Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by congratulating the member for Kamloops, Thompson and Highland Valleys on his November 4, 1998 motion. It as important than it is topical.
In fact, greenhouse gases represent one of the greatest challenges facing the planet for the next 100 years. They cause adverse climatic changes affecting all nations, not just Canada, but every country in the world.
In Canada we have quite a challenge ahead of us. We undertook in Kyoto to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions by 6%. We were already over 13% behind target. We will therefore have to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions by 20% over the coming years.
Transportation generally accounts for one quarter of all greenhouse gases. If we can concentrate on the issue of transportation and public transit, together we will make a huge contribution to the debate on climatic changes.
In fact, public transit has become a key issue. In all our urban centres—whether larger centres where the problem is even more serious, or smaller ones—all our roads today are completely clogged with traffic during rush hour.
North Americans have a real love affair with automobiles. But, more and more, urban stress, the stress of taking one hour and sometimes two to get to work in the morning, is beginning to get people thinking about the whole issue of public transit.
We have to provide them with a means to be able to shift from the personal automobile to massive public transport, because, as I mentioned, the issue of public transport is closely tied to climate change.
Under the climate change secretariat, the government has set up 16 issue tables that are looking at all the various questions, including transportation and fiscal and economic incentives. The various stakeholders, the federal government, the provincial governments, the municipal governments and Canadians at large, have joined these issue tables. Therefore my colleague's motion is timely and topical. The issue tables are going to report in the fall. It is important that we consider the question of mass transit, of providing tax benefits for transit passes.
It is interesting to know that in 1993 a study by the U.S. General Accounting Office showed the drawbacks and benefits of a tax transit program. In the drawbacks, is the whole question of cost, of whether we should give tax exemptions for this particular program or another particular program. It seems from the study that the benefits far outweigh the downside. Out of 150 U.S. federal agencies, 75% now have a transit benefit program. Among those agencies, which represent thousands of employees, the people who are using mass transit are encouraged to continue to do so. In that crucial 25% of agencies, where the employees use personal automobiles to get back and forth to work from large urban centres, the transit benefit pass system showed that nearly a quarter of them shifted from using personal automobiles to mass transit.
The study showed that if the program shifted from half of the federal agencies to all federal agencies, if it shifted into the private system and if tax benefits were given to corporations to encourage workers to take mass transit, we could wean at least 50% of the total personal automobile population from private transit to public transit.
What a tremendous goal, for all kinds of reasons: the declogging of our roads, the reduction of pollution in our cities and in all our centres of population, and the social benefits, especially the health benefits.
This motion is timely. It is important. It has to be carried out. It is an incentive for the government, as the issue tables are now in place and are discussing these various subjects, to pick up the motion, which I hope will be supported the great majority of members of parliament, and to give more momentum to the benefits of transit passes.
I believe that all of these various issues that touch on the environmental question are not just environmental issues. They are also cost cutting issues. As I mentioned, they touch on health side and the social side of our lives and on the economic benefits as well. As a country, one thing we never do is to add up the massive cost of keeping our roads in shape, especially given our climate, and of keeping our individuals in single driver cars day in, day out. There are massive costs to the country as a result of pollution and of road repairs, as well as social costs. These costs are never accounted for in our taxation system. We should put back some of that money into a productive and constructive system of transit passes.
I believe the motion before us is a cost cutting issue that is a quality of life issue. It is fitting and propitious that it is before us today. We should consider with great seriousness the motion before us, both the pluses and the minuses. I think we are going to find that the pluses are going to greatly outweigh the minuses.
Again, I congratulate my colleague from Kamloops, Thompson and Highland Valleys for having brought this before us. I hope we support it with a massive vote when it comes up for a vote.