Madam Speaker, on December 12, 2011 I posed 11 questions to the parliamentary secretary regarding ozone monitoring, as Canada has a critical role to play in the world as part of the global observing system for climate in support of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The questions were as follows.
Why have both the minister and the parliamentary secretary repeatedly stonewalled and said there will be no cuts to ozone monitoring, especially when their own briefing document is entitled, “Ozone Monitoring Cuts”?
Will monitoring be maintained in the lower atmosphere?
Before a decision was taken to cut the ozone monitoring program, was any research undertaken to assess the adequacy of Canadian contributions to the global observing system for climate in support of the UNFCC, yes or no?
Was Environment Canada aware of the two million square kilometre ozone hole over the Arctic when decisions were made to cut ozone monitoring?
How many people work in the World Ozone and Ultraviolet Radiation Data Centre?
Does the parliamentary secretary understand that if the person who runs the data centre is let go, the data centre will close?
By what percentage, in terms of money and positions, was the experimental studies division to be cut?
What percentage has been cut?
Can the parliamentary secretary table in the House a spreadsheet showing how many people work in the department, how many people received letters and who, if any, had their letters rescinded?
In response to my first nine questions, the parliamentary secretary said:
—as I have said several times before in response to my colleague's questions, we will continue to monitor the ozone. It is as simple as that.
It is, in fact, not so simple. This is about an issue that is critical to life on earth and enormously complicated. Ozone protects us from harmful ultraviolet or UV radiation from the sun, the radiation that causes skin cancer, cataracts, sunburns and local and whole-body immunosuppression. Without the ozone layer, life as we know it would not exist on earth.
Canadians deserve better than “It is as simple as that”. They deserve real answers to important questions. More important, if the parliamentary secretary is as committed to monitoring ozone as she says, then why has nothing been done to reverse the cuts to ozone science? Cuts reduce Canada's ability to monitor the environment and respond to problems, reduce our country's ability to explore the links between ozone and climate change and threaten international science and Canada's reputation. Is the government trying to eliminate science that it finds inconvenient?
My 10th and 11th questions were as follows: Do brewers and ozonesondes perform the same task; that is, is there duplication in the system, yes or no?
Why in May were ozonesondes critical and in fact believed to be in need of being expanded and not so in August? What changed?
Eleven questions, zero answers, zero accountability, zero respect for taxpayers despite the government's claim that it has a responsibility to manage and be wise stewards of taxpayers' dollars and to deliver services that are important. Canadians deserve better than “It is as simple as that”. They have a right to know the details, and every time the parliamentary secretary avoids providing the details, she fails to fulfill her responsibilities to the people of Canada.