David Anderson

[The Environment, November 17th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the answer is quite simple. Based on the information provided, there is no conflict of interest.

[Endangered Species, November 15th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the constituents of the hon. member reflect the views of Canadians from coast to coast to coast, all of whom want to have strong endangered species legislation.

I will be meeting with my provincial counterparts later this month, which follows up on a meeting of two months ago, so that we can have full provincial and territorial participation in an effective network across the country to protect species at risk.

[The Environment, October 26th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, contrary to what the hon. member said, the agreement in Kyoto was arrived at by 160 countries. It was not imposed by the United Nations.

Further to what he said with respect the issue of taxation, all members of the government have made perfectly clear that we do not believe a broad based carbon tax would be an appropriate way to go.

There are however many other other measures, including incentives whereby we can work together to achieve the Kyoto targets. These targets are very important for us to achieve.

[The Environment, October 26th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, once again the official opposition has missed the bus. The Bloc asked the question yesterday and I answered this very point.

The fact is that we now have in place committees of 450 people from the private sector, the provincial governments and the federal government who are working together to work out a strategy. The position taken by the Canadian government is virtually identical to that announced yesterday by Chancellor Schroeder of Germany. We are on track to achieve our Kyoto targets.

[Greenhouse Gases, October 25th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the problem to which the hon. member refers is that of a rapidly expanding Canadian economy. On this side of the House we take pride in the fact that our economy has performed very well. There has been a great increase in the number of jobs in all provinces, including Quebec.

On the other hand we do have to achieve those Kyoto targets. We fully intend to. That is why we are working together with the private sector and the provinces to make sure we do put ourselves on the path to achieve the Kyoto targets of minus 6% of 1990 levels in the years 2008 to 2012.

[Greenhouse Gases, October 25th, 1999]

No, Mr. Speaker, the plan we established several years ago is in place. We will continue with what we have decided to do.

I should add that the period during which the Kyoto objectives would be in effect would be from 2008 to 2012. There are a number of years left until then.

[Greenhouse Gases, October 25th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, growth in the Canadian economy has increased the level of CO2. It is true we have had considerable economic growth, but at the same time, we are now working with the private sector to define and establish the best ways to achieve the 6% reduction below the 1990 level.

[Greenhouse Gases, October 25th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, yes, currently, members of the private sector and of various governments are looking together at ways Canada could act in order to achieve the level of 6% below that of 1990.

[Water Exports, October 22nd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member and his party keep insisting that somehow water is an item of trade which can be handled by NAFTA. We say no. We say this is a decision for Canadians, not for people elsewhere. We are saying no to water diversions from any of the major watersheds in Canada.

[Water Exports, October 22nd, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, I am astonished that the NDP policy would be put forward by the hon. member in this way.

We do not believe that bulk water is an item of trade. We do not think it should go to NAFTA panels. We think that is covered entirely within Canada by the decision of Canadians.

The NDP may think differently. It may think it is a matter of trade. It may think it should be sent off to those lawyers elsewhere, but we say we make the decision and not other people.