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.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
Is there any debate?
(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Mr. Chair, I hereby move amendment L-10. It reflects the fact that the bill allows the minister to add air pollutants identified by the scientific community. We want to see Canada move and roll with new scientific knowledge as it comes forward. We are pleased to see it built into this bill, because it was not accurately or adequately reflected in the first draft the government put forward.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
Is there any debate?
(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
The next is amendment BQ-3, which appears to have been overtaken by other amendments.
Bloc
Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So I move amendment BQ-3, which defines greenhouse gas emissions as being the total annual emissions, excluding carbon sinks, the national inventory and the levels of 1990. However, I would like to remove the mention of an independent body from the definition.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
Your amendment, then, is as printed in our package, with the exception of removing the part of paragraph (b) that talks about the independent body.
Acting Director General, Legislation and Regulatory Affairs, Environmental Stewardship Branch, Department of the Environment
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
This definition defines greenhouse gas emissions very specifically to include total annual national emissions, whereas the bill uses the term greenhouse gas emissions in numerous ways: in ways that could be applied to individual facilities, to sectors, etc. This would create some significant contradictions, in my opinion.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
Is there any debate?
Monsieur Bigras, do you have a comment on that, or considerations concerning it?
Conservative
Conservative
Conservative
Conservative
Liberal
John Godfrey Liberal Don Valley West, ON
Mr. Chair, this is simply to put in the definitions section “greenhouse gas emissions trading system”, which we have established through amendments.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
Is there any debate?
(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]
Liberal
John Godfrey Liberal Don Valley West, ON
Again, because we have introduced this whole concept of the carbon budget, we need to define what an individual.... We have various ways of speaking of carbon budgets; this defines an individual carbon budget.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Laurie Hawn
Is there any debate?
(Amendment agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]
Liberal
John Godfrey Liberal Don Valley West, ON
Amendment L-13 is the other side of the coin, if you like. It's “individual carbon deficit”, which again was referred to in the insertion. Therefore, we need to define what that is. It just lines up with what we've done.
