It's more than a carbon rebate Did someone forward you this newsletter? Sign up here to get it delivered weekday mornings. "Canada must not ignore the reality of climate change," said Erin O'Toole, who dropped his party's new climate plan in front of a huge screen that shuffled through a selection of magnificent Canadian landscapes. The plan's signature plank was a "personal low-carbon savings account," which would funnel every cent spent by Canadians on, say, gasoline into a personal account that could be used to buy exclusively green things—a transit pass or a hybrid vehicle or a new furnace. A Globe and Mail reporter called it a "reward program for fossil fuel consumption." O'Toole insisted he'd still scrap Justin Trudeau's carbon tax—which the Supreme Court ruled wasn't a tax—and replace it with a carbon pricing mechanism that he insisted isn't a tax because the feds would never see a cent. He claimed the Liberals' annual rebates don't fully offset the costs borne by certain Canadians. And this was where he revealed his audience, setting his sights on "commuters in Vaughan, Whitby, Burnaby and Surrey." In 2011, Conservatives won every seat in Vaughan and Whitby, Ont., they came second in both ridings in Burnaby, B.C., and they took one of two ridings in nearby Surrey (finishing a close second where they lost). In 2015 and 2019, they won only a single riding in that quartet of cities. The path to victory requires Conservative MPs in those places. (As it happens, O'Toole is joining a virtual town hall tomorrow with the chamber of commerce in Delta, B.C.—a riding with similar voting patterns.) But while he's busy pitching to suburban voters, is what's on the table even a Conservative plan? O'Toole says the fact that no government ever sees a red cent of the carbon cash means it burnishes its conservative cred. But would a truly small-c plan control how consumers can spend their money? And will the party's base go for it? Early indications aren't bullish on that front. Of course, the full plan is more than the rewards thingie. The party is pitching a zero-emissions vehicle mandate, a hefty industrial carbon price, a lower carbon fuel standard, and a carbon tariff. There's more, too, including potential "new taxes on frequent flyers, non-electric luxury vehicles and second homes." The party enlisted the services of an external analyst—Navius Research—which found the Tory plan will "achieve comparable greenhouse gas reductions" to current federal policy. The party wouldn't tell Maclean's much about who was consulted on the climate plan, but party spokesman Cory Hann did list some influences that included Mark Jaccard at Simon Fraser University, Dale Buegin at the Canadian Institute for Climate Choices and Michael Bernstein at Clean Prosperity, a market-oriented climate advocacy group. Each of them tweeted approvingly, with some caveats. But they mostly talked about everything that wasn't the carbon savings account. Greenpeace, for its part, hates the plan. Liberals came up with a sarcastic points-program tagline: "The more you burn, the more you earn." O'Toole needs a win: Abacus Data pegs the Liberals at 37 per cent, eight points ahead of the Tories and ahead in every region save for the Prairies. Trudeau's net approval rating is -3, but O'Toole is stuck at -13—with only 19 per cent of respondents giving a positive score. (Jagmeet Singh is +12 across Canada, and most popular in the Atlantic region.) A CBC News poll spelled more trouble for the Tories. Even in the party's Alberta heartland, O'Toole scored poorly. Polluters pay? More like paying polluters, argues Environmental Defence in a new study on fossil fuel subsidies. The advocacy group claims the feds found almost $18 billion in financial support for the oil and gas industry. Stop the cleantech exodus: Joe Biden’s impressive tax incentives are luring clean technology companies that incubated in Canada, writes Stewart Elgie in Maclean's. Elgie is the chair of the Smart Prosperity Institute and was a member of Canada’s Economic Strategy Table for the resources and energy sectors. He wants the federal budget to reverse the trend. Is the parliamentary dress code out of date? Long before this week's excitement about one MP's momentary lack of clothing, Marie-Danielle Smith filed a story for the most recent issue of Maclean's that tackled a much more foundational sartorial question in the Commons. New Zealand recently did away with a rule forcing parliamentarians to wear ties. Precious little changed about how legislators legislated. Should Canada follow, ahem, suit? Maybe this moment—a moment when an untold number of our political leaders are secretly wearing pyjama bottoms—is ripe for change. Maybe it’s time to let go of rules whose only practical effects are to stymie cultural expression and give MPs an excuse to interrupt each other’s speeches. If we’ve entrusted these grown-ups to govern, we may just be able to trust them to dress themselves. Brace yourselves, Ontario: CBC News quotes a provincial government source saying Ontario could see 18,000 new COVID-19 cases per day by the end of May—and 1,800 patients requiring intensive care. Doug Ford's cabinet was reportedly considering even harsher restrictions, including the prohibition of even curbside pickup or delivery for non-essential retail and a broadening of police powers. —Nick Taylor-Vaisey | 
