Evidence of meeting #25 for Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
1:55 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
I don't think it's going to be relevant, as worthwhile as it may be.
Does anybody need an explanation?
The question, then, is shall the schedule carry?
(Schedule negatived)
(On clause 1)
2 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
Just for your information, there's a reference to the schedule in clause 2, which has now been adopted, but the schedule no longer exists. We'll look at that at report stage.
We are now at clause 1 and amendment L-1, which is back at the beginning of your songbook.
Mr. McGuinty.
2 p.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
This is an amendment that seeks to rename the short title of the act. Now that we look at the bill in its new form, we think it's important to build on the work of all parliamentarians of this committee and rename it as “Canada's Carbon Budget, Climate Change Action and Air Quality Act”.
We think it reflects the desire of all parliamentarians at this table to move aggressively on climate change. We have now built an operable plan into Bill C-30. It's workable, implementable, and understandable. It provides for emissions trading internationally. It has capped the total percentage of international credits. It has ruled out hot air purchases, very much as a result of the government's concern and our concern.
Most importantly, it takes Canada into the 21st century because it starts to speak about carbon as a form of budget. The single greatest threshold we have to cross as a nation-state to deal with climate change is to monetize carbon. It is the single greatest market correction that must be made. Hence, we have introduced the notion of carbon budget into this bill, and hopefully into Canadian society.
Not only does it reflect a carbon budget; it also reflects, as my colleague said a moment ago, sectoral carbon budgets. It reflects individual carbon budgets and treats carbon as a monetized asset. It reflects it for what it is: something with value attached. Until we actually monetize carbon we will continue to treat the atmosphere as a free dumping ground and receptacle for greenhouse gases and other pollutants. Science has taught us most of all that it is the equivalent of playing Russian roulette with the atmosphere, and Canadians don't want us to do that.
So we'd like to see the short name of this act reflect the carbon budget, because it talks about what we can do and not simply what we can't do. It tells us we can deal with the carbon deficit, for example, the way we dealt with the fiscal deficit in this country in the 1990s as a people, when we wrestled to the ground the fiscal trouble we were in and went on to make great strides.
In closing, on moving this amendment I would quote from a document recently published. Here's the quote:
Let them say that we never settled for second best. That we had the conviction to make the right choices. Let them say we had the courage, the commitment and the confidence to bring Canada to its rightful place on the world stage
We think renaming this act accordingly would be helpful, because—
2 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
Sorry. You may not believe this, but we have to suspend until we sort out the translation.
2:15 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
Mr. Chair, can I suggest that there's not much that can stop Mr. McGuinty from chairing this committee? Maybe this is a sign from the heavens that this committee is totally on the wrong track and we should be reconsidering.
2:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
I think I'll call that a matter of debate, Mr. Warawa.
Mr. McGuinty, could you continue on or wrap up?
2:15 p.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
I'm going to wrap up, Mr. Chair.
I'd suggest that in naming this new bill, we should go back to some of the language that the government itself tabled in its budget last week. We should talk about
...the courage, the commitment and the confidence to bring Canada to its rightful place on the world stage. ... Let them say that we never settled for second best, that we had the conviction to make the right choices.
I think we've made the right choices in this process. I'm hoping the short title will reflect that. I would plead with all members, and particularly the government members, to remember that it's now time for us to talk most of all about what it is that we can do, and not simply what it is that we can't do.
On that note, Mr. Chair, I am in fact going to withdraw this amendment. I think you'll find there is consensus at parts of the table for another short title.
2:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
Is it agreed to withdraw amendment L-1?
The suggestion is that if you don't want it, vote against it.
2:20 p.m.
Conservative
2:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
Actually, you don't, Mr. Jean.
Let me go back to you for a second, Mr. McGuinty. You need consent to withdraw.
2:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
Are we prepared to yield to hear a friendly amendment from Mr. Jean, in the spirit of cooperation?
2:20 p.m.
Conservative
2:20 p.m.
Conservative
2:20 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
It is a friendly amendment, in the spirit of cooperation.
I was listening very carefully to Mr. McGuinty when he was talking about a reflection, to make sure we reflect what is actually in the bill. Notwithstanding that we would continue to oppose it, the friendly amendment that I would propose would more accurately reflect what is in the bill. After “Canada's Carbon”, we would replace the word “Budget” with the word “Tax”, to accurately reflect the changes that have been made by the opposition parties.
2:20 p.m.
An hon. member
That's a very good idea.
2:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
Is that accepted as a friendly amendment?
Are you proposing that? Are you leaving that in the “friendly” category?
2:20 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
I'm just trying to be friendly and cooperative, as the Conservatives have shown in this process.
2:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
So we are at amendment L-1, which you now want withdrawn. Is that correct?
We need consent to withdraw.
2:20 p.m.
Liberal
John Godfrey Liberal Don Valley West, ON
We can go one of two ways. I will try to “friendly amend” this back so that it will now read that this is the Clean Air and Climate Change Act as the full short title.
2:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
So it would say “This Act may be cited as Canada's Clean Air and Climate Change Act.”