|
The Greater Vancouver Regional District - a federation of 18
municipalities - is responsible for air quality in the Lower
Mainland. Since the mid-80s, when the Region started to develop
the first Air Quality Management Plan in Canada, the principle
has been "polluter pays": those who pollute should pay
for the regulatory system necessary to control emissions.
Major stationary sources of pollutants - concrete plants,
refineries, forest-product mills, etc. - are charged through a
permit system based on their emissions. For mobile sources - that
is, motor vehicles (the source of approximately 75 percent of
pollutants) - the Region asked the Province for the right to
charge a fee. In fact, it has asked the Province many times for
any of several options (an additional vehicle-registration fee,
an AirCare testing charge, an emission-based gas tax) but no
authorisation has ever been given.
Nonetheless, the region passed the Air Quality Management Plan
in December, 1994, and funded programs needed to meet its goal of
reducing emissions by 38 percent over the next decade. However,
none of the money is coming directly from automobiles or trucks.
The general taxpayer is making up the difference.
In other words, the motor-vehicle, the source of
three-quarters of the pollutants in the region, does not directly
pay for air- pollution programs. Industry and the general
taxpayer, including those who do not have a vehicle, make up the
difference. This is, in my opinion, a subsidy for the
motor-vehicle that violates the polluter-pay principle.
The GVRD has not tried to implement a vehicle charge itself
since it either lacks jurisdiction or cannot find a
cost-effective way to impose the fee. The Province, I believe, is
reluctant to impose a charge on the motor-vehicle that would go
to the Region since it would have to take the political heat for
a tax that would go to another level of government.
In this way, the impact of the motor-vehicle is disguised, and
the motorist does not directly perceive the subsidy.
Citizens nonetheless call for government action to control air
pollution, and understand that the motor-vehicle must take a
large share of the responsibility. But without a direct
pollution-based tax to fund programs and alternatives, the
regional government has been reluctant to take truly effective
action. (The only regional transportation-demand management
program currently proposed - ride-sharing - would reduce
emissions by 2 percent if successful, but it has not yet been
approved.)
Transportation-demand management programs can be expensive and
intrusive, and the public, no matter how great the concern for
quality of life, either rejects or complains about such
restraints and the general level of taxation not directly tied to
a service.
In summary, Regional Directors have supported a direct charge
on the motor-vehicle to help pay for pollution-reduction
programs. The Province has so far said no. The Region in turn has
limited the introduction of programs to reduce vehicle emissions,
relying instead on land-use strategies over the long term.
If we do not tackle mobile sources, the gains achieved through
technological improvements in the car will be overcome by
increased travel and vehicle growth - and the Air Quality Plan
will not achieve its goal.
Gordon Price
|
