Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Thank you for the point of order, Mr. Leslie.
As I was saying, over 100 measures have been undertaken by this government to lower our emissions and, in every step of the way, the Conservatives have tried to block them. They voted against these measures, while not proposing any alternative measures to lower our emissions. It's pretty rich to hear from the Conservatives that they feel as though we're not on track, despite evidence to the contrary—that we are on track to lower our emissions to the proposed 40% to 45% mark by 2030.
They are lower than they've been since 1997. The year Connor McDavid was born was the last time our emissions were this high. That's good news and something that we can all celebrate. Innovations—from transport to construction, agriculture and even oil and gas—have allowed them to be this low. I would say that the innovations put forward by the oil and gas sector and the energy sector more broadly have not been sufficient, because they continue to go up, but the sector has been innovating and lowering its emissions to some degree, or at least its hypothetical ones. They could be a lot higher.
Among the over 100 measures undertaken by this government that the Conservatives have continually stood against and voted against are ones that have earned a Nobel Prize in economics, such as carbon pricing, but also our clean fuel standard; our phase-out of coal—it's astonishing that the Conservatives should stand against that—our plan to have net-zero emissions by 2050 with our Federal Accountability Act; our clean growth program; our zero-emissions vehicle initiative, which has seen record growth, particularly in provinces that also have a zero-emissions vehicle standard; our investments in renewable energy; our investments in carbon capture, utilization and storage; industrial carbon pricing in the oil and gas sector; our investments in green buildings and energy efficiency; our home retrofits; and our efforts to reduce plastic waste pollution.
In fact, this one draws particular ire, given that the Conservatives have brought forward a private member's bill entitled the “bring back the plastic bag” bill, because they just can't seem to remember their cotton bags when going to the grocery store, I guess. Also, their boycott of Tim Hortons and its plant-based lid experiment was another hilarious move by the Conservatives.
There are also nature-based solutions for climate change, subsidies for green innovation, working towards international leadership and developing those relationships, commitments in collaboration with other jurisdictions, funding for climate adaptation, our work on green energy and green job creation, electrification of public transit, sustainable agriculture, hydrogen strategies and our work on environmental, social and governance initiatives, an acronym that the Conservatives just love to hate—ESG. I don't know why they keep bringing witnesses here to suggest that ESG is a bad thing. We should focus on the environment, sustainability, better governance and social programs that support people.
Once again, Mr. Chair, we have the commissioner of the environment coming to this committee on Wednesday. We did not need to have this emergency meeting to discuss this. We have time in the committee to discuss it.
It's particularly disappointing that the prestudy on Bill C-73 for biodiversity—to ensure that we have accountability in that regard—has been continuously blocked by the NDP and the Conservatives. I don't know why it needs to be so contentious. Instead, the opposition has been filibustering these meetings, wasting time and then calling an emergency meeting on a Friday of a non-sitting week—