Thoughts on Bill C12, the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act. It's a big deal that Canada is committing -- in legislation -- to reach net zero in 2050, because a future government would have to amend or eliminate the law to sidestep. That's unlikely to be popular. /1

There are weaknesses and strengths in the bill, IMO. There's no magic here, but worth stressing approach, which is to hold future govts' feet to the fire by requiring mid-term targets, plans to meet them, reports on progress, all public, + independent advice and oversight. /2

This complements rather than supplants the #ParisAgreement process of joint setting of NDCs. It will be easier as more countries match this ambition (it's not like we're in the lead!) Expect we'll be waiting to see what the US announces pre-COP26 before adjusting our 2030 NDC /3

Weakness 1: 1st target yr is 2030 and 1st progress report is 2028. We know now we're not on track for 2030. Canada's track record of missing ALL prev targets tells us it's essential to act early. Credibility of this law will turn on starting on right foot. Amend to add 2025? /4

Weakness 2: Progress reports for each milestone year (2030, 2035... 2050) are due 2 yrs before the milestone. Three years in will be too late for much course correction. /3

Weakness 3: no discussion of "what if" target is missed (esp with progresss report only 2 yrs before). I'm skeptical of simple solutions, but worry that future govts will blame their predecessors and just keep promising that magic will happen in future. As they have to date. /4

Strengths! Federalism has more often than not been an obstacle to Cdn climate policy: decentralization + HUGE differences in C-intensity + norm of fp consensus. This bill requires opportunity for provincial "submissions" but presumes feds set goals, plans. Expect fireworks! /5

That is backed with a fair amount of non-discretionary language ("the Minister shall", "the Minister must" establish a plan to meet the target) which is unusual in Cdn envtl law. Could open door to citizen suits to further hold future governments to account. /6

Will be challenging in a federation in which provinces do control things like urban design. BC-12 raises the spectre (threat to provs?) of sectoral strategies, presumably federal regs. Oil and gas would be an obvious 1st candidate as the sector with highest emissions. /7

No mention of carbon pricing, though would be covered under "key emissions reduction measures." That would be an alternate way for the feds to go if upheld by the Supreme Court. Not clear to me whether fed regs or C tax would be more threatening to provinces. /8

There is provision for independent advice and oversight from a new 15-member Advisory Body. Much will depend on its composition (which experts, how open is Min to criticism). Encouraging that that body will report annually and Minister must respond. Both will be public. /9

A big uncertainty in "net zero" is what we assume now wrt future availability of CCS and Negative Emissions Technologies. That govts will be over-optimistic that tech can save Canada's oil/gas exports remains a risk, but I hope lessened by independent, expert oversight. 8/8