Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Yes, we would be very keen to provide changes to the legislation. One of the ambiguities, if I might say, is that although we were asked to address international aspects related to the Clean Air Act, the act is very specifically focused on domestic legislation, which made it difficult to figure out exactly how it would be integrated.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  I'm not sure if anything is actually in place now. I am very well aware—as probably all of you are as well—of Alberta's intent to submit a regulatory framework that would be an intensity-based or -driven system, so we'll have to see exactly how that comes out. As far as integration with the American market today is concerned, I think that's a very relevant point.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Yes, absolutely, and in particular, the statement of intent.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  First of all, it sends a signal. While we're getting a signal about Canada having difficulty reaching its target, which is a very legitimate point, and Canada will be having a lot of challenges in meeting its target, there are protestations that it's only the target we're not talking about not meeting, but we're bound and determined to meet all other provisions relating to the Kyoto Protocol.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  No, and there was a deadline for January 1 for doing that. One of the examples was to what extent are we going to use our managed forests as part of our inventory. There's a real issue on this in a country like Canada. Because our forests are so vast, like Russia's, we have to determine, in terms of our forecast, whether or not Canadian forests would actually represent a net sink or a net source.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  There were two reports due that we're now tardy on, as I understand it. The first one was the fourth national communication. Every few years, we are to provide a national communication that basically provides an update on our national circumstances, our emissions trajectory, and the measures we're taking to mitigate our greenhouse gas emissions.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  I'm just saying that's the formal mechanism by which these sorts of things are communicated. I know that figures have been bandied about. The Prime Minister made a presentation a few days ago about how far out we are from our target. We need to fill that formal obligation of providing the international report; that's what we committed to.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Yes, absolutely, we have pretty accurate knowledge of that as of the 2005 emissions.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Yes. Mr. Delbeke could probably deal with this as well. By no means am I a technical expert on this, but I think the biggest problem is simply “truing up”. When you're doing an intensity-based system, you basically have to make an estimate at the beginning of the year of how many megatonnes you would expect that reduction to provide.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  I think it's perfectly within the government's mandate to decide exactly what kind of actions it feels are the most effective in meeting the targets we have committed to. I don't want to get into the business of saying that the government should or should not get into the business of buying credits.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Allow me to thank you and the other members of this committee for the opportunity to speak to you today on this critical issue. I will focus my comments on relevant international aspects, including the lessons Canada might want to consider from the experience of others, particularly the United States and the European Union; how the development of a domestic climate change plan is intimately linked with ongoing discussions on a post-2012 climate change regime; and the implications for Canada of the recently released report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Environment committee  On the first question, in terms of anything that would be perceptible, let me be as concrete as possible. I think the two most important initiatives that you could do from a capital investment perspective are carbon capture and storage and sending up the signals on that as quickly as possible, particularly Alberta and Saskatchewan; and a clean energy east-west line, getting Churchill Falls, getting Manitoba, getting clean coal out of Saskatchewan and Alberta, and starting an east-west clean energy transmission.

Environment committee  What I would say is that in the domestic context, I think we need a strong suite of policy measures and a clear regulatory framework for industry. Secondly would be fiscal measures. I think in that sense what the Quebec government has done with its so-called carbon levy is particularly interesting.

Environment committee  We'd just come off two large successes in the environmental field, particularly on acid rain. Through a very innovative emissions trading program out of the Environmental Protection Agency, costs were less than 10% of what was originally estimated. Secondly, there was the ozone treaty itself.

Environment committee  Okay. Ultimately, successfully addressing this grave and present threat means an evolution in understanding what national interests truly signify: acting responsibly for the sake of the environment and our children. I believe Canadians are ready and impatient to face the challenge.