I can't let those comments go unchallenged.
Global warming is not a weather event. You don't listen to Johanna Wagstaffe to get a prediction on global warming.
The natural disasters that we're suggesting should be studied, or their increased incidence, are directly related to climate change. As you do the research and learn about climate change, it's not just about warming temperatures, it's about more extreme events at both ends of the spectrum. The increased incidence of natural disasters, whether it's floods or the ocean warming or the rising sea levels, etc., are consequences of climate change caused by humans.
The reason our country keeps winning the dinosaur award at every environmental conference around the world is that we're still having this debate when the rest of the world has moved on. But we, as an oversight committee for planning and priorities and estimates, surely want to be able to recommend to government that they better have some way to fund this liability. Currently an unfunded liability that's looming over our heads is like a sword of Damocles, because every time you try to balance the budget, if you have a $6 billion flood in Calgary, there goes your balanced budget.
This is predictable. This is scientifically based. It's irresponsible of us not to be dealing with this at the very committee where we're supposed to be forward looking about anticipated costs, budgets, and spending. This is the committee that should be dealing with it. We should be getting information from other committees perhaps, but we should be recommending that the government has this contingency, not just the costs, but being involved at the root of the problem as well. This committee should be recommending that this government shouldn't be engaged in any activity that may be exacerbating the climate change emergency that the globe is facing.
Global warming is not a weather-related issue. You don't look at the 11 o'clock news to deal with global warming. You take your head out of the sand and deal with it.