PHOTO ROBERT SKINNER, LA PRESSE ARCHIVES
“It is neither by subsidizing nor by freezing consumers’ bills that we will encourage them to reduce their energy consumption,” writes our editorialist.
The freeze is as harmful for our roads as it is for our public services, no offense to all those who are calling for a freeze on Hydro-Québec’s rates.
Posted at 5:00 a.m.
It is that after a freeze always comes a thaw.
On our roads, it digs potholes that make us angry every spring. And in our public services, this causes a price shock when sooner or later we have to catch up. Just remember the concert of saucepans during the maple spring to denounce the increase in tuition fees.
Easier to freeze than to thaw.
So, we understand that Prime Minister François Legault refuses to freeze rates. But it is his fault if Hydro-Québec customers find themselves, from 1er April, with a 2.6% increase in the price of electricity, an increase unequaled in 15 years. And strap on your toques, because the bill could go up by 5% next year.
All this because the Coalition avenir Québec (CAQ) chose, in 2019, to link electricity rates to inflation, instead of leaving it to the Régie de l’énergie to establish a reasonable increase, as it was before… and as it should still be.
The goal was to simplify the process. That is. But it was written in the sky that it would turn out badly.
Customers now find themselves with increases that have no common measure with the relatively stable costs of the Crown corporation, which will line its pockets. It looks like a tax hike in disguise.
It will be particularly hard to swallow for the less well-off who devote almost two-thirds of their budget (62%) to essential expenses (housing, transport and food), compared to only 27% for the most well-off.
For them, it is difficult to make cuts in heating in winter, in gasoline to go to work or in the grocery basket to feed the children.
However, there are better ways to help them. It would be better to improve the solidarity tax credit, for example, than to freeze electricity rates for everyone… including wealthier households who consume two to three times more electricity.
Already, commercial and industrial customers are “subsidizing” residential customers whose bills are about 10% lower, thanks to this absurd cross-subsidization.
It is neither by subsidizing nor by freezing consumers’ bills that we will encourage them to reduce their energy consumption. However, it is essential to reduce waste if we want to succeed in our energy transition.
To achieve our greenhouse gas reduction targets, Quebec is relying on electrification, which is highly commendable. But to get there, we will need about 50% more terawatt-hours. Those that can be generated through better energy efficiency will cost much less than those resulting from the development of new production capacities.
In this context, a more substantial increase in our electricity bill deserves consideration.
It wouldn’t be a tragedy, because Quebec’s rates are the lowest in all of North America. And by far.
In Quebec, the price of electricity is two and a half times lower than in Toronto and four and a half times lower than in New York, according to a comparison carried out annually by Hydro-Québec.
It is not because Quebec is swimming in hydroelectricity that it should be wasted. Look at Norway, which has oil over its ears… but which is also the place in the world where the price of gasoline is the highest (behind Hong Kong).
Quebec is ripe for a real debate on the energy transition. But this must be done transparently. Not by hiding behind inflation.