Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The Leader of the Opposition listed his party's agenda on the environment. While much of what is on that list are initiatives that the government has already taken action on, there lies a danger in Leader of the Opposition's thinking that I'd like to draw your attention to. It is germane to what is happening right now, at Copenhagen and elsewhere.
The Leader of the Opposition reinforces this government's strategy for a national cap and trade system that will include absolute caps, put a price on carbon, and be structured so it can be harmonized with a future United States system. However, the Liberal leader at the same time has adopted the European baseline of 1990 rather than the North American targets that have been adopted by both this government and the Obama administration. Throughout the speech, the Leader of the Opposition indicated the need for harmonization with the United States, but insisted on diverting from the North American targets that both countries have identified, which are virtually identical and would permit harmonization.
The Liberal leader has called for a clean energy act that would adopt the toughest vehicle emissions in North America. I think this is one where I believe the leader of the Liberal Party does not appreciate the importance of harmonizing our standards with those of the United States. Our economies are integrated, and our environments are integrated as well. We need to harmonize our regulatory approaches.
Our goal should be to integrate with the national standards of the United States--not to try to implement the toughest standards on the continent, but rather to have a harmonized North American standard. We need regulations that keep our borders open to trade and encourage a North American-wide approach to addressing climate change.
Mr. Chairman, we will continue to work with the United States towards a common North American approach for regulating greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles, which will benefit the environment, industry, and consumers.
It is crucial that a plan for the environment take into consideration Canada's entire geographic, economic, and industrial realities. To ignore them would lead to continental isolation and economic hardships--two things that this government will not allow.
When we meet again, I believe we'll be able to point to further examples of how, in this pivotal time for the environment and the economy, Canada has made real progress.
I welcome the committee's questions.