1. Ontario renewable energy and climate change policy in the Canadian Intergovernmental and North American contexts Douglas Macdonald

2. Format What decides subnational lead or veto role? Why do federated systems have to allocate reductions? Ontario and Canadian national policy Ontario and Canadian national climate-change policy The likelihood of an Ontario lead role The way forward

3. Subnational lead or veto? Environmental threat = lead, eg Sweden acid rain Economic cost = veto, eg Saudi Arabia, Alberta Low economic cost = lead, eg Germany 1997 Internal politics, government ideology also factors, may = lead role or veto Desire reduce competitiveness problems, gain political cover = lead role, eg California, WCI

4. Why must federations allocate? Climate change a global collective action problem Federated countries/systems (EU) can only have one target in international regime Geographically concentrated sources means cost differ geographically Relevant subnational governments defend their economic interest, play veto role That can only be overcome by bargaining Bargaining can only happen if there is explicit recognition of the need to allocate, reach agreement on equitable cost sharing

5. Ontario and Canadian national policy 1867 Canada created by the Ontario-Quebec axis; industrial heartland, agricultural hinterland 1960s Premier John Robarts, Ontario and Canadian interest seen as identical 1982 Ontario support for Trudeau repatriation constitution 1990s Premier Bob Rae, Ontario seen to have a separate interest 2015 Premier Wynne, return to Quebec alliance, no identification with national interest

6. Ontario and national climate-change policy 1985 federal-provincial acid rain program, Ontario resistance, then action for domestic reasons 1990 – 2002 feds and provinces on the climate policy highway, Ontario “on the service road” 2000 Ontario sabotaged NCCP Framework Agreement, burden sharing 2003-15 coal phase-out, renewable FIT, purely domestic, not related to national policy Participant Council of Federation CES, but lead role Alberta Ontario has not played a lead national role to date

7. The likelihood of an Ontario lead role No particular environmental threat No particularly high cost Internal politics, government ideology only work if Liberal or NDP government Reduce competitiveness, Ontario focus cross- border not just within Canada As a province, lacks sticks or carrots to influence other provinces Low likelihood

8. The way forward Provinces are unilaterally taking lead action, eg BC carbon tax; but not many “lead points” to date on national co- ordination; closest has been Quebec, Liberal federal governments Powerful veto point, the higher per capita cost of reduction in oil provinces (geographically concentrated sources) Federal government stick = threaten regulation Federal government carrot = cost sharing Leadership has to come from Ottawa, ideally supported by some provinces First step: federal-provincial agreement on equitable sharing of reductions among provinces and sectors