Mr. Speaker, we just saw once more how much the Conservatives hate the Kyoto protocol and how they will try everything to get rid of it.
I am glad to have the opportunity to debate such an important bill. I take this opportunity to thank my seconder, the hon. member for Don Valley East and everyone who worked directly or indirectly on the bill.
This bill speaks primarily about the future. It is designed to make possible concrete acts today that will improve living conditions for the generations of tomorrow. I have always believed that political action should be motivated by a strong desire to make a positive difference in the world around us, a strong desire to prepare a better future for the generations to come.
As elected officials, we have the political and moral obligation to work toward building a better society, not only for those around us but, more important, for those who will follow us, our children and our grandchildren.
The environment is certainly something on which we can act, starting right now, to improve living conditions for the generations that will succeed us.
Not only can we act, we must act. We can act in a multitude of ways. We can act as individuals, through simple daily actions, and we can also act collectively, by adopting measures or passing legislation that promotes positive and responsible environmental behaviour. That is what this bill seeks to do.
The bill is absolutely necessary for a very simple reason. The Conservatives have decided to abandon Kyoto. They have decided to abandon the fight against climate change.
In reality, the conservatives have decided to surrender without even trying to fight. We cannot let them do this. That was what this Parliament tried to prevent when it adopted the Bloc Québécois' motion on May 16.
That motion, which received the support of a large majority of hon. members, was rejected out of hand by the Prime Minister. In this way he showed how little respect he has for this House, how little it matters to him.
His reaction to the motion simply highlights the importance of the bill now before us, since if passed it will force the government to respect the will of this House. It will mean that Canada will have to comply with its Kyoto protocol commitments on reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Climate change represents one of the biggest challenges facing humanity, not solely from the environmental perspective but also from the perspectives of public health, security of the food supply, quality of life and economic prosperity. On this last point, I should point out that doing nothing about climate change today could lead to considerable economic costs in the future.
When we talk about climate change, we are not just talking about the environment, we are talking about individuals, we are talking about human beings. We are talking about direct consequences to the health and quality of life of millions of people all over the planet.
In Canada, let us think about the way our vast natural spaces could change—the melting of Arctic glaciers, the viability of our agriculture, the threat to the cultural survival of our northern communities.
The impact of climate change is felt more in certain regions that are already among the poorest in the world. Regions that are already grappling with problems of inadequate food supplies or chronic coastal flooding.
According to the best experts, if the average temperature at the earth's surface increases by 2 degrees above what it was during the pre-industrial era, dozens of millions of people by the year 2080—which is not that far—are likely to be confronted with coastal flooding and famines, hundreds of millions of people risk coming down with malaria, and billions of others may run short of water.
This is not to be alarmist, but rather to recognize that the effects of climate change have already been felt and that this situation will worsen if we do not take concrete action in Canada as well as elsewhere in the world. This is, therefore, a collective and global effort. Everyone must shoulder the responsibility. This is the case for others and this is the case for Canada. It is in this context that I have the honour to table a private member's bill which will ensure that Canada meets its commitments under the Kyoto protocol.
More concretely, the bill creates an obligation on the government to establish an annual plan for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and to make the necessary regulations to ensure implementation of the plan.
The plan will have to include a description of the measures to be taken to ensure that Canada meets its obligations.
This description will have to cover, first, regulated emission limits and performance standards; second, spending or fiscal measures or incentives provided for this purpose, if the government so wishes; third, market-based mechanisms such as emissions trading or offsets; and, fourth, cooperative measures or agreements with provinces, territories or other governments, where that applies, of course.
The government will have to set dates for the coming into effect of each of these measures, and the amount of greenhouse gas emission reductions that have resulted or are expected to result for each year up to and including 2012.
When the bill comes into force, the government will have 180 days to make appropriate regulations to establish its action plan. Such regulations could for example limit the amount of greenhouse gases that can be released into the environment by the large industrial emitters. They could also provide for emissions trading, structured to achieve the targeted objectives.
Naturally, each annual climate change plan will have to respect provincial areas of jurisdiction and take into account the respective levels of greenhouse gas emissions in each province.
It is also important to note that the bill creates an obligation on the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development to review the plan and the proposed regulations, and to report to Parliament on them. His involvement will guarantee the plan's credibility and the aptness of the regulations, so that we can indeed achieve the targeted objectives.
I could continue to go into detail, but I feel it is more important to come back the spirit of the bill. Why is it necessary? Why is it so important to adopt it?
As I said a little earlier, climate change represents one of the biggest challenges facing humanity. That is why the international community saw fit to adopt the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the well-known Rio Convention. The Convention, which has been ratified by Canada, came into force in 1994.
Realizing that the Convention’s scope and the tools it provided were insufficient, the international community decided to go further. That was the impetus for the Kyoto protocol.
Canada ratified the Kyoto protocol by a majority vote in Parliament in 2002, and it came into force in 2005.
The protocol may not be perfect but it represents the best weapon available to us for the urgent task of combating climate change. Various analyses have shown that if we do not start immediately, and decisively, we risk running out of time to prevent serious repercussions on our climate.
Canadians understand it, scientists understand it and all opposition parties understand it. Only the Conservatives do not understand it. In fact, they are trying to spread, without much success, various myths about Kyoto.
For example, they are trying to claim that most countries cannot achieve their Kyoto objectives, which is false. Most of the 36 signatory countries with specific objectives are well on the way to achieving them. Within the European Community some countries, including Great Britain and France, have not only achieved but even surpassed their objectives.
Even countries that are having difficulty, like Norway and Japan, are still striving to meet their targets and putting in place the measures that will enable them to do so.
The government is also telling us that the Asia-Pacific partnership, so enthusiastically touted by the Bush administration, will be just as good as Kyoto. Nothing could be further from the truth. They are two completely different things. The partnership is a formula that allows its members to exchange information. It has very little funding, sets no mandatory objectives or reductions, does not even have a timetable. On the other hand, the Kyoto protocol has become international law, with detailed objectives and a precise schedule, along with obligations for emission reduction.
As for the defeatist myth that says our objectives may be unattainable, this is merely an excuse coming from people who lack even the courage to try.
My colleagues may be sure that we can achieve our objectives. One way we can do so is by exploiting the potential and seizing the extraordinary economic opportunity that the renewable energy sector offers. We can also do it through giant steps forward in energy efficiency.
Let us not forget that it is also possible to act positively by funding specific projects in certain less fortunate countries, projects that are also beneficial for our own environment because, as we know, the environment knows no borders. Greenhouse gases do not require a passport or a visa to enter or leave a country or a region.
Those are a few of the approaches we can take and there are others. There are always ways for those who want to find them.
Canada has always been able to find solutions. Not only has it been able to find solutions to its own challenges, it has also been able to take on leadership roles on the international stage.
We have only to think of the leading role played by Canada at the Montreal conference on climate change this past December. Canada's action was recognized and hailed around the world by foreign leaders, the international media, the scientific community and environmental groups.
But now all that is changing. Why? Simply because the Conservatives have decided to abandon Kyoto. They have decided to abandon the fight against climate change.
This is a sad moment in our history, because by abandoning all this they are doing immense damage to Canada's image. But more important than that, they are hurting the generations to come.
On this very important issue, the government is out of touch with Canadians, out of touch with most of the international community, out of touch with this Parliament and even out of touch with provincial premiers.
As elected officials, as legislators, we have a duty, a moral obligation, to change this situation. We have the obligation to act right now. That is what this bill proposes to do.
When a government does not respect international law, or the will of its own citizens—when it does not shoulder its responsibilities for one of the most important challenges facing our planet—Parliament can and must force it to do so.
I therefore urge my colleagues of all parties to support this important bill. The environment is not a partisan issue, and cannot be approached in a partisan spirit.
Let us unite to work together, starting right now, for the benefit of future generations. Let us unite on concrete action to safeguard the environment. Let us do this together, for our own sakes, but above all for the sake of the generations to come.
