Environment Committee on Dec. 11th, 2007

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

Do you agree that the 300 megaton reduction target that I mentioned should be shared among the territories and provinces? Do you agree with the Bloc's theory of territorial allocation?

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

It depends on where the solutions are to be found. If we can find a formula that takes territories into account—or territoriality, if you prefer—as well as the sectors that have the largest emissions, and if this formula enables us to meet our overall reduction targets, we are ready to discuss it. Nevertheless, if one part of Canada meets the reduction targets proposed by this bill while other parts of the country have a four-fold increase in emissions, we will not reach our ultimate goal. However, if the committee can help us to work out an acceptable formula, we are ready to discuss it. We said the same thing about Bill C-30 and the other proposals brought before the committee weeks and months ago.

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

Section 10 states that the federal government could take measures in respect of cooperation or agreements with provinces.

What kind of agreements or cooperation would this involve?

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

We can mention several examples that we have witnessed in the past. We have worked together to reach all kinds of objectives with very different models, be it with regard to health, post-secondary education, immigration or pensions for seniors. We have many different models. We believe that with a flexible federal approach, we can find solutions.

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

What about a possible bilateral agreement with Quebec pursuant to this bill? Quebec wants to recover funds, but it wants to manage its reductions within its own framework and to reach precisely targeted objectives.

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

It can always be done. We proposed the same thing in our bill on child care, for instance. Our proposals have been adopted by the House on several occasions.

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

Have you studied the European hypothesis which just came out whereby industrialized countries should or would want to reduce their emissions not by 20% or by 25% but by 30%? Was this figure brought to your attention?

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

Yes. We did not change the figures in our bill. It would be rather difficult to achieve those results. The Europeans began improving their energy performance a few decades ago. Therefore, they are ahead of us now.

It is up to you to discuss the targets. If scientific information shows that we must make some changes, we are ready to accept that.

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

Would you also be ready to support an increase up to 30%, and by that I mean an increase in the emissions reduction target from 25% to 30%, by 2020?

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

We must study the scientific basis of this proposal. We are currently using research by respected Canadian groups that recommended these targets.

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

Do you think that it would take a long time to negotiate a territorial agreement with the provinces to share the famous so-called 300 megaton pie that I mentioned earlier among the territories and the provinces?

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

I said that if the committee could find a formula for achieving the results aimed at by this bill, namely an 80% reduction by 2050, we are very interested in discussing it, because that is the objective we want to attain.

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

In your discussions with members from various provinces, have you noticed if some provinces have particular requirements? Manitoba, for instance, is in a situation similar to Quebec's situation regarding hydroelectricity. Have you already felt any pressure from Manitoba to adopt a territorial approach to greenhouse gas reduction?

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

The issue most often raised by Gary Doer is the need for an infrastructure that would make renewal energy, which is the preferred form of energy, available everywhere in Canada. He greatly emphasized his famous green grid. He also wants the federal government to take concrete steps. They now have an agreement with California, for instance. As far as the Manitoba government is concerned, the time has come to stop discussing and to start doing.

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

Do I have a split second left?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

You may have one quick question.

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

I asked whether other provinces support Quebec's territorial approach. I asked where Manitoba stood. I also think that some people in Alberta and in Saskatchewan are opposed to this territorial approach.

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

You should speak to those governments; I cannot speak on their behalf.

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

I am talking about your members of Parliament.

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

I said that if we can find a formula for attaining the results stated in the bill, and if it has some elements of territoriality, we are open to such an option.

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

Who, then, will devise this formula, Mr. Layton?

[Jack Layton, NDP, Toronto—Danforth, ON]

We can work on it with you.

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

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bob Mills]

Good. Thank you, Mr. Lussier.

Mr. Christopherson.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you very much, Chair.

Thank you, Jack. Welcome.

I want to start by asking the question you touched on when you mentioned our children and grandchildren. Again, to set the stage, from your own experience you mentioned that we're already starting to see something in the forest and the glaciers, and we see in news reports what's happening in Antarctica and the Arctic. What are our children and grandchildren facing in our cities in particular, because that's where 80% of the population is? What are they facing if we don't collectively do something? In an attempt to reach the average person, what kind of life are people looking at in our cities around the Great Lakes, but especially around our major urban centres? What sort of world are our children and grandchildren going to inherit if we don't take the kind of action that Bill C-377 puts to us today?