Evidence of meeting #42 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was targets.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Who cares if it's a Canadian statute? If it was a thousand pages of European material, we would still want to hear from them--
Conservative
Liberal
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
Mr. McGuinty, you have the floor, and you have six and a half minutes left.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Right. Voyons donc, as they say.
Mr. Minister, the Waxman-Markey bill, which was introduced less than five months ago in the American Senate, is a 1,428-page plan for the United States.
I've done a complete search of that bill, sir, and there's not a single reference to the word “Canada” in 1,428 pages.
To my knowledge, there's not a single reference to the word “Mexico” in 1,428 pages.
Sir, we've had 33 witnesses come to this committee and speak to us on Bill C-311, which is linked to your energy dialogue in supplementary estimates (B) because you keep talking about a dialogue. We've asked all 33 witnesses on Bill C-311 whether they have in their possession a plan, have seen a plan, could share a plan. Thirty-two of those witnesses have categorically stated there is no plan.
The only witness who has stated there's a plan was your employee, who came here and said that one-page statement was a plan--
Conservative
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Wetaskiwin, AB
Mr. Chairman, if Mr. McGuinty is going to pursue this line of questioning, he should at least be forthright. I specifically remember the member from the Pembina Institute indicating clearly--
Conservative
Blaine Calkins Conservative Wetaskiwin, AB
--that he had in his possession a plan tabled by the Government of Canada.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Bezan
That isn't a point of order. It is a question of facts. You can correct that later on, when it's your turn.
You have five and half minutes left.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Terrific. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Minister, at least three American Senate committees are completely and utterly seized with this bill, with the United States plan. It's an extremely detailed plan. Allocation, energy efficiency, technology, targets, carbon pricing--it's there.
I need to understand, and Canadians need to understand, that the plan--and I quote--“To create clean energy jobs, achieve energy independence, reduce global warming pollution and transition to a clean energy economy”, is the American plan.
Canadians need to know: why it is that we have no plan?
You once said publicly you're a negotiator. Well, I'm a former corporate lawyer and negotiator, and I never recall entering negotiations without a plan. I never recall negotiating from a blank sheet of paper.
The Mexican government, sir, has 86 specific goals in a climate change plan tabled in June. That's 86 specific goals on how they'll slow the growth of carbon emissions now at about 700 megatonnes a year.
By my accounting, that is about 85 more specific goals than you have. The only thing you keep repeating is that you have a target of 20% by 2020, but you have absolutely no plan to backstop that.
Can you help us understand? Is the United States going to factor in Canada's environment and Canada's economy as they design their plan through this bill? Are they going to be looking at the Mexican situation, sir?
How are we supposed to believe that we're supposed to wait for the 1,428-page plan before we can go here, ourselves, in Canada?
Conservative
Jim Prentice Conservative Calgary Centre-North, AB
I think there's a question in there somewhere. I can't speak to the honourable member's experience as a lawyer, what he might have experienced negotiating, what he did, or how he comported himself.
There is a Canadian plan. We are approaching this. You referred to the previous testimony of an “employee” of mine, to use your words. Michael Martin is not an employee of mine. He is Canada's climate change ambassador, and he is one of the most respected people in the Department of Foreign Affairs and the Canadian civil service.
Conservative
Jim Prentice Conservative Calgary Centre-North, AB
I think he was quite clear, in his testimony with you, in outlining the position that Canada has put forward at Copenhagen relative to our mid-term emission reduction commitments and the approach that we are taking in going about that. I'm happy to come back to that and to walk through it with you.
As for legislative developments in the United States, just to clarify a couple of points that you made, the Senate committee is not seized with the Waxman-Markey bill, as you indicated. The Waxman-Markey legislation was passed in the U.S. House of Representatives. The legislation that has been put before the Senate is entirely different. It is the Kerry-Boxer bill, and it is quite a different piece of legislation. I don't know if you've actually read Waxman-Markey or not. I have. You might want to focus your attention on Kerry-Boxer, because it is the current state of play in the United States.
That piece of legislation proposed a cap and trade system. It is unclear at this point whether it will pass the United States Senate. It is unclear when it will pass the United States Senate. It is unclear what form it may take.
In addition, with respect to the United States and our desire to harmonize, as this relates to our trade-exposed industrial sector, which comprises the base of the Canadian economy, there's also action being undertaken in the U.S. by the Environmental Protection Agency--
Liberal
Conservative
Jim Prentice Conservative Calgary Centre-North, AB
The Environmental Protection Agency has brought forward a regulatory approach.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
I understand that there are elements you'd like to see in a plan. But after 47 months, sir, and three environment ministers, you have no plan, do you?
Conservative