What I didn't hear in the discussion—in fact, I just heard from Monsieur Harvey—is that....
If I understood him correctly, Mr. Harvey agrees with the principles laid out in the preamble.
In Monsieur Warawa's remarks, none of the facts that are laid out and none of the values of Canadians that are laid out were challenged. The only challenge is the crucial phrase, “this legislation is intended to meet, in part, Canada's obligations under the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol”.
The minister herself, in Nairobi, as Mr. Bigras pointed out, confirmed that Canada supports the Kyoto Protocol. The minister, I think I heard her say for the first time on Kyoto, confirmed that we would have to try to do something in the short term—that is, before 2012. All this does is translate that intention into a more vigorous form of action, monitoring, and accountability. That's what the preamble is about. That's what the bill is about. So either the minister misspoke herself in Nairobi or she intends to do her best to try to meet the obligations under Kyoto, which is the whole point of this proposed law.