Thank you, Mr. Chair.
It's nice to have you before us, Mr. Minister. I would simply say that I support the issues raised by my colleagues and I look forward to getting into more of the details on climate change when you come to defend the new budget.
What I would like to have you respond to today is the overall mandate of the department and the slippage in seriousness of the federal government taking on its environmental responsibilities. It's been a great concern over the last 20 years, and we're seeing extreme slippage. We're seeing extreme slippage in movement on the regulation of serious toxins. I don't intend to ask you specific questions. I look forward to quizzing your officials on particular regulations that don't seem to be seeing the light of day.
What I'm particularly concerned about are the comments in the fiscal update of last fall. You yourself stood up in the House and spoke to those. You said that when we look at the coming budget, when we look at the supplementary estimates, we need to look to the message of the fiscal update: that we were going to work toward clean electricity. While the Prime Minister has said we're not going to pick favourites, the Government of Canada has picked favourites by singling out nuclear power and coal-fired electricity as a purported source of clean electricity for the future of Canada.
Coal-fired power, as we well know, is probably the largest source, if not one of the largest sources of greenhouse gases in Canada. It is the single largest source of industrial mercury in Canada. In fact, it's the single largest source of industrial mercury in North America, if you're looking toward North American action.
It's very important, when you look at the regulation of mercury, that you not simply pick on the United States. When you're controlling a neurotoxin, it isn't the volume. In other words, it doesn't matter if we are emitting less than the United States; they should be serious about it. That substance bioaccumulates in the local environment. We have proven that in Alberta, and as a result we have introduced provincial regulations.
So I welcome your addressing how you are going to move forward. You're saying we shouldn't give up environment for energy security, and yet your whole plan of action is to continue to put more support into those dirty sources. Where is the money in this supplementary budget for incenting renewables? Where is the money for moving on a coal-fired mercury regulation?