There were no new arguments for the federal carbon tax plan. 

The only new development in the ongoing dispute between the federal government and the province of Saskatchewan as it relates to a national carbon pricing strategy was that Ralph Goodale was discussing the issue with us in Moose Jaw.

The Regina-Wascana Member of Parliament is the only Liberal M.P. from Saskatchewan and is also Minister of Public Safety. He was making the rounds in his home province last week discussing a few topics, most notably the federal carbon tax plan that was announced in May. 

Their plan would begin with a $10 per tonne charge on carbon dioxide emissions, with that price steadily increasing to $50 per tonne by 2022. The feds say the carbon tax is designed to reduce greenhouse emissions, with all money collected being returned to the provinces to allocate as they wish. 

“It could be offset entirely by a provincial government’s decision to take some of the revenue from carbon pricing, and eliminate property taxes on farmland," Goodale explained, citing one example. 

Premier Brad Wall has suggested that a fully-implemented carbon tax could remove $1.3 billiion from the provincial economy due to the prevalence of resource-based industries like potash, oil and gas and agriculture.  Goodale said many loss projections are overstated, particularly in one sector.

“We have calculated our very best in terms of what the impact would be on agriculture," said Goodale. "Some people have speculated it would be tens of thousands of dollars in new costs. That’s not true. It’s in the area of two or three hundred dollars, not tens of thousands. We’ve done that calculation through the Department of Agriculture, and we’ve had it verified by agriculture economists at the University of Saskatchewan.”

Meanwhile, there were no new arguments against the carbon tax plan.

Saskatchewan Environment Minister Scott Moe reacted to Goodale's visit by re-emphasizing the Saskatchewan Party's staunch opposition to the idea. 

Speaking to Goodale's assertments that the tax wouldn't harm the agriculture industry, in part because carbon tax revenue could be re-allocated to farmers in other ways, Moe said flatly "“all taxes are revenue-neutral.  That’s how we build highways, hospital and schools. That’s how taxes are designed – to be revenue-neutral. What this tax is doing, is driving investment capital to other areas of the world."

Moe says outside of agriculture, other areas of the resource sector would ge greatly harmed by a carbon tax. 

“To force that additional capital on industries like the potash industry or the energy industry would prompt them to just move to other areas of the world, where quite frankly the suite of environmental programs they have in those areas may be less than what we already have here in the province of Saskatchewan.”

“We have great opportunities in Saskatchewan to use technology and innovation to reduce emissions in our industuries," Moe continued. "Not just in our province but across the country. We don’t need to put a broad-based tax across the nation when it will have very different affects in different provinces or different industries. In the case of Saskatchewan, that affect is detrimental to the industries here.”

Goodale says that despite the differences in opinion, dialogue with the province is "ongoing."