Bernard Bigras

[The Environment, November 24th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of the Environment.

After environmental groups, the Canadian environmental ambassador and the Government of Quebec condemned the Regina accord on greenhouse gas emissions, we have learned this morning that a number of industrialized countries have reached a consensus at Tokyo to stabilize their greenhouse gas emissions by the year 2005, not 2010, as set out in the Regina accord.

Is the Minister of the Environment prepared to revisit the Regina accord in order to endorse this compromise position?

[The Environment, November 21st, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, what we want to know on this side of the House is whether the government is prepared to set the example, as it did in the case of the anti- personnel mines, and to sign the Kyoto agreement even though the United States and other countries might refuse?

[The Environment, November 21st, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Deputy Prime Minister.

Canada's ambassador in environmental matters, John Fraser, added his voice to that of all environmental groups in denouncing the minor Regina agreement on greenhouse gases. He calls on the federal government to honour its earlier agreements.

Is the government committed to reviewing its position and agreeing to that proposed by the Quebec government, as its own ambassador of the environment is suggesting?

[The Environment, November 20th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of the Environment.

How does the minister justify the fact that her government is paying out hundreds of millions of dollars directly or indirectly to support the oil industry, when it is throwing only crumbs to support the development of renewable energy?

[The Environment, November 18th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister had promised a very firm position on the reduction of greenhouse gases. Today, he is content to follow the American position.

Is this not another of the Prime Minister's broken promises?

[The Environment, November 18th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.

While environmental groups have unanimously condemned the Regina agreement and cited the position taken by Quebec as an example, the president of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, for his part, said that it was the best agreement his association could have hoped for.

Will the Prime Minister admit that his position is the best proof that his government has caved in to the petroleum lobby and to its representative, the Reform Party?

[The Environment, November 17th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, considering the weakness of the federal government's position, did the minister at least obtain assurances from the provinces that they will accept to ratify the agreement that will be reached in Kyoto?

[The Environment, November 17th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Environment.

Ever since the Canadian position on greenhouse gases has been raised, the government has repeatedly accused the Reform Party of disregarding environmental matters and of lacking the courage to take a stand on such matters.

After the meeting in Regina, does the federal government realize that it has assumed the Reform Party's position, based on the lowest common denominator?

[Nuclear Reactors, November 5th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, are we to understand that the federal government is prepared to do anything for money, including violating its own laws?

[Nuclear Reactors, November 5th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister.

Yesterday evening, CBC National News announced that the federal government intends to fund the sale of two CANDU reactors to Turkey, to the tune of $1.5 billion, without conducting environmental impact studies.

Can the Prime Minister explain why his government is prepared to circumvent its own legislation for the sole purpose of selling nuclear reactors to Turkey, while here in Ontario, nuclear reactors are being closed down because of the risks to the environment?