Mr. Speaker, I would like to provide two bits of information before I ask my question relative to the hon. member's speech.
First, on the issue related to MMT the Government of Canada went wrong with that particular issue. It should have banned it as a toxin under schedule 1 of the Environmental Protection Act. It then would not have been subject to a challenge by Ethyl Corporation because it was challenged on the basis that it was banning a tradable commodity. The science on the precautionary perspective was fine. It was how the Government of Canada went about banning that particular substance.
Second, the United Nations and the scientific community as a whole have said that there is a discernible human influence related to greenhouse gases that are precipitating the change on a climatic basis.
The hon. member asked a very constructive question in question period yesterday. I would like to give him a chance to reiterate it. The Government of Canada should at least have a consensus reached with the provinces on whatever implementation strategy it may develop before it goes for ratification.