Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
First of all, I would like to welcome the witnesses, all of whom we recognize for their expertise.
Mr. Bramley, I thank you for your study which you presented this morning, because it enlightened parliamentarians on the economic impact of respecting the scientific evidence.
Until now, the government was expected to ensure a 25% reduction compared to 1990 between now and 2020. That would have spelled economic chaos in Canada: substantial job losses, a decline in the economy. It's as if we found the Canadian economy horribly weakened overnight.
Today we see—you'll tell me if I'm wrong—that between the government's scenario and the scientists', there's not as big an impact as we would have thought.
How is it that having ambitious goals doesn't considerably weaken our economy and the opposite happens? Why is it that substantial reductions don't lead to economic chaos as some people try to have us believe?