House of Commons Hansard #140 of the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was animal.

Topics

The Environment
Oral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean
Ontario

Conservative

John Baird Minister of the Environment

I have to say to the House, Mr. Speaker, I am not familiar with Teletoon as much as the member opposite.

I can say that during the Liberal regime the Liberals did not deliver the goods. Greenhouse gases went up instead of down. Under our regime we have a real plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Maybe the member could explain to the House why on April 15, 2005 the Globe and Mail said that his leader acknowledged that the Liberal plan was still unclear when it came to regulations needed to make sure--

The Environment
Oral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Peter Milliken

The hon. member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie.

The Environment
Oral Questions

2:55 p.m.

Bloc

Bernard Bigras Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Mr. Speaker, this morning, the Minister of the Environment said that “when greenhouse gas emissions stop increasing, we can begin to reduce them”. That is a totally irresponsible statement.

Does the minister realize that, without absolute targets, he is allowing polluters to continue to pollute, and he is admitting from the outset that he has given up on meeting the Kyoto targets?

The Environment
Oral Questions

3 p.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean
Ontario

Conservative

John Baird Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, we will absolutely reduce greenhouse gas emissions. We will have absolute terms for emissions reductions. We will also have a real plan, a national plan to improve air quality. For 13 long years, with the Bloc Québécois in this House, we never saw any progress regarding the environment, air quality and climate change. This government is now taking action.

The Environment
Oral Questions

3 p.m.

Bloc

Bernard Bigras Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Mr. Speaker, during all these years, the government denied the existence of climate change in this House. The minister's attitude is the same as that of his government with Afghanistan. He says one thing, but does the opposite.

Is the reference year to which he referred this morning for calculating the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions 1990, 2006 or 2012? Which year will he use to begin penalizing those, such as Quebec, who made efforts in the past, and rewarding polluters, such as major oil companies?

The Environment
Oral Questions

3 p.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean
Ontario

Conservative

John Baird Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, we have a great plan that we will release tomorrow. It will be one of the world leading plans. It is a plan where we acknowledge as a country and as a government we will come together to reduce greenhouse gases. We will come together to improve the quality of air in Canada. It is a plan that will regulate industry in a mandatory fashion, something that has never been done in Canada. It is a plan that we will all be able to be tremendously proud of.

The Environment
Oral Questions

3 p.m.

Liberal

Geoff Regan Halifax West, NS

Mr. Speaker, the government's greenhouse gas targets are a recipe for cooking this planet. They leave Canada 10% above our Kyoto commitments eight years after the due date.

If every country modelled its anti-global warming plan on the plan of the minister of hot air over there, world temperatures would rise disastrously by the end of the century.

Why is the government choosing to measure itself against 2006 emission levels when every other Kyoto signatory uses 1990 levels?

The Environment
Oral Questions

3 p.m.

Ottawa West—Nepean
Ontario

Conservative

John Baird Minister of the Environment

Mr. Speaker, what Canadians want to see is the government come forward with a strategy to genuinely reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Greenhouse gas emissions went up under the Liberals. They were supposed to go down under the Liberals.

Canada is prepared to accept leadership to do more than any other country over the next 13 years. We are going to have short term targets. We are going to have medium term targets. We are going to come forward with meaningful initiatives on technology, meaningful initiatives on international collaboration, meaningful initiatives to get the job done, where his leader and the Liberal Party failed Canadians.

The Environment
Oral Questions

3 p.m.

Conservative

Dave Batters Palliser, SK

Mr. Speaker, this morning the Minister of Natural Resources along with the Minister of the Environment announced another step to protect the health and environment of Canadians.

Last year our government announced new regulations and more stringent energy efficiency standards for a whole range of common products. With these new proposed regulations, Canada is a world leader in efficiency standards.

Could the Minister of Natural Resources explain what further action he is taking today to improve energy efficiency in Canada?

The Environment
Oral Questions

3 p.m.

Saanich—Gulf Islands
B.C.

Conservative

Gary Lunn Minister of Natural Resources

Mr. Speaker, please let me enlighten the House with another great initiative by this government.

We are taking steps to regulate efficiency in lighting. These regulations will be in place this year. Within five years we will ban inefficient light bulbs. What does that mean? This is the equivalent of 3,000 or 4,000 megawatts. How much is that? That would be six or seven coal fired electricity generating units, or the equivalent of Nanticoke, the largest polluter in North America.

This is real difference. This is action. This is helping Canadians use less and live better.

Canadian Heritage
Oral Questions

3 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus Timmins—James Bay, ON

Mr. Speaker, since the last election, the Minister of Canadian Heritage has been slashing arts and heritage programs.

However, we recently learned that the minister sent a memo to Conservative members regarding a secret plan to spend $30 million from the new arts fund. The minister did not set any criteria and used her personal e-mail account.

Does this money belong to Canadians or does it belong to the minister?

Canadian Heritage
Oral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Durham
Ontario

Conservative

Bev Oda Minister of Canadian Heritage and Status of Women

Mr. Speaker, the program does not yet exist. The criteria have not been set. We are only in the consultation phase. I invite all parties to provide their input in the consultation. In fact, I have already received input from members from other parties in this consultation phase.

However, guess who has already requested funding for a festival in his riding? The member for Windsor West from the NDP.

Canadian Heritage
Oral Questions

3:05 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus Timmins—James Bay, ON

Mr. Speaker, the minister has been caught in the headlights of accountability. Her department has been stalling on criteria. She has frozen out our group. She is using her personal e-mail to troll the Conservative backbenches for ideas on how to spend this money that has not yet been identified as in the program.

The question which has to be asked is, are we watching the birth of a brand-spanking new little baby boondoggle?

Canadian Heritage
Oral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Durham
Ontario

Conservative

Bev Oda Minister of Canadian Heritage and Status of Women

Mr. Speaker, I reiterate the program does not yet exist. The criteria have not been established. We are in a consultation phase. I welcome input from the member. I think that he should be contributing in a positive manner. I welcome input from all members in this House to serve our communities.

The Environment
Oral Questions

April 25th, 2007 / 3:05 p.m.

Liberal

Marlene Jennings Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC

Mr. Speaker, in 2006 alone, greenhouse gas emissions increased dramatically. Canadians expect their government to address the problem of climate change immediately.

Why is this government willing to waste at least five years before beginning to reduce greenhouse gas emissions? Why does the government refuse to act immediately?