Is the criticism of the carbon tax justifiable?

Intersectionality means that most modern-day issues are intricately related. For example, this CBC article, entitled Is the carbon tax an easy scapegoat for high food prices, discusses how concerns about the impact of the carbon tax also tend to ignore the fact that the policy has two parts - a fuel charge collected by the federal government and a rebate that returns 90 per cent of the revenue generated by the level to Canadian households. The remaining 10 percent is directed toward businesses, farmers and Indigenous communities.

Any discussion of food prices must include the impact of climate change, as an analysis from Statistics Canada published last November linked erratic weather - including droughts, heat waves, flooding and heavy rainfall - with increases in the prices of meat, fruit, vegetables, sugar and coffee. Similarly, the war between Russia and Ukraine dramatically effected energy prices, supply chain disruptions and labour shortages.

The answer to the above question is a resounding no, as nearly all households receive more from the rebate than they pay in direct and indirect cots (Parliamentary Budget Officer). And moreover, economists worldwide agree that carbon pricing is one of the most effective ways to reduce GHG emissions now. So, why in spite of the evidence, is ‘axe the tax’ getting so much play in the media and by Polievre?