House of Commons Hansard #14 of the 37th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was accord.

Topics

Kyoto Protocol
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

The Speaker

The hon. government House leader and Minister of State.

Kyoto Protocol
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Glengarry—Prescott—Russell
Ontario

Liberal

Don Boudria Minister of State and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I find it unusual that the leader of that party would see it appropriate to discuss private members' business while asking the government, when most people in this House, particularly the people on this side of the House, consider private members' business to be free votes.

Kyoto Protocol
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Progressive Conservative

John Herron Fundy Royal, NB

Mr. Speaker, the government's draft document to implement the Kyoto protocol falls far short of even reasonable expectations. This pathetic, paltry excuse for a plan is absent of any costs and falls 60 megatonnes short of our commitment under Kyoto.

If the provinces reject the plan when they meet next week, is it the federal government's intention to go ahead without them, without their support and without their consent?

Kyoto Protocol
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Victoria
B.C.

Liberal

David Anderson Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, there are various rules against hypothetical questions in the House.

All I can say to the hon. member is that if, if, if the situation arises, if, if, if, as he suggests, then we are going to have a debate in this House and he will be quite at liberty to give his views at that time as to whether we should or should not.

Kyoto Protocol
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Dave Chatters Athabasca, AB

Mr. Speaker, since the Kyoto process first began in Japan, the government, the Prime Minister and at least two cabinet ministers have promised credit for early action for voluntary emission reductions.

Could the Minister of Natural Resources confirm that these companies that accepted the government's promise will receive credit under this latest plan?

Kyoto Protocol
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Vancouver South—Burnaby
B.C.

Liberal

Herb Dhaliwal Minister of Natural Resources

Mr. Speaker, we have been consulting with industry. We know that it has some legitimate concerns. We want to make sure that we deal with those concerns in the final plan in terms of dealing with that uncertainty, in dealing with making sure that we deal with the early action that some companies have taken so that they are not disadvantaged in any way.

That consultation is continuing because they have some real, legitimate concerns we need to deal with, and because we want to make sure that investment stays in Canada and that we continue to be competitive with our partners.

Kyoto Protocol
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Dave Chatters Athabasca, AB

Mr. Speaker, that truly was a hypothetical answer.

I know for a fact that promises mean little to the government. Many corporations and municipalities have spent hundreds of millions of dollars on early action because they believed that the government would keep its promise.

Why is there no reference to credit for early volunteer actions in this latest fantasy plan?

Kyoto Protocol
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Victoria
B.C.

Liberal

David Anderson Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has raised an important issue which we think should be discussed fully.

The fact is many companies have taken early action and made more money as a result. Should we be giving them taxpayers' money that could go to other uses when in fact the companies have become more profitable because of the measures they have taken?

This is the type of dilemma that the hon. member should put his mind to and discuss more fully during the debate that we are having this afternoon. It is not that easy to work this out on a general rule.

Kyoto Protocol
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Bloc

Serge Cardin Sherbrooke, QC

Mr. Speaker, in the plan proposed this morning to meet the Kyoto objectives, one quarter of the effort could depend on credits for exporting green energy sources.

How can the government think it realistic to base 25% of Canada's efforts on a measure that has was not accepted during the Kyoto negotiations?

Kyoto Protocol
Oral Question Period

2:30 p.m.

Victoria
B.C.

Liberal

David Anderson Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, the plan contains a variety of means to reach the final 60 megatonnes. Exporting clean energy is one of them.

I agree with the hon. member. We do have problems in this respect internationally, but it is very important to point out that by exporting clean energy, we will be reducing greenhouse gases that are emitted into the atmosphere. Even if this happens in the United States or in another country, it is very important to do so. In fact, this is the very goal of the Kyoto protocol and the Rio convention.

Kyoto Protocol
Oral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Bloc

Serge Cardin Sherbrooke, QC

Mr. Speaker, logically speaking, how can the Government of Canada claim that it should benefit from credits for its efforts to reduce pollution by exporting clean energy, but at the same time, that it should not suffer penalties for exporting energy that pollutes?

Is the government not being terribly naive?

Kyoto Protocol
Oral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Victoria
B.C.

Liberal

David Anderson Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is a sensible man. He has made an important point. Yes, if there is an increase in polluting energy, it should be taken into account, not only for Canada, but for all countries around the world.

Ethics
Oral Question Period

October 24th, 2002 / 2:35 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Ken Epp Elk Island, AB

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Deputy Prime Minister stated that there would be an independent ethics commissioner, yet he was ambiguous on the method of the commissioner's appointment. The proposed legislation does not provide for any direct involvement by the House in selecting the appointee.

Will the Deputy Prime Minister admit that the proposed legislation precludes the direct election of the ethics commissioner by members of Parliament?

Ethics
Oral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Ottawa South
Ontario

Liberal

John Manley Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, I refer the hon. member to Standing Order 111 which provides for the election by the House of Commons of officers of Parliament of which the ethics commissioner is one.

Ethics
Oral Question Period

2:35 p.m.

Canadian Alliance

Ken Epp Elk Island, AB

Mr. Speaker, the proposed legislation says that the commissioner will be appointed by order in council. That is the Prime Minister. Any votes in committees are non-binding, and the votes there as in the House are controlled by the Liberal majority. All members of Parliament should have a real say in the selection of the commissioner.

Will the government commit to an all party selection of the ethics commissioner?