Environment Committee on Feb. 25th, 2008

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Mr. Scarpaleggia.

[Francis Scarpaleggia, Liberal, Lac-Saint-Louis, QC]

I have enormous respect for Mr. Johnson, and I prefaced my remark. I know what kind of advice he could bring, and I think maybe he was underutilized by the minister.

My question was what kind of advice he ended up giving. It wasn't--

[An hon. member]

What's the point of order?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Okay, go ahead, Mr. Watson. You have a minute left.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks to the honourable member for interrupting my train of thought.

Do you see the kinds of politics that occur here?

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

The train is off the track already.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Regan.

In your opinion, was it the case, as has been claimed, that Canada was being obstructionist in Indonesia?

Mr. Morton, I'd like you to answer on that question as well.

[Pierre Marc Johnson]

No. I think it's an interpretation.

Vocabulary has a lot of baggage in the UN. Of course, the Canadian position--and Canada didn't make any secret of the fact--was that going along with Kyoto and leaving only those who are in Kyoto, which represent 30% of emissions in the world, is not sufficient.

The interpretation made by certain people there, who maybe had an agenda--I don't know, it's not for me to say--was that this was disruptive of the process. I don't think it was, personally. I didn't see this disrupting the process at the UN.

Second, I had the occasion to speak to a member of the NGO community for whom I have great respect, because he's been around for a while. And I asked if in his head and heart he really believed that a Canadian minister would come to the UN system and try to disrupt it. It's so incompatible with what this country is about, has always been about, and will always be about.

It's really a matter of perception. In that sense, I believe the minister brought all he could bring in difficult circumstances. Also, he was domestically under the gun quite a bit. I know the stat there, because he didn't only have friends there among the Canadian groups. I noted that very specifically. Some people intervened towards him in what was a pretty impolite and not very gentle way. But I understand that the NGOs had a couple of axes to grind also, including the fact that they were not formally part of the delegation, which was a pretty big change compared to the years before.

I did bring up that issue with the minister. His answer was--and I think he said it publicly, which is why I feel comfortable saying it--that the reason the NGOs were not in the delegation was that the year before, in Nairobi, the NGOs didn't respect the basic rules of participation. The basic rule of NGO participation in Canadian official delegations is that when you have access to official briefings, you don't get out of that room and talk to journalists or mount a campaign against whoever brought you into that room. It's an informal rule, which is just a common-sense rule.

NGOs, which have access to briefing materials, in some countries, like the Nordic countries, and Canada does it a lot, sometimes Great Britain, but not really France, and many others--

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Mr. Johnson, I hate to cut you off....

[Pierre Marc Johnson]

I'm sorry. I'll finish on that, if I may.

NGOs that do have access can exercise much more leadership in the NGO community in these conferences, and they're respected for that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

We'll go to Mr. Lussier, please.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Chair, my first question is for Mr. Johnson.

You know that the European Union has signed an agreement on how countries will commonly manage the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. The European agreement is a model, I think, of how responsibility can be shared among countries. It is a responsible and even-handed agreement, which was signed in 1997.

Why is it that a similar agreement has not been copied in Canada, and why has this country not promoted similar agreements between the provinces and territories? In your view, what was lacking in Canadian discussions?

[Pierre Marc Johnson]

One day, when I was at one of those conferences, I had the opportunity to meet Fidel Castro. In the course of a conversation which lasted only a few minutes, Mr. Castro asked me why I thought Latin America had not managed to unite despite speaking the same language, except for Brazil, whereas the Europeans, despite their diversity, had managed to do so. I replied that it was easier to unite a diverse group of countries, particularly when they want to avoid war; the Europeans have gone through two wars, so they managed to find a compromise. I believe that there needs to be a great willingness among the parties—and it often comes by virtue of the potential threat of brutal conflict—to reach agreement on many issues. But that is not the case of Canada.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Did you ever see the provinces wanting to come together?

[Pierre Marc Johnson]

Yes. Today, British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec, and even some of the larger municipalities, definitely want to do something to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. That is the right way to put it. True, that has not happened yet in Canada. Why not? Mr. Lussier, I think you are in a better position than me to answer that question. But as an outside observer, what I see is Alberta's oil production and its oil sands, which greatly contribute to greenhouse gas emissions. I also see the nuclear industry in Ontario and hydroelectric power in Manitoba and Quebec. Now try getting all these people together in one room, and then get them to agree on something, and you will see that is not easy. Again, people need to really have an incentive to find common ground, otherwise they all go their own way, which is what is happening now.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Johnson, you attended a parallel event where the issue of carbon sequestration was discussed. Who was there?

[Pierre Marc Johnson]

There were about a hundred people in attendance, most of whom were Canadians. Many represented NGOs, and many more were members of the Canadian Youth Delegation, I believe.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Who gave the presentation?

[Pierre Marc Johnson]

I was asked to chair this event, to be the moderator, to introduce the three panellists and to moderate the discussion.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Were these three experts?

[Pierre Marc Johnson]

In fact, they were three industry representatives, experts in the field of carbon sequestration. They spoke about the importance of this type of technology.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Did they represent the oil sector?

[Pierre Marc Johnson]

One of them represented the oil industry and the two others were experts in carbon sequestration technology.

[Marcel Lussier, Bloc, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

I am interested in a second event, that Mr. Baird was unable to attend, when the famous government plan was presented.

Who made the presentation?

[Pierre Marc Johnson]

There was none. It was on that same evening. Mr. Baird was to have closed the event and I was told he could not attend.