The Conservative war on EVs is bound to fail

National Observer

20 hours ago

You might think the 2025 federal election would have taught the Conservative Party of Canada a few lessons. Chief among them would be the need to break with Trumpism and avoid investing their political capital in an issue — like the carbon tax — that can be eliminated with the stroke of the prime minister's pen. Instead, Pierre Poilievre's party seems destined — and determined — to learn these lessons again.
Its renewed attack on the federal government's electric vehicle mandate is a case in point here. In an email sent to supporters last month, CPC co-deputy leader Melissa Lantsman said that 'the radical Liberals are planning to make your gas-powered vehicles ILLEGAL. They will FORCE you to buy an expensive electric vehicle.' This is obvious nonsense, since existing gas-powered vehicles sold up to 2035 would be allowed to operate for as long as a mechanic could keep them on the road.
And while it's true that the up-front cost of electric vehicles is still higher than gasoline-fueled ones, that won't be the case for long. The ongoing developments in battery technology mean that so-called 'up-front price parity' — that is, an equivalent cost, without subsidies, for electric and gasoline versions of the same vehicle type — is a question of when, not if.
That may arrive far sooner than Canada's Conservatives want to believe. Chinese automaker BYD and its ultra-low-cost EVs absolutely dominate the ever-expanding Chinese market, and it's rapidly winning hearts and market share in places like Europe and South America. Its new generation of solid-state batteries could lead to both a major increase in range and a major decrease in price. It's not alone in developing these new batteries, either: Nissan Canada has said that solid-state batteries can be produced 'at a lower cost than conventional lithium-ion batteries,' while Toyota and Volkswagen are also betting heavily on them.
In time, then, and not that much of it, electric vehicles could enjoy an up-front cost advantage over gasoline-powered vehicles. That's without factoring in the far lower costs of operating an EV, which can amount to thousands of dollars per vehicle per year, according to the Canadian Automobile Association. If Canada follows through with its electric vehicle mandate, it's expected to save Canadians approximately $36.7 billion in costs by 2050.
So why are Canada's Conservatives picking this particular hill to fight on? In part, it's because it allows them to play their greatest hits and try to recapture some of the political energy they generated with their campaign against the consumer carbon tax. Andrew Scheer, for example, got to break out his ample supply of political tinfoil in claiming that the EV mandate — one designed and implemented by the previous prime minister — is really a sop to Brookfield, the company Carney chaired before entering politics. 'Brookfield is heavily invested in the EV supply chain. If this prime minister refuses to reveal his financial interests or self-admitted conflicts — isn't it true that this isn't about the environment, this is about the bottom line for Brookfield?'
More importantly, they're also doing this because Canada's Conservative movement remains incapable of tacking against the political winds of Trumpism. As Trump has turned ever-more aggressively against electric vehicles, and particularly the ones sold by his former best friend Elon Musk, so too have leading Canadian Conservatives like party leader Pierre Poilievre and Melissa Lantsman. It seems almost inevitable now that electric vehicles will become part of the ongoing culture war there, and that any rational attempt to help the automotive industry adapt to the changing global landscape will be subsumed into Trump's fight with Musk.
It seems almost inevitable now that electric vehicles will become part of the Conservative Party of Canada's ongoing culture war, writes Max Fawcett.
It's reasonable, and maybe even rational, to re-assess some of the near-term targets in Canada's EV regulation, given the threats posed by Trump to the very existence of Canada's auto sector. But the longer-term objectives here should remain in place, and the Carney government should be willing to fight hard for them. The transition away from fossil fuels and gasoline-powered vehicles is a question of when, not if. As the New York Times reported recently, 'auto executives are nearly unanimous that, even in the United States, electric and hybrid vehicles will eventually displace gasoline-powered vehicles.' Just ask Musk, who shared a post about Norway's June car sales figures — 97 per cent of which involved EVs — and added his own commentary. 'Combustion engine cars will be like the steam engine — quaint, but primitive.'
On this, at least, he's correct. Not even Donald Trump can stop the global transition to electrification, and Canada needs to remain focused on the longer-term trajectory here, both for its domestic auto sector and the consumers who buy their products. The Conservative attack here is the very definition of a rearguard battle, one that confirms its enduring loyalty to the oil and gas industry and its economic interests. It's also another reminder that the leadership team that blundered away a 20-point lead heading into the last election might not be fit to win the next one.