As some governments adjust their climate targets or repeal the laws governing those goals, Canada’s climate action could become less co-ordinated and transparent.
Summary
- Ontario and Yukon repealed their climate accountability laws within the past year, reversing a years-long trend toward greater provincial and territorial accountability for climate action.
- Climate accountability laws require governments to set targets, produce action plans, and report on progress—among other best practices identified by the Canadian Climate Institute.
- Their repeal makes climate policy less transparent, and potentially less effective, underscoring the importance of independent tracking and analysis of climate policies.
Two years ago, 440 Megatonnes wrote about how a growing number of provinces and territories were embedding their climate targets and plans into law. Now two of those laws—which we call climate accountability laws—are gone.
Within the past year, Ontario and Yukon have repealed their climate accountability laws, formally abandoning pledges to reduce emissions and their obligations to plan for and report on their climate policies.
The repeal of those laws reflects a wider retrenchment in Canadian climate policies, but takes it a step further, not only delaying progress toward climate goals but rejecting the very goals themselves. Without those goals or processes for transparently measuring progress toward them, it is only more important to have independent tracking and evaluation of governments’ efforts to fight climate change.
Reversing the trend toward greater accountability?
At their simplest, climate accountability laws require governments to do three things: set emissions reduction targets, make plans to meet them, and report on their progress.
Those requirements serve several purposes. They can improve decision making, requiring governments to identify a clear goal and align their policies with it. By requiring regular reporting on progress toward those goals, they encourage course correction along the way. And more fundamentally, these laws formalize the notions that governments should be aiming to reduce emissions, measuring their progress, correcting their course when necessary, and keeping the public informed along the way.
For a moment, it looked as if it was only a matter of time before every region of Canada had its own climate accountability law. In just five years, between 2018 and 2022, Canada went from having zero provincial or territorial accountability laws to having seven (Figure 1).
In late 2025, that trend started to reverse. In November, Ontario repealed provisions of its Cap and Trade Cancellation Act that required it to set a climate target, make a climate plan, and publish a progress report. Then in March 2026, Yukon repealed its Clean Energy Act. This law was only four years old, and it was particularly comprehensive, containing targets for electric vehicle sales, renewable-powered heating, and emissions reductions. The repeal of the law abolished all of these obligations in a single stroke.
Figure 1
The repeal of accountability laws reflects a wider pattern of retrenchment
The repeal of these two climate accountability laws comes amid a wider retrenchment of Canadian climate policies. An increasing number of climate policies are ending or running out of funding, while major policies like industrial carbon pricing have been weakened, making it even harder for Canada to reach its climate targets. Governments have explained some of these changes as responses to various challenges, including competitiveness threats, affordability pressures, or in Yukon’s case, concern about the ability of the electricity grid to meet rising demand.
But the repeal of a climate accountability law suggests a more fundamental shift in direction than a change in policy, or even a change in target.
By removing its climate accountability law, Yukon went far beyond adjusting a target that its government considered problematic—it eliminated its targets entirely, even the long term goal of reaching net zero emissions. Likewise, the removal of Ontario’s climate accountability law may remove any legal obligation for the province to address climate change, a question that is now being tested in court.
Other governments in Canada have indicated that their climate goals are changing, even if they have not changed their accountability laws. For example, Quebec has delayed its timeline for emissions reductions by five years (a change that required no legal amendment because the province’s climate accountability law does not attach a date to its climate target). Meanwhile, the federal government has acknowledged that its changes to climate policies will lead to higher emissions in the coming years, suggesting that it is no longer committed to the country’s 2030 or 2035 climate targets.
Laws are not the ultimate form of accountability
The removal of climate accountability laws makes it harder for Canada to effectively address climate change. Now that governments are delaying or eliminating their targets as well as modifying their policies, Canada’s progress in reducing emissions will be slower, less co-ordinated, and harder to track.
Independent organizations like the Canadian Climate Institute can fill some of the gaps when a climate accountability law is repealed. Research from 440 Megatonnes already provides independent assessments of climate change policies and Canada’s progress in reducing emissions. We are also building a new series of climate progress indicators that can offer a broader assessment of Canada’s movement toward a cleaner, more competitive economy.
However, all of these tools have their limits. Assessments are not a replacement for action. Laws can be amended or repealed.
When no climate accountability law is in place, it remains to be seen whether governments face a binding legal consequence for failing to address climate change. There may be reputational consequences with the public, but that is for the electorate to decide. Still, no matter what governments or the public decide, the ultimate consequence for failing to address climate change will not come from any law court or individual—it will come from the atmosphere.
Ross Linden-Fraser is a Research Lead at the Canadian Climate Institute.