Bill C-311 (Historical)

Climate Change Accountability Act

An Act to ensure Canada assumes its responsibilities in preventing dangerous climate change

Climate Change

[Bruce Hyer, NDP, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we will soon be voting on Bill C-311, the climate change bill, in its third reading. In just 79 days, 6 hours and 11 minutes, Canada will be in Copenhagen to sign the world's next major climate treaty. However, we still do not know what the Conservative or Liberal policies actually are on climate change.

When will we get Canadian leadership and Canadian action on climate change? The people in Thunder Bay—Superior North are ready, willing and able to do their share, but Thunder Bay and north shore towns like Nipigon, Schreiber, Terrace Bay and Marathon are about to lose their intercity buses. We have already lost VIA Rail.

These were our most fuel-efficient ways to travel, plus their loss is making tough times in northwestern Ontario tougher still. Whether we are talking about regional hardships or national policy, our government must start taking action to protect our citizens and our planet.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

No, it is adducing the evidence. The evidence was public, but now it's under proper consideration by the committee for Bill C-311. It's what committee hears. We're just accepting that testimony for this committee rather than the evidence for the past committee, and we do have new members here.

Are there any other comments?

Mr. Woodworth.

We are running out of time.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

It shall read:

That, in order to ensure a timely and efficient review of Bill C-311, An Act to ensure Canada assumes its responsibilities in preventing dangerous climate change, the Committee agrees to accept information, testimony, and materials considered during hearings conducted by the Committee in the 2nd Session, 39th Parliament on Bill C-377, An Act to ensure Canada assumes its responsibilities in preventing dangerous climate change, as supporting documentation for review of Bill C-311.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

You said it would be after the words “Bill C-311”. It's in the second last line twice.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Just for clarification, the committee already has a motion instructing us that the first five meetings when we come back in the fall session will be dedicated to Bill C-311. With that in mind, Mr. Warawa's suggestion was to remove the last two lines after “Bill C-311”, because we already have direction to--

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I have to say that I'm completely befuddled by Mr. McGuinty's comments. His motion must have been raised when I was at the international climate change conferences, so I wasn't actually aware of it. His motion appears to support the very motion I've raised to expedite the review of Bill C-311. In other words, in my absence the committee agreed to move to it.

That's expediting it, in lieu of the fact that the review of this bill has been continuously deferred by both the Liberals and the Conservatives. We have swayed from the traditional practice of all committees, which is that review of legislation and estimates is given first. This bill is being given short shrift and has been put at the bottom of the pile. Instead of completing a review by now, we are only going to start it in September. I remind the committee that we have to report back to Parliament by October 22.

We are also reviewing Bill C-311. We're not reviewing whatever the Liberal new climate change plan might be. We're not reviewing “Turning the Corner”. We are reviewing a bill that has been tabled before this committee by Parliament. So I think it's incumbent upon us.... Certainly everybody can have full rights and propose whatever witnesses they want to bring in. I am simply again, as I have continuously done in this committee, trying to suggest an efficient review.

I have already agreed, at the request of Mr. Warawa, to take out the clause-by-clause. That may have been my mistake as a new member. I know he was suggesting that we preclude amendments. I'm not even excluding that there be additional witnesses. I'm simply suggesting that my motion, on review of past testimony, certainly helped inform me who would be additional witnesses. There's a lot of pressure by outside forces, by members of my own party, about all kinds of witnesses who should be brought forward.

I am trying to balance the interests of this committee, because I feel responsible for proceeding with all the matters that are before us--and there are a number of other matters. The committee can choose to vote against it. I would accept a friendly amendment to take out the clause-by-clause. I'm in no way excluding that there be additional witnesses. I will certainly be objecting, as a member of the steering committee, to an endless list of topics, witnesses, and so forth, that do not directly speak to Bill C-311.

I would like to thank Mr. Bigras for his comments. There is something new in Bill C-311 that was not in Bill C-377: there are actually less than three months until Copenhagen. In fact, the negotiation position of this country is being made right now, not six months from now.

We were asked by Parliament to seriously review this bill. It puts forward targets to be considered to take to Copenhagen. So I think it's incumbent on us to move forward. If we only have that number of meetings we will have to seriously decide, as a steering committee and as a committee, how to constrain that review. That's all there is to it. This is simply my suggestion on how we constrain that review.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Just to follow up on Mr. McGuinty's reference to the previous motion we passed on June 2, it said that the committee shall study Bill C-311 for at least the first five meetings of the fall session.

Mr. Bigras.

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

Mr. Chair, has there already been a motion or an understanding that previous testimony from Bill C-377 will be incorporated into the consideration of Bill C-311?

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

In response to that, Ms. Duncan, and to clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-311 immediately when Parliament resumes, I'm open to accepting all the previous Bill C-377 testimony, but the world situation has changed so much that we have some serious issues we need to look at in and around Bill C-311. We have to hear what Canada's position is, what the world's position is, what's coming out of the negotiations that are happening now with the G17, and these sorts of issues. We need to know where the BRIC countries are and what kinds of targets....

There are things we need to talk about around Bill C-311 that will prevent us from getting immediately into clause-by-clause consideration with any ability to get somewhere.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Bezan]

Time has just expired.

Thank you very much, Mr. Hyer, for coming in today. I know it's a difficult situation for you as a member of Parliament to actually be called as a witness, but we do appreciate your giving testimony and answering forthrightly the questions that were put to you on Bill C-311. I want to wish you all the best.

With that, we're going to continue with our meeting. I'm sure you've all seen the agenda, which is being circulated again.

We're going to move to the motion by Ms. Duncan.

Ms. Duncan, if you could move that to the floor, I'd appreciate it.

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Do you feel that Bill C-311 reflects the realities of the current global economic recession?

[Bruce Hyer, NDP, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

I'm not here today to debate Kyoto. I'm here to talk about Bill C-311.

[Stephen Woodworth, Conservative, Kitchener Centre, ON]

First, I would like to thank Mr. Bigras for his expression “pre-industrial“. I feel that the term is very appropriate, in English at least, to describe the consequences of this bill.

Secondly, I wish to make very clear my point of view, which is that merely setting targets without providing detailed plans on how to achieve them is a highly partisan, totally useless publicity exercise, and notwithstanding your protestations of non-partisanship, Mr. Hyer, I'm afraid that's all I see in this bill--merely setting targets without providing any detailed plans about how to get there. Anybody can set targets for the sake of putting a plaque on their wall that says “I signed this agreement setting targets”. It gets us nowhere, in my opinion.

Having said that, as you as a parliamentarian know, Mr. Hyer, under Standing Order 79, a private member's bill like Bill C-311 cannot require the appropriation of any part of the public revenue. So I want to ask you, can this bill be implemented without appropriating any public revenue?

[Mark Warawa, Conservative, Langley, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Hyer, for being here.

As you've mentioned, Bill C-311 is virtually identical to Bill C-377. There are some minor changes in definition. You've called it the “Copenhagen bill”. Mr. Layton, your leader, called it his “impossible dream.” The testimony we heard was that it was a poorly written bill, and it was uncosted. Mr. Layton recommended that it be costed, as did Mr. Bramley. More recently, Ms. Libby Davies said bills like this should be costed.

The world has change since Bill C-377 was introduced and dealt with about a year and a half ago. I'm sure you're very aware of some of those major changes.

We have a global recession and it's a very difficult time economically for a number of countries. Canada entered last; we'll be the first to come out. Canada is one of the strongest economies in the world, but we're also being affected dramatically by the global recession.

We also have a new President in the United States, who has made the environment a priority. Things have changed now in that we have a clean energy dialogue ongoing with President Obama's administration. That's progressing in a very positive way. That wasn't present before. Both Canada and the United States agree that all of the major emitters have to be part of a global solution as we head toward Copenhagen.

Bill C-311, as you said, is virtually identical to Bill C-377. What changes would you be willing to make today to Bill C-311 to make sure that you get consensus around this table?

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Hyer, for tabling your bill and trying to expedite this process.

Can you tell the committee whether you have had any feedback from Canadians on Bill C-311?