David McGuinty

[The Environment, December 12th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, what this is—

[The Environment, December 12th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, in this holiday season Conservative re-gifting just keeps on coming.

Yesterday, Conservatives re-announced $7.5 million in Liberal funding for adaptation. Today, wait for it, the minister said that Canada's 700 largest polluters had better watch out or else they would be in trouble if they did not do what they had already done for four years. That is right, Canada's largest emitters have been required to report their emissions since 2004.

My question is for the Prime Minister. What is going on here? What kind of games is his minister playing? Who does he think he is fooling and when is this nonsense going to stop?

[The Environment, December 11th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, Canada and its Minister of the Environment have become the object of ridicule, singled out as the greatest obstacle to progress in Bali. No one believes the government is negotiating with clean hands. This domestic plan has been rejected by every single independent observer. It will allow Canada's emissions to rise for decades. Nobody believes the government at home. Nobody believes it at Bali.

Why does the minister not just come home and finish up his Christmas shopping? Does the Prime Minister not have anyone, anyone at all, to send abroad to represent the will of Canadians?

[The Environment, December 11th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the UN climate chief, Yvo de Boer, portrayed Canada as a climate hypocrite by rejecting Kyoto commitments but demanding “developing countries...take binding reduction targets”. Meanwhile, China points to Canada as one of the single biggest obstacles to progress.

The government claims its actions are based on science, but the head of the IPCC has labelled it “a government of skeptics”. Our top Canadian climate scientist believes the minister's policies were devised on a Ouija board. Why is the government refusing to sign on to reduction targets the science demands?

[The Environment, December 10th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, this Conservative government's conduct at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Bali has been criticized by international organizations and foreign governments. The leader of the German delegations said, “We, the Europeans, do not believe that Canada's position is constructive.”

Will the government stop dragging its feet, put an end to this furor and finally and truly lead by example in Bali?

[The Environment, December 10th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, already the government's approach at the United Nation's conference on climate change in Bali is drawing fierce criticism from our international partners. Canada is completely isolated, providing cover for the Republican White House.

Here is what the UN climate chief says, “Canada is becoming a bargain discount version of Australia of old”. The head of the Nobel Prize winning intergovernmental panel on climate change is convinced the Conservative government “does not want to do anything on climate change”.

Will the government abandon its obstructionist approach and the bluster and show real leadership at Bali?

[The Environment, December 7th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister's position is a Republican position. He talks a big game about accountability, but he refuses to be held accountable for the fact that 75% of greenhouse gases currently in our atmosphere were put there by developed nations like Canada.

Here is what the Prime Minister is really saying, “We won't stop dumping our pollution into the atmosphere until you stop dumping yours”.

Exactly how is this juvenile tit-for-tat sandbox game going to help us achieve a binding agreement at Bali to deal with the climate change crisis?

[The Environment, December 7th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, here is what someone once said on how best to address the climate change crisis:

—our approach must be based on global participation, including that of developing countries whose net greenhouse gas emissions now exceed those in the developed countries.

Does this sound familiar? It ought to. That was the excuse President Bush used when he announced to the world that he was taking the United States out of the Kyoto deal after promising he would ratify it during his presidential campaign.

Why is the Prime Minister insisting on isolating Canada while providing cover for a wounded Republican administration with one foot out the door?

[International Volunteer Day, December 5th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, today is indeed International Volunteer Day and, in particular, I want to draw attention to those Canadians who are serving overseas as volunteers.

At any time, over 3,300 Canadians are volunteering internationally, working to fight poverty, increasing access to water and sanitation, teaching classes, providing health care, working to strengthen democracy and improve governance, and helping accelerate small business development.

Since the creation of Canada's aid program more than 35 years ago, more than 75,000 Canadians have volunteered overseas.

Canada is fortunate to have volunteer organizations with the expertise to make sure our volunteers have a lasting impact. These agencies are attracting international attention for their innovation and ability to work together effectively.

All Canadians can and must be proud of the contributions of Canadian volunteers overseas. I ask all members of the House to join me in saluting the 75,000 Canadians who have served overseas to build a better world.

[The Environment, November 30th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, that is nothing short of pathetic. Where is Karl Rove when Canada's new republicans need him?

The hole in the ozone layer is no longer a menace to humanity because the industrialized countries were the first to reduce their emissions. But when it comes to climate change, the minister proclaims, “you first”.

Why does he not set the bar higher for Canada? Why is Canada not a world leader?