Mr. Speaker, before question period I was reiterating the record of the Progressive Conservative Party on the Kyoto accord and quoting at some length from transcripts, from here and at the environment committee, of the environment critic of that party and the leader of that party who clearly and consistently have since 1997 supported the Kyoto accord. In fact during question period my friend from Fundy--Royal challenged me to come up with a quote where he actually explicitly supported the accord. He has been very artful about trying to play both sides of the field, but not artful enough, because he actually let honesty get the better of him on March 5, 1999, when he said in the House:
The Minister of Finance should step into the real world and see that climate change is for real and so is the Kyoto challenge. The truth of the matter is that we are 25% behind our goal and environmental issues continue to be a low priority for this Liberal government. Another Liberal budget has just passed and so has another opportunity for the minister to take concrete action to combat climate change. When will this government put an end to its paltry environmental record and announce new and significant economic instruments so Canadians can meet their Kyoto target?
What could be clearer? I do not know. He then went on to state:
A target a decade or more away is likely to become irrelevant as the science continues to evolve. However the PC party will accept reaching 1990 levels by the year 2010 as an interim target--
I understand. If he opposes Kyoto, it is because the targets are not aggressive enough and the economic damage done is not big enough. His own leader said in a recent op-ed on February 20:
Should it be made evident, following an analysis of the impact and the costs of the Kyoto protocol...I will actively support ratification.
That is the comment of the leader of the fifth party.
Finally, in a press release today the member for Fundy--Royal very clearly said in regard to the Tory Party:
We would have engaged in more constructive debate...on the need to postpone any decision on ratification--
It is quite clear that the member from the Tory Party and his party are consistently in favour of this devastating accord. We will not be fooled by the political trickery of their trying to support this motion.
In closing, pursuant to Standing Order 26(1), I move:
That the House continue to sit beyond the ordinary hour of daily adjournment for the purpose of considering the supply motion in the name of the member for Red Deer.