Mr. Speaker, I had not planned on speaking to this private member's motion but I have to talk for a minute because the last speaker is doing what so many people are doing in terms of trying to sell the Kyoto accord. They are making statements about air pollution and smog that have absolutely nothing to do with greenhouse gas emissions, specifically CO
2
. The generic discussion that develops is doing a great disservice to the Canadian public because there is obvious confusion.
Everyone is in favour of clean air. What we are talking about with Kyoto is a very specific emission, CO
2
, a greenhouse gas. It has absolutely nothing to do with the other symptoms and pollutants the member is speaking of.
It is a very unfair characterization and one that makes for lesser debate rather than greater debate. It is one that would indeed lead me to believe that supporting the motion is absolutely the right way to go so that the public can become informed rather than misinformed, which is the way things have been going most recently.
In particular the proponents of Kyoto become more and more desperate when they see that as people become educated, their education about the real impacts of Kyoto correspond almost identically with opposition to the accord because it is not in Canada's best interests. It is not even productive in terms of reducing global greenhouse gas emissions. It will probably achieve the exact opposite because it will displace greenhouse gas emissions from our jurisdiction to jurisdictions with lower environmental standards than our own, either because we would be transferring our financial resources to those jurisdictions or we would be buying emissions credits which would allow them to continue on with their dirty industries and allow us to do the same.
That concludes what I wanted to say. I am very thankful that we have a motion which, if amended in the way the Canadian Alliance is suggesting, would be a very good motion indeed.