Conservative elder statesman Preston Manning is advising the Conservative caucus to lay off attacking the market-based concept of carbon pricing.

In an email obtained by iPolitics, Manning points caucus members at a Fraser Institute report on carbon pricing by conservative economists Jason Clemens and Ken Green, which he says is “right on” and “could be useful to you.” Manning attached the report to his email.

“I know all of you are wrestling with this issue and that there is considerable disagreement among conservatives on how to approach it, but hopefully this approach — focus on attacking the implementation rather than the market-based concept itself — will be helpful,” Manning writes.

While the Tories have been hammering Prime Minister Justin Trudeau over his plan to price carbon, Conservative leadership candidates and also some members have also attacked Michael Chong on this issue.

Chong is the only leadership candidate to publicly embrace pricing carbon; his arguments in favour of a market-based mechanism to reduce carbon emissions are often greeted by catcalls at leadership debates.

However, there have been few, if any, solid arguments from leadership candidates against Chong’s plan. Candidates merely say it’s a bad idea and attack the concept itself — which is exactly what Manning wants them to stop doing.

Manning writes that the Fraser Institute’s report states that using a pricing mechanism to drive down carbon pollution is preferable, from the perspective of market-oriented conservatives, to micro-regulation by governments.

“But then they assert that for this concept to work in practice it is absolutely essential that it possess certain characteristics: genuine revenue neutrality, a significant reduction in environmental regulations, and a no-subsidy policy with respect to alternative energy sources,” writes Manning.

He goes on to say that the report makes the point that none of the carbon-pricing regimes proposed in Canada meet the criteria — citing the federal, Alberta, Ontario and British Columbia schemes as examples. Manning steers clear of referencing Chong’s plan.

Manning writes that the implementation of a carbon-pricing regime is being “hopelessly bungled” by these administrations and it is “this bungled implementation which should be the primary focus of our attacks and opposition.”

Drilling down into the implementation of carbon pricing, says Manning, avoids “putting conservatives in the contradictory position of appearing to favour regulation over market mechanisms for dealing with environmental challenges.”