We’re keeping an eye on the Canadian government’s ataxic effort to pivot away from its earlier disastrous woke climate policies to a shiny new set of woke climate policies. Thus we have the latest news that “Prime Minister Carney launches new strategy to transform Canada’s auto industry”. We might object that it is not obviously within the duties of politicians, or their capacities, to “transform” key sectors of an economy based on some trendy clichés from Davos, rather than allowing the structure of production to be driven by what consumers actually want at prices they can afford, with the state limiting itself to creating and enforcing fair rules. But the really feeble part is that the new plan, while blasting platitudes out the tailpipe, amounts to stomping on the accelerator with one foot and the brake with the other, replacing a simple misguided policy (you have to buy an EV) with a complicated but equally misguided one (we’re outlawing gas-powered cars so you have to buy an EV). Robert Bryce mocks Stellantis, fresh from writing off $26 billion from its failed EV ventures, for boasting of making “a strategic shift to put freedom of choice” at the “heart” of its plans (as opposed to what, trendy statism?). But at least they show signs of learning. The Government of Canada, not so much.

As Dan McTeague of Canadians for Affordable Energy promptly retorted, under a “bait and switch” headline:

“the Prime Minister announced that he was replacing the EV mandate with a 75% tailpipe emissions reduction target by 2035 and an aspirational 90% reduction by 2040. Now, this might sound much better initially. ‘Wow, instead of banning the sale of gas cars, Mark Carney is going to reduce their carbon footprint!’ Except a policy target for emissions reductions doesn’t equate to emissions reductions – that takes technological change, fleet changes, time, and money. Which really means that in 2035 – less than 10 years from today – when the only vehicles which conform to this standard are EVs, then, well, that’s all you will be able to buy.”

On the subject of policy targets not equating policy results, and at the risk of appearing to digress even more quickly and sharply than usual, this week we also bid a nostalgic farewell to the Canadian federal government’s climate-transforming “Two Billion Trees Program” which spewed rhetoric, shifted goalposts and somehow managed to spend nearly half a billion dollars before the politicians and bureaucrats admitted they couldn’t even plant trees in Canada. However they can totally transform our economy, anticipate the technology of the 22^nd century, triangulate the “variable geometry” of modern geopolitics and such comparatively simple tasks. They assure us. (As they assure us that after ending it will plant 800 million more trees. They would.)

Which brings us back from the forest to the EVs, because some time back the Carney administration “paused” the mandate to forbid internal-combustion vehicle sales by 2030 in order to think about it, which seemed odd. What seems odder, and the one-on-the-gas-one-on-the-brake bit, is that they have apparently not revived it but instead created an interventionist hydra starting with $3.1 billion in new subsidies “to help the auto industry adapt, grow, and diversify to new markets.” Ooooh. Diversify. There’s a good word. So is “adapt”. Not to mention those glittering “new markets”. But with China’s state-backed EVs devouring the world, including now Canada’s own domestic market, what is he even talking about? Bursting into Peru? Nobody knows. Not even him, Carney being alas a past master at wrapping bad or incoherent ideas in pleasing verbiage. But it will cost an arm and a leg.

As it has cost car companies a fortune. As mentioned, Stellantis just took a hit of over €22 billion to swerve off the EV highway because staying on was even worse. Does the Canadian government even know this private sector rout is going on? And if they know, do they begin to comprehend it, or care? Bryce notes the Stellantis debacle brings “the combined EV-related losses at seven major automakers” just since 2022 “to a whopping $140 billion!” A sum even a government might begin to consider significant, particularly if asked to blank-cheque the tab. (By some calculations the Canadian federal government alone has already promised $50 billion to the EV sector, which the recipients insist is money well-wasted though taxpayers like consumers may beg to differ.)

Mind you Carson Jerema argues persuasively in the National Post along McTeague lines that the whole thing is smoke and mirrors like, he adds, far too much of what the Prime Minister appears to do:

“Prime Minister Mark Carney has become adept at making it sound as though he’s enacting major policy shifts, while changing very little. While most media carried headlines that emphasized the government’s plan to remove the EV mandate, which makes Carney look realistic and pragmatic, the Thursday announcement appeared to be more about reinstating tax credits for people buying EVs and, most importantly, the government’s ‘more stringent’ tailpipe-emissions standards.”

So it will fail to accomplish the same thing as the old policy, in an even more ruinous way. And the second head on this hydra is: “To rationalise emissions reduction policies to focus on outcomes that matter to Canadians”, which in the sickeningly slick rhetoric of modern politics does not mean where they get to buy the car they want in a free market. Instead the self-styled “Canada’s new government” (despite the Liberals having held the Prime Ministership without interruption since 2015) will:

“Introduce stronger greenhouse gas emission standards that put Canada on a path to achieve a goal of 75% EV sales by 2035 and 90% EV sales by 2040 – reducing our carbon footprint and securing Canada’s global leadership in clean energy. These more stringent emissions standards will enable the Government of Canada to repeal the Electric Vehicle Availability Standard. This approach will allow manufacturers to use a wide array of technologies to meet the standards and respond to consumer preferences in the near-term, while driving EV adoption over time.”

So their idea of going with consumer preferences is imposing strict regulations, and repealing the EV mandate means keeping it in place just on a longer timetable. As for being “on a path”, well, we’ve been on a path to reduce GHG emissions dramatically for decades or so they’ve claimed. But we keep bumping into trees.

William Nordhaus famously said carbon taxes were the best instrument to reduce emissions but only if they replaced other more cumbersome mechanisms, and Canada’s old government promptly piled the one on the other. And here “rationalise” means to stack complex interventions atop other such interventions:

“To strengthen domestic demand by making EVs more affordable and reliable for Canadians, Canada’s new government will: Launch a five-year EV Affordability Program to lower the cost of EVs for Canadians and create a stronger domestic consumer market. The new $2.3 billion program will offer individuals and businesses purchase or lease incentives of up to $5,000 for battery electric and fuel EVs, and up to $2,500 for plug-in hybrids (PHEVs) with a final transaction value of up to $50,000 on cars made by countries Canada has free trade agreements with. To support the Canadian automotive industry, this $50,000 cap will not apply to Canadian-made EVs and PHEVs.”

The Prime Minister has a PhD in economics. But not the real kind if he does not know that someone has to pay for those “incentives” and whatever boost they give to demand for this product they will reduce for all others by the amount of the subsidy plus the cost of collecting the money then handing it out. Oh, and:

“Enhance our national EV charging network through investments of $1.5 billion through the Canada Infrastructure Bank’s Charging and Hydrogen Refueling Infrastructure Initiative, making it easier and more convenient for drivers to charge their EVs across the country.”

Don’t hold your plug cord. But maybe do plug your ears, because also:

“To establish a comprehensive trade regime that strengthens the competitiveness of the auto sector, Canada’s new government will: Strengthen Canada’s automotive remission framework to reward companies that produce and invest in Canada.”

In short, free trade through protectionism. And on it goes, including subsidies to companies who don’t streamline their production. But we’ve had enough and so presumably have you.

Those receiving subsidies were naturally delighted, and said so. (Like those politicians who care more about Canadian canola than the auto sector, and security be hanged. Meanwhile Ontario premier Doug Ford, whose constituents care about car manufacturing, suddenly discovered his buddy Mark Carney was a spineless nitwit then undiscovered it in classic Ford untethered style.) And the Canadian Climate Institute, which is paid to praise the government’s climate policy, praised the government’s climate policy, albeit with an accidental caveat:

“The new auto strategy announced today is a positive step toward a more affordable future powered by clean electricity. By replacing electric vehicle (EV) sales targets with updated tailpipe regulations, investing in new EV charging infrastructure, spurring new investment in auto manufacturing and innovation, and launching new consumer EV purchase incentives, the new federal strategy aims to reduce transportation emissions and strengthen Canada’s auto sector, while making it easier and more affordable for people and businesses to go electric. Whether this policy package ultimately delivers cost-effective climate benefits and leads to more high-quality, affordable electric vehicles in Canadians’ garages will be determined by how – and how quickly – these policies are finalized and implemented.”

Oh. Right. The part where you have to design it sensibly and implement it consistently. Dang. The Canadian Charging Infrastructure Council was, amazingly, in favour of a massive policy to force and subsidize charging infrastructure in Canada. But even they said, via their president and CEO:

“Canada’s new automotive package could unlock billions of dollars in charging investment if implemented fully. A Canadian vehicle emissions standard that achieves 75% EV sales by 2035 and 90% EV sales by 2040 will be a major step toward achieving a globally competitive automotive sector, provided that appropriate regulations are finalized in 2026.”

Provided. And an outfit called Global Automakers noted, after saying thank goodness the 100% EV mandate bit the asphalt:

“We respect the government’s efforts to both sustain and encourage automotive investment in Canada, however, with all such announcements, the details matter.”

You ain’t foolin’.