House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was fisheries.

Last in Parliament November 2005, as Liberal MP for Victoria (B.C.)

Won his last election, in 2004, with 35% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Kyoto Protocol December 9th, 2002

Got it, and this is the problem with the Conservative member's approach, that is, it is quite easy to get agreement as long as one gives away the shop. We do not intend to do that. We have to protect the Canadian taxpayer.

We believe there should be a common movement forward by all 14 governments. We intend to negotiate agreements that are fair to all concerned and that also at the same time do not penalize any section of the country unduly.

Kyoto Protocol December 9th, 2002

But as the Alliance members are now shouting out, there is only one taxpayer.

Kyoto Protocol December 9th, 2002

Madam Speaker, the hon. member has raised the issue of agreements with each and every province. We know full well that if we guarantee to pick up the bill for everything they do in the climate change area, we will get their agreement, each and every one in turn.

Kyoto Protocol December 9th, 2002

Mr. Speaker, I indicated in the answer to the previous question some of the measures that are being taken.

I point out to the hon. member that the major problem we currently face in the tar sands development is cost overruns. These cost overruns are going up to 70% of original estimate. That is the major issue. Second, there is the uncertainty over price, uncertainty that is exacerbated by concern over what is happening in the Middle East.

These are major issues, and unless they are taken into account, to simply list what is probably the least important of issues affecting them is just simply not a rational approach to what is indeed, for the energy companies concerned, an issue of taking everything into consideration. That has been shown time after time by the business pages and by the statements by the energy spokespersons themselves.

Kyoto Protocol December 9th, 2002

Mr. Speaker, we have in fact guaranteed for the major emitters that there will be a 55 megatonne cap. We have, as indicated in this morning's Globe and Mail , entered into discussions with them with respect to a cap on price of carbon, so it is quite clear that we have been working with the large emitters, including the oil and gas sector, for quite some time to deal with some of the uncertainties which they have indicated they have concerns over and to make sure that those uncertainties are reduced to the minimum.

Kyoto Protocol December 9th, 2002

Mr. Speaker, I agree with the principle mentioned by the hon. member for Rosemont—Petite-Patrie. It is true that we must go further. The hon. member indicated a specific means, that is levelling the playing field between the oil and gas sector, and the other industries involved in renewable energies. I do not know if that is the best solution. However, the main point and the principle raised by the hon. member is that we must go much further as regards renewable energies. I fully agree with him.

Kyoto Protocol December 9th, 2002

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member forgets to point out or does not point out that the industry study in question was done before we had an international agreement with respect to credits for sinks and before we had any plan in place. It is based on assumptions which are simply no longer true today, such as Canada being the only country to ratify.

There have been plenty of studies done on various scenarios, but picking one based on a scenario situation which now does not exist is not the way of advancing intelligent discussion of the Kyoto accord.

Kyoto Protocol December 9th, 2002

Mr. Speaker, the member asks why we are invoking closure at this time. That is because we have had an extensive debate, with one member of his party taking a full 11 and a half hours in which he repeated himself time after time.

If the House is to have filibusters, the only logical option is for the government side to from time to time put in closure motions of this type.

Kyoto Protocol December 9th, 2002

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is well aware of the measures that were put forward in the last budget of the former finance minister with respect to renewable energy. He did not bother to mention them of course but he is well aware of the $260 million that was put aside in the budget for that.

The former minister of finance had four points with respect to ratification: First, to maintain a strong and growing economy, for which I agree; second, maintain a climate of investment certainty, which is why we must have a decision on Kyoto, so that we get the certainty, and I agree; third, to reject the hot air credit purchases and invest in environmental technologies in Canada. Yes, I have said that we will not be purchasing this so-called Russian or eastern European hot air. The fourth point was to maintain openness and transparency in discussion with Canadians, which is precisely what we have been doing continuously.

Kyoto Protocol December 9th, 2002

Mr. Speaker, we have been working on that since long before. We have been working on that with the other governments of Canada, provincial and territorial. We have been doing that in fact since before Kyoto, after Rio. We have been working on it for literally years. The hon. member is aware of that.

Certainly I agree with him that a decision to have closure is not what we would prefer. However after eight days and 33 hours of debate spread over three weeks what else could we do when we have filibusters by one member of eleven and a half hours of debating time?

The Alliance Party members applauded that but that is why at some stage democracy has to proceed after an adequate time for debate.