House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2004, with 43% of the vote.
Assisted Human Reproduction Act January 28th, 2003
moved:
Motion No. 1
That Bill C-13 be amended by replacing the long title with the following:
“An Act respecting assisted human reproduction and related research”
Motion No. 2
That Bill C-13, in Clause 2, be amended by replacing, in the English version, line 15 on page 1 with the following:
“individuals, for families and for society in”
Kyoto Protocol December 2nd, 2002
Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague's question is a good one.
As I understand it from the same person I was speaking about a moment ago, in the case of Russia it is going to have approximately 1,000 megatonnes to sell for emissions credits because of the fact that its economy is approximately half the size it was in 1990. That is 1,000 megatonnes of credits available which could be banked, by the way, so each year it would have 1,000 more. That could have all kinds of consequences.
If the Russians sold their credits to whomever and used that money to improve their environmental practices, that would be good. If they were to flood the market with that 1,000 megatonnes and the price went down to $1 or $2, that would be good for Canada in the sense that if we had to buy emissions, we would be buying them at a very low price.
The point my colleague is making, as many people have said, is what good does it do to buy hot air from Russia? I would hope very much that if Canada bought an emissions credit outside our country, it would go to a country that would use that money immediately to cut down pollution in whatever country it happened to be. If the money just went--
Kyoto Protocol December 2nd, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague from Athabasca for that question, which is one that has troubled me as well. I have been to see one of those nuclear plants near Shanghai. In fact, it is in production now.
My understanding of whether nuclear power will qualify for credits is that at present it does. An American living in Europe who is a specialist on the Kyoto accord told me that European nations are moving against allowing emissions credits for nuclear plants. If that move is successful, as the member is indicating, Canada and other countries that produce nuclear power would lose the right to build nuclear plants in developing countries and thereby obtain an emissions tax credit.
I know nuclear power is very controversial in the member's riding, as it is in mine. Safe nuclear technology, such as the Candu reactor, will continue to be eligible for credits. If we can cut the pollution in places like Shanghai, Beijing, New Delhi or Jakarta through sound, safe nuclear technology, I think the member would be the first to agree that would be an excellent contribution by Canadians to the developing world.
Kyoto Protocol December 2nd, 2002
Mr. Speaker, there are now more than 6 billion co-trustees of planet Earth. Those of us fortunate enough to live in Canada want to do our best to help keep it in good repair. Accordingly, I will be voting yes to the ratification of the Kyoto protocol.
I am sure that I surprise no one when I say I have great concerns, especially in terms of the effects it will have on Alberta.
It is clear that Kyoto is not self-implementing; we need to pass legislation. A constitutional cloud, however, is lurking just over the horizon. The provinces are claiming jurisdiction over elements of the accord. Alberta has already introduced legislation to occupy the field in certain respects. I think it would be fair to say that constitutional experts across the country are divided. We must accept that there will be issues and continue to work together on an acceptable implementation strategy. The case for continued cooperation and consultation is clear.
Particularly disturbing throughout the discussion over recent months has been the notion raised by some that Albertans are not committed to the environment. Questioning Kyoto has wrongly become synonymous with being anti-green. Albertans are far from that. We understand that climate change needs to be addressed and are appalled at the suggestion that we would ruin the planet for selfish gains.
Many Albertans, including myself, moved west at least in part because of the natural environment. In the 1970s, it might be added, I conducted a number of environmental prosecutions for the province. Most Albertans want Canada to be a global leader in environmental protection.
After travelling to Asia, Africa and Latin America and meeting families there living on less than $2 a day, it is often overwhelming to return home and see how well most of us live here.
Canadian industries are recognized everywhere for their bold, creative ways of reducing emissions. For example, Alberta based EnCana and others are developing sequestering techniques to pump CO
2
underground as a way of forcing oil to the surface. EnCana estimates that its operations could produce the same effect as taking 212,000 cars off the road would. Sequestration applied throughout western Canada could reduce emissions by as much as 75 megatonnes a year, provided that it can be done at a reasonable cost.
The use of ethanol blends and other bio-diesel fuels reduces greenhouse gas emissions and has the potential to create tremendous new opportunities for agriculture, especially for prairie farmers.
Syncrude, one of Alberta's leading energy producers, has already cut CO
2
emissions per barrel of production by almost a fifth since 1990. I could go on and on.
Not only is it important for the environment to be careful in our energy consumption, but it is also in the interest of the business community. They know it and are making the necessary adjustments. Let us be clear; they do not want to suffer any negative impact on their economic growth.
Businesses are not just developing ground breaking technologies; they are doing what Canadians generally have come to expect: they are using innovations to help the developing world. It is little known that under Kyoto Canadian businesses could get credit for helping developing countries put in place cleaner technologies.
As an example of a clean development mechanism, take a proposed coal burning electricity plant in a developing country. If Canada offers to build a much cleaner gas burning plant instead, I gather we could claim a credit for the difference in emissions levels between the two facilities. This approach would appeal to all of us in Canada who want to see developed countries do something about greenhouse gases and other air pollution around the world.
The reality is that many Albertans' jobs depend upon the fossil fuel industry, as does much of our Alberta advantage. Many Albertans fear that they are going to be most negatively impacted and we must not be. Implementation must in no way jeopardize the strength of the Alberta economy, the growth of which is heavily dependent upon the expansion of the oil sands.
Our Prime Minister has said, “Nothing is more nervous than a million dollars”. Now consider $5 billion for an oil sands plant. The fact is that in the investment world, perception is reality.
The development of our oil sands is too important to the country not to go ahead because of the chill factor or any other reason. Implementation must protect the oil sands as a priceless national asset. They are the source of hundreds of thousands of direct and indirect jobs across western Canada. Moreover 40% of the money spent on machinery, chemicals, equipment and services in Fort McMurray goes to Ontario's and Quebec's manufacturing sectors.
It is estimated that between 30,000 and 52,000 jobs in Ontario's steel industry alone depend on the Alberta oil sands. As the Calgary Herald said, when a project is cancelled in Alberta, steelworkers in Hamilton go home.
Since 1995 and the much praised agreement on the taxing of the oil sands projects introduced by our Prime Minister, approximately $86 billion in related development has been announced with about $24 billion of it to be completed by the end of this calendar year. That leaves $62 billion awaiting decision.
The oil sands have created outstanding opportunities for our first nations. Persons in the oil sands pay taxes and contribute to transfer payments. Much of the Alberta government's annual budget is based on energy royalties meaning that social programs throughout the province are dependent on the sector.
In an era of instability in the Middle East, a strong oil patch increases North America's energy security. Reduced reliance on imported energy sources is something for which many countries around the world are now clamouring. Some Canadians ask, what is the risk; heavy emitters cannot simply pack up their drills and find the reserves south of the border. Industry however has said that even though some might continue to extract oil in Alberta, upgrading and treatment operations may be moved out of the country.
Even as per unit reductions are achieved, they worry that Canada's industry might still be disadvantaged because Canada is a growing exporter of oil and natural gas.
When the U.S. pulled out of the negotiations, the entire dynamic changed. Many people have expressed concern that the protocol now appears to favour European nations.
However, it is said that countries the size of continents with growing populations, such as Canada, Australia and the United States, will have to absorb greater economic costs in order to comply.
Canada can and should play a decisive role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. However, our approach should be one that leads to a moderate and lasting impact, while upholding the economic benefits that our government has generated.
The plan to implement Kyoto must bring certainty to the investment environment as soon as possible, reflect the unique concerns of all of our regions as a national family, and as the Prime Minister has committed, not impose a disproportionate cost on Alberta.
I intend to be vigilant about all of the implementation measures. As a representative of the province, the economic needs of three million Albertans are crucial.
Foreign Affairs October 8th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, after Pakistan's test last Friday, Canada expressed deep regret and urged a halt to nuclear development. Today we reiterate that as tensions in the region remain high, these tests are particularly counterproductive and serve only to undermine efforts by the international community to bring a lasting peace.
In the interests of regional and international security, Canada urges both Pakistan and India to de-escalate and resume dialogue immediately.
Iraq October 3rd, 2002
Madam Speaker, would my hon. next door neighbour in the Edmonton area be kind enough to say what he thought of that statement by the retired European diplomat on how we could avoid a war in Iraq?
Iraq October 3rd, 2002
Madam Speaker, would my hon. colleague from Edmonton Southwest give us the benefit of his views on the problems that might result in Iraq among peoples of different branches of the Muslim faith like the Kurds, for example? I do not think he mentioned any of those problems when he was giving his speech.
Supply May 7th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, could the hon. member tell us whether or not he supports a tax on softwood lumber exports? Has he had time to think about this? Does he feel that there are other means that are more effective than a tax on softwood lumber exports?
Supply May 7th, 2002
Mr. Speaker, I really appreciated the speech made by the hon. member, but I wonder if he could be a little more specific.
It goes without saying that there is a crisis in the softwood lumber industry. Could the hon. member give us some figures that apply, for example, to his own riding? Could he give us figures for the province of Quebec? In his opinion, how many people are now out of work? What can he suggest in terms of specific programs? Finally, does he support a tax on softwood lumber exports?
Supply May 7th, 2002
Madam Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition has made a speech saying the government is not doing enough. In my speech I mentioned things that are already happening such as employment insurance and a number of other things. What does the opposition party advocate should be done in addition? Does the Leader of the Opposition favour an export tax while our actions are proceeding to the WTO? What other things does he advocate we do? We on this side of the House would be happy to hear his party's proposals.