Evidence of meeting #31 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was targets.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
Have you made a comment on Bill C-30, the government's bill to deal with climate change, which would set targets to be announced in the spring of 2007? Would you have a position on that?
November 28th, 2006 / 10:20 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Mills
Mr. Bigras, I think he's asking about targets and Mr. Bramley has stated he wants targets.
Can you answer regarding the targets?
Director, Climate Change, Pembina Institute
What I've said publicly on many occasions is that the notice of intent that accompanied Bill C-30 foresees Canada's emissions remaining above current levels until at least 2020, and possibly 2025, which, when combined with the government's refusal to purchase international credits, adds up to a refusal to comply with the Kyoto Protocol.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
On Bill C-30, have you strongly come out and said a yea or a nay?
Bloc
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Mills
Mr. Warawa, perhaps you could specifically try to relate that to Bill C-288. I think that's Mr. Bigras' point.
Director, Climate Change, Pembina Institute
No, we do not. We have published an initial reaction to Bill C-30, which is available on our website. I invite all members of the committee to consult that.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
I found the papers that you've written—actually Pembina, not you personally—on the oil sands, the tar sands, very interesting.
I visited Fort McMurray to take a look at them, bought the DVDs, and actually met with a representative from Pembina. I was really surprised about their involvement with the development of the tar sands, and I was surprised that they weren't opposing the oil sands, the tar sands; it is one of the major producers of greenhouse gas emissions. Causing the increase in greenhouse emissions, globally, right here in Canada, is our tar sands, and yet Pembina is actively involved in consultation and has not taken a position in opposition to that. I find that ironic.
I also found your comment that Canada had abandoned Kyoto as equating...honestly sharing internationally the condition that Canada finds itself in, saying that we are 35% above the Kyoto targets.... An honest statement reporting the conditions of Canada...because of, according to the environment minister, the lack of leadership--and you were asking for leadership--shown by the previous government. We ended up with a situation where we're 35% above those targets, which is basically what Bill C-288 is trying to reintroduce, a Liberal plan of inaction.
You're supporting this, and you're supporting, it appears to me, reporting honestly that we're above those targets, and that's equated to an abandonment of Kyoto, which is not the case at all, Mr. Bramley. Actually, what the government has done is we've been committed to the Kyoto Protocol right from--
Liberal
Francis Scarpaleggia Liberal Lac-Saint-Louis, QC
This is not a question; it's a berating of the witnesses.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Mills
We give quite a bit of latitude. People are on a time clock. I really think if the witness wants to answer.... I certainly like to treat our witnesses with respect.
Mr. Bigras.
Bloc
Bernard Bigras Bloc Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC
Mr. Chairman, I have a point of order.
I believe we are here to study Bill C-288. It is unacceptable and irresponsible for our committee to prejudge our witnesses. I would therefore ask you to call the member to order.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Bob Mills
Mr. Warawa, if you can direct the question, Mr. Bramley is ready to answer. Let's try to keep the questions as related to Bill C-288 as we can. But if the witness wants to answer, we should listen.
Conservative
Director, Climate Change, Pembina Institute
I'll be quick.
I heard three questions. As to my comments about the government abandoning Kyoto, I've already explained the practical purposes. I think the government has abandoned Kyoto because it clearly doesn't intend to comply with the target.
I don't see that Bill C-288 has anything to do with a particular government's plan. Bill C-288 is about ensuring that the Government of Canada--whichever government happens to be in place--complies with our international legal obligations.
On the oil sands, Pembina and ten other major environmental organizations issued a statement last December calling for a moratorium on further oil sands development until such time as certain frameworks were put in place, including a commitment to move toward carbon-neutral, emissions-zero oil sands by 2020.
That brings me back to the comments I made about emissions trading. We belive that through a combination of emissions trading and new technologies, including carbon capture and storage, the oil sands sector has the financial and technical capability to move toward zero emissions by 2020. So we're not calling for an end to oil sands development, but we are calling for that industry to take full responsibility for its emissions.
Conservative
Mark Warawa Conservative Langley, BC
The point I was trying to make was that this Government of Canada has not abandoned Kyoto. We are very committed to the Kyoto Protocol. We have been honest. We have the list provided by Mr. Dillon, but a number of other countries are having difficulty. We've been honest and have shared the difficulty Canada is having in meeting those targets. We have a clean air plan for the short, medium, and long terms. Those targets will be set out at the beginning of 2007.
It's unfortunate the previous Liberal government, through lack of leadership and inaction, put us in a mess. The Liberal plan would have taken us to 47%, as you all know, if we continued on that route. This government is committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, not allowing them to increase.
My question is on the impact of greenhouse gas emissions. The greenhouse gas emissions being put into the atmosphere now are going to have a growing impact over the next 20 to 30 years, so what we're experiencing in climate change right now has been impacted by greenhouse gas emissions growing over the last 20 to 30 years. Would you not agree with that?
Where we are now is going to have a continuing impact on climate change. That's why I agree with your urgency. We need to take action now and move on. The bill that will meet that is not Bill C-288; it's Bill C-30.
I'd appreciate comments from all four witnesses.
Conservative
Director, Climate Change, Pembina Institute
If you or any other representative of the government were able to say clearly and publicly that the government intends to meet the Kyoto target, I would withdraw my remarks about abandoning, but I haven't heard a statement of that kind.