Yukon Party stands firm against carbon tax, though others disagree

Yukon Party leader Darrell Pasloskisayshe doesn't need a study to tell him the carbon tax is bad forYukoners.

• Carbon tax first heated issue of Yukon election campaign

• More Yukon Votes 2016 coverage from CBC North

"Everytime there's a new cost in the system, ultimately it's the end user or the consumer who's going to pay more," Pasloski said on Monday.

"The Canadian Taxpayers Federation has just recently came out saying at $50a tonne, that the average Canadian household is going to pay almost $2,600 extra dollars in taxes."

Pasloskipromised another $33 million for energy retrofits to government buildings on Monday, if his party is re-elected. Last week,hepledged $47 million for similar upgrades to 20 schools in the territory.

Altogether that will reduce the Yukon government's greenhouse gas emissions by 15 per cent, Pasloski said.

"Yukoners are looking for leadershipa party that's going to stand up and say that we can do our part and reduce our emissions, and not swallow a new tax," he said.

But Whitehorse engineer Forest Pearson disputes that. He'sknown for building super energy-efficient homes, andwrote on his blog earlier this month that the Yukon Party has it all wrong.

"The carbon tax will have almost no measurable impact on the price of goods (and zero impact of the cost of services) because the amount of fuel used to transport goods to the Yukon is very, very small, relative to the value of the goods," Pearson wrote.

2 cents per litre of gas

Pearsonsayspeople will see the difference at the gas pump, and on heating fuel, "but it is not much of a difference."

He saysthe $10 pertonne tax will translate toabout two cents per litre of gas.

He also argues thata national carbon tax is an advantage for Yukon, asthe territory has a highly educated workforce employed mainly in sectors that producerelatively little carbon.

Still, Pasloski said families who cannot afford extra expenses will be hit hard.

"Our plan will put money into the economy, by creating new jobs as opposed to sucking huge amounts of money out of taxpayers pockets, money they don't have to pay their bills or buy food or to buy hockey equipment for their kids," he said.

But Pasloski has not considered using carbon tax revenue to lower taxes for low income families, or other uses.