House of Commons photoWon her last election, in 1997, with 46% of the vote.
Environment November 3rd, 1997
Mr. Speaker, this issue is one that the Reform Party will not speak about from an environmental perspective.
We have yet to hear after 50 questions any view of the Reform Party with regard to this as an environmental issue. Many Albertans are doing very serious things to reduce greenhouse gases in that province. The Reform Party could learn a lot by listening to Albertans.
Environment November 3rd, 1997
Mr. Speaker, the issue of climate change is an issue that affects our environment profoundly. It is an issue for all Canadians, for every region of the country, and every region of the country will take a part.
Environment October 30th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, over the last month the federal government has had over 100 meetings with a wide variety of partners on the issue of climate change. We have been negotiating and discussing this very serious issue constantly.
In setting our targets and timetables and the measures that are required to achieve them, we will continue this process of dialogue with all of the partners who will be implicated. Together we can achieve our objectives.
The Environment October 30th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, scientists suggest that there can be very difficult implications for many sectors in our economy. Our natural resources of forestry, water, fisheries, agriculture and many sectors could be impacted by the effects of climate change.
Our government will work hard to make sure that Canadians understand these issues and that we respond accordingly to the crisis.
The Environment October 30th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, responsibilities for meeting Canada's targets and timelines will be that of all the players and partners involved in this issue. The federal government will have to take its responsibilities. Its partners, business, industry, municipalities, individual citizens, in fact many of them are already taking these responsibilities.
The Environment October 28th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, the federal government, through the Department of the Environment, carefully regulates toxins such as PCBs. We were sending PCBs for destruction to Swan Hills, but we have put a stop to any such shipments until we are assured that that particular facility is operating safely for the environment and the health of Canadians.
Environment October 28th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, the government has been looking at a very long list of measures that can be taken to meet whatever the target and timelines are that are agreed upon in Kyoto.
We did put one measure in our last budget, $60 million for refurbishing commercial buildings. Many of the measures that can be taken will be taken by the federal government, but other partners in this issue will also have to take their own measures. That will all be a matter of discussion between the federal government and all of our partners.
The Environment October 27th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada will make its announcement on targets and time lines when it feels it is appropriate.
The Environment October 27th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, there are all kinds of science in support of the international community's signing an agreement in Kyoto, Japan. To carry on with a quote from the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers: “But we think it is better to be safe than sorry. The world should act now to control carbon dioxide emissions”.
The Insurance Bureau of Canada states there appears to be very clear scientific evidence that global warming increases severe weather. That increasing severe weather is causing the industry hundreds of millions of dollars every year.
The Environment October 27th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, there are thousands of respected scientists around the world who are telling us all that this an issue we have to be concerned about. Their science tells us that human introduction of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere is changing our climate.
The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers is placing ads in the paper, and I will table this. If I may quote, on the issue of greenhouse gases: “Scientists are divided about climate change and whether man made emissions are a major cause. But we think it's better to be safe than sorry”.