Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to take part in this debate on Motion M-82, proposed by the right hon. member for Calgary Centre.
This motion, should it be adopted, would express the opinion of the House on the creation of a special joint committee to examine the impacts of the Kyoto protocol. One of the problems with this motion is that the Senate would have to approve the creation of such committee. The House alone cannot strike a special joint committee.
The right hon. member for Calgary Centre has certainly heard about the ideas expressed recently by members of the Senate concerning the creation of joint committees and the problems that it causes for both Houses.
That being said, he worked diligently on his motion to create a special joint committee that would have the mandate to examine and analyze the regional, sectoral, consumer, environmental and provincial impacts of meeting Kyoto targets; to encourage the provinces and territories to provide their opinions as to the effects of ratification; to consider the effect on Canada of the ratification or non-ratification of the protocol by the United States; to determine if specific adjustment programs would be required; to obtain a comprehensive legal opinion on the constitutionality of ratifying the Kyoto Protocol without provincial agreement; and to provide recommendations as to whether Canada should ratify the protocol.
The government has stated its support for the ratification of the Kyoto protocol on climate change, but the position of the right hon. member is less clear.
For the government's part, we have been consulting extensively with the provinces, industry and the Canadian public on the Kyoto protocol.
A chronology of activities may help members of the House. Activities on climate change date back at least 10 years when Canada agreed to the United Nations' framework convention on climate change in 1992, at which time, I would note, the right hon. member was seated on a different side of the House. I would note that at that time he and his party did not advocate the establishment of a joint committee to study that matter.
After the conclusion of international negotiations on the Kyoto protocol in 1997, Canada's first ministers agreed to begin examining ways of meeting our climate change commitments and tasked their energy and environment ministers to design Canada's national implementation strategy for the Kyoto protocol.
Ongoing discussions with the provinces, territories and other stakeholders have thus been underway for many years. In June 2001, at the G-8 summit in Italy, the Prime Minister indicated that a decision with respect to the ratification of Kyoto would be taken by the end of 2002. The government has taken significant efforts toward this goal in 2002.
In May of this year the government released a discussion paper on Canada's contribution to addressing climate change, presenting options to meet our commitments. The discussion paper was considered by federal and provincial energy and environment ministers at their meeting on May 21, 2002. There were consultations with approximately 900 stakeholders in June.
More recently, the government tabled in the House a draft plan on October 24 which outlined how Canada would meet its Kyoto commitments. The Minister of the Environment stated in the House:
What we have put forward is an approach built on the best ideas to come out of the five years of constructive consultations with the provinces and territories, with private industry, with environmental groups and with the Canadian public.
This approach is based on principles on which I believe we can all agree, including: made in Canada within an international framework; collaboration and partnership; fairness; sharing, and no unreasonable burden; and transparency.
The Minister of the Environment noted that the government had tabled in the House its draft plan to engage in further substantive discussions with the provinces and territories. It should therefore be obvious that the government would have supported the October 24 opposition day motion that before the Kyoto protocol is ratified there should be a plan that Canadians understand, with costs, benefits and targets.
I understand that environment and energy ministers are scheduled to meet again on November 21 to further shape this plan. This will be their fourth meeting in 2002.
As the Speech from the Throne stated, the government will bring a resolution later this fall to Parliament on the issue of ratifying the Kyoto protocol.
In his address in reply to the throne speech the Prime Minister stated:
We have no choice but to act. It is our moral responsibility and it is in our enduring interest.
We are working hard with Canadian provinces and industries to develop an approach that will work for everyone. We will call for a fair contribution from every sector of society. We will have to reward innovators. Invest in new technologies. Be more efficient and productive. We can reduce the costs and maximize the opportunities. Citizens and consumers are ready to adjust their behaviour. Obviously, it will not be easy. We are grappling with very difficult issues. But I have no doubt that, working together, we will do it. We will have a strategy in place that allows us to meet our obligations by 2012.
The right hon. member for Calgary Centre wants to divert attention from the issues of the Kyoto protocol by the notion of a joint committee process. This is certainly not the case for all opposition members. For example, our colleagues in the Bloc and the NDP have been urging the government to ratify the protocol.
My question is this: Does the right hon. member have a position on the Kyoto protocol? If so, let him state it clearly and not hide behind the diversion that he has put before the House today.