Lawrence Cannon

[The Environment, February 9th, 2007]

We have invested in the transit fund. We have been able to put money into public transit. They have done nothing. We are getting it done.

[The Environment, February 9th, 2007]

We have invested over $2 billion in ecoenergy projects.

[The Environment, February 9th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the difference in our approach is that we have done something and we are dedicated to doing something. That is the fundamental difference with what has been there on the other side. Those members can preach to us all they want. The reality of the thing is that we are investing in the climate change issues.

[The Environment, February 9th, 2007]

No, I am not struggling at all. What we have to be able to understand is that when we discuss issues that are of this importance, we must be able to have a clear view of them. Indeed, I think it is the member for Ottawa South who indicated not long ago in the Globe and Mail that if Canada does ratify Kyoto “the cost...would be as much as $40-billion”.

We are not saying that. Those members are saying that.

[The Environment, February 9th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, of course I think that what we have to be able to understand is that--

[Business of Supply, February 8th, 2007]

Yes, I agree with my colleague that he probably is an excellent radio announcer. However, he did not do enough to help the GTAA. He did put a proposal forward which a lot of the airports, indeed 99%, bought into.

The problem is that the Greater Toronto Airport Authority has not bought into that proposal that was there. So there is an opportunity for the folks in Toronto to bring down the costs of their rent if they sign on to the proposal that was put forward by my hon. colleague.

[Business of Supply, February 8th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague's question is interesting. I have heard many representations on that specific issue. I will remind my hon. colleague, though, that my predecessor, who is now a radio host, did in effect--

[Business of Supply, February 8th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, there are suggestions such as the one that has been put forward by my colleague as well as others that have been put forward by his political party which we believe sincerely are very conducive to diminishing greenhouse gases and diminishing the atmospheric particles that we breathe.

Surely my hon. colleague is aware that the Minister of Public Works and Government Services has been working on that file. If I am not mistaken, I believe the Government of Canada has invested in that area and is continuing to invest in that area. The member is correct that there is a way of doing things and we should be looking at that.

[Business of Supply, February 8th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I clearly heard my hon. colleague come out with his big figures. What I just said was that, in the past year, Quebec received nearly $300 and some million to invest in public transit. Yours truly was very vocal in demanding everywhere that we be allowed to invest in transit companies to ensure, first, accessible transportation for everyone and, second, congestion reduction, thereby reducing polluting emissions.

The government did act on this issue and it is working closely with the Government of Quebec, because we sincerely believe that something has to be done to reduce greenhouse gas and polluting emissions.

[Business of Supply, February 8th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to inform you that I will share my time with my colleague, the Secretary of State for Agriculture.

All political parties in the House of Commons hope to govern the country one day, except the Bloc Québécois. Its supreme ambition is to sit eternally in the opposition. All parties work hard to win the Super Bowl of Canadian politics, except the Bloc Québécois. The members of the Bloc Québécois are happy to sit in the stands, criticizing the teams on the field.

Today, the leader of the Bloc Québécois is proposing a resolution asking the government of Canada money for the government of Quebec. Last week, however, the leader of the Bloc Québécois supported a motion from the Liberal Party sponsored by the very man who personifies the futility and inefficiency of the environmental policy followed by the previous government.

But in its platform, during the election campaign, the Bloc was far less enthusiastic about the actions of the previous minister of the Environment. Here is what the platform said about the so-called plan from the previous minister: “This plan will not allow Canada to reach its objectives. It applies the polluter-paid principle and it is especially inequitable towards Quebec. Therefore, it is an awful plan”.

For the benefit of the leader of the Bloc Québécois and in response to his resolution, I will summarize what a government that takes its responsibilities seriously is doing to protect and restore the quality of our environment. There needs to be political will to establish a fair balance between environmental protection and economic growth, political will amongst all political parties and all governments.

This is why we welcome all the propositions to improve our clean air act, wherever they come from. What was the Bloc Québécois saying on clean air during the last election? Nothing at all. Not a word on that subject. The Bloc claims that it can achieve Quebec's sovereignty, but when it goes go before the public during an election campaign, it cannot even bring forward one single measure to improve the quality of the air that we breathe.

In fact, the emperor has no clothes.

As the Prime Minister said during his speech on Tuesday, the fundamental challenge that Canada is faced with now is to make real progress in the area of environmental protection while maintaining jobs and our standard of living. Our new government has already announced a number of tangible measures.

For example, for the first time ever in Canada, we will be moving to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution from major industrial sectors. For the first time ever in Canada, we will be moving to regulate the fuel efficiency of motor vehicles, beginning with the 2011 model year. For the first time ever in Canada, we will be setting out enforceable regulatory targets for the short, medium and long term.

Canada's new government will implement new ecoenergy programs to support energy efficiency and stimulate the production of clean, renewable power. It will mandate greater use of ethanol and other renewable fuels. It will introduce measures to make energy efficient vehicles more affordable. It will provide better protection from hazardous chemicals through its new chemical management plan, and it will support new projects to preserve Canada's wilderness.

As the Prime Minister said, the actions of Canada's new government are rooted in the values and aspirations of all Canadians to serve our ultimate goal: a stronger, safer, better Canada.

The department I head is very aware that the activity for which it is responsible, transportation, is a large contributor to the problem of the deterioration of our environment. That is why we will be playing a key role in solving that problem.

Transportation is one of the biggest sources of air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions in Canada. Transportation is largely responsible for smog: 59% of the carbon emissions and 53% of the nitrogen oxide emissions that pollute our cities. In our ports, marine transportation is the source of nearly 41% of sulphur oxide pollution.

We therefore cannot have a significant impact on greenhouse gases without taking energy-related measures to reduce emissions generated by the transportation industry. That is why the new government has made transportation issues central to its environment planning.

The portfolio of the Department of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities is also where the major issues of concern to governments and the public converge: economic productivity, transportation safety, sustainable development and quality of life in cities and communities.

Among other things, we are committed to transfer $5 billion in fuel tax revenues over five years to support an environmentally sustainable municipal infrastructure. In due course, Quebec will receive $1.52 billion of that amount.

In the 2006 budget, we also announced an investment of $1.3 billion in public transit. Of that amount, $400 million was transferred to the provinces and territories in 2005-2006.

We also provided a new tax credit for people who buy monthly or long-term public transit passes. This credit, which can be claimed for every member of a family, amounts to two free months out of twelve. This kills two birds with one stone since it leaves more money in people's pockets and helps reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.

Never before have we seen, in only one year, such a big investment in mass transit or as much support from the government to Canada's mass transit sector.

These funds provide predictable funding to the municipalities and, as such, are giving them a fabulous boost, allowing them to simultaneously increase their transit capacities, reduce traffic jams and control air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.

I should also point out that provincial transport ministers are the ones who approve the investments made by the transportation corporations that are funded through this initiative.

So, the provinces and territories have all the necessary leeway to fund any public transportation project that is deemed necessary.

Under this initiative, Quebec received $94.4 million. What was left of the $1.3 billion went to the public transit capital trust. This $900 million trust, from which Quebec received $210.8 million, has enabled that province to invest in the public transit infrastructure, based on its own priorities and needs, including in the rapid public transit system, intelligent transportation systems and other initiatives, such as reserved lanes for high occupancy vehicles and for bicycles.

These investments will impact significantly on the provision of public transit services. We are convinced that if we increase services, the number of users will also increase. The new Government of Canada is also investing in the demand side. We want to encourage people to use public transit.

The motion presented by the member for Laurier—Sainte-Marie deals with the fundamental issue of financial transfers between the Government of Canada and the provinces, and particularly equalization.

I remind the House that in 2006-07, for example, Quebec received $5.5 billion in equalization payments. This is money that it can use at its discretion, including for environmental initiatives.

Moreover, the Minister of Finance recently informed his Quebec counterpart that, in 2007-08, the province will be getting at least $6.5 billion in equalization payments, until a new formula is announced, something that is expected in the 2007 budget.

The 2006 budget also detailed the commitments made by the federal government to restore fiscal balance by using an approach based primarily on five major principles, including accountability through clarity of roles and responsibilities, financial responsibility and budget transparency. The other two are predictable long term fiscal arrangements and a competitive and efficient economic union. So—