Linda Duncan

[Paris Agreement, October 4th, 2016]

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to put a question for my colleague, the leader of the NDP and the member for Outremont.

Yesterday, the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands suggested that I had misled the House by saying the previous Liberal government had not failed because it actually came up with a plan after it ratified Kyoto. I look forward to my leader clarifying this. My understanding is that under the Paris agreement, and it is very specific under article 4, that when they move to ratify, they actually have to table specific provisions of how they will undertake rapid reductions at the highest possible ambition.

Yes, the government yesterday announced that it would go forward with a carbon tax. However, what the Liberals have not come forward with is the whole bundle of actions, which they promised during the election and for which people are calling, including more rapid phase-out of coal-fired power and to incent the direction toward a cleaner economy.

Does the member agree with me that it is probably not proper to ratify yet, since we do not have a plan?

[Paris Agreement, October 4th, 2016]

Madam Speaker, I thoroughly enjoyed working with the hon. member when we were both on the environment committee, and I know she is very dedicated.

The member's government has yet again signed on to the G20 that they will remove the perverse incentives to the fossil fuel sector. The former Conservative government promised to do that too and did not do it. There are growing concerns that for some sectors the failure to remove the perverse incentives will simply undo any effect of the carbon tax.

Could the member speak to that and to why the government has not immediately moved to remove those perverse incentives?

[Paris Agreement, October 4th, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for her hard work on the environment file. It is a pleasure working on the committee with her.

The question I would like to put to her is whether she is going to support our subamendment. I know that she has read all the documents. I am sure she has read the Paris agreement. I am sure she is aware of the Vancouver declaration.

However, it is important for the member to recognize, having read those, that both the Paris agreement and the Vancouver declaration, which Canada has signed and is now considering ratifying, say that the parties will commit to engagement of indigenous peoples and the peoples of their country.

What we are debating is the motion put forward by the government. The government has simply said it now wants to ratify. Based on what it has put forward so far, generally speaking, apart from some money in the budget, it is saying that at some time in the future there is going to be carbon tax. However, the motion also says that it only commits to engage provinces and territories.

Does the member think that all members of this place should stand and support our subamendment, which specifically mentions adding the necessity to engage indigenous peoples, municipalities, and the people of Canada, and that we should have a full package of proposals to meet our commitments to two degrees in the Paris agreement?

[Paris Agreement, October 4th, 2016]

Madam Speaker, I thank the minister very much for her speech and her hard work on this file.

As the minister has said, climate change is indeed real, and we are already feeling the effects in Canada. The minister has also shared that during the election campaign, the Liberals presented the need for a comprehensive plan to address climate change in Canada. So far, regrettably, their budget has only committed part of that.

Today we are debating whether or not the government should move to ratify. We are not debating whether or not there should be a carbon tax, although we were blindsided on that by the Prime Minister's statement. Pricing carbon is just one piece, as the minister knows.

Delivering on the commitments that the minister made in Paris will be much more than before. It is to go eventually to 1.5 ^o C. My question for the minister is therefore: Will she support our subamendment that calls on her government to engage not only the territories and provinces but also the municipalities, indigenous Canadians, and Canadians in general? Will she commit to providing the full substantive plan, before ratifying, which includes the carbon tax, so that we have a credible plan before the United Nations?

[Paris Agreement, October 4th, 2016]

Madam Speaker, I would like to put a question to the hon. member.

He makes the case that we not be trying to reduce carbon pollution because it will download the costs to ordinary Canadians. If I follow his logic, that also means we should shred all the laws that we have put in place over 40 to 50 years to reduce mercury, to reduce sulphur dioxide, to reduce NOx, to reduce particulate, because when the companies start to spend the dollars to put in place the technology to do so, they raise their prices.

Is the hon. member saying that we should also shred those laws?

[Paris Agreement, October 4th, 2016]

Madam Speaker, I listened with great interest to my colleague from Alberta espousing support by his party for cleaner energy production.

I wonder if the member shares my disappointment in his party's failure, in the decade it was in power, to take more strident measures to phase out coal-fired power. Under his government's tenure, it failed to introduce binding federal regulations to reduce mercury, which Alberta, to its credit, did. Now, other coal-fired power plants in Canada do not have to reduce mercury. Second, the Canadian Medical Association has said that, due to the serious health impacts and deaths associated with coal-fired power, we must move expeditiously to phase out coal.

Does the member share my disappoint in his party's failure to support Alberta's measures?

[Paris Agreement, October 4th, 2016]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his very insightful speech. He gets to the point, always.

One thing we need to keep in mind is that, in our subamendment to the motion before us, we say it is not enough just to talk to the provinces and territories; we should also be talking to indigenous leaders and the public.

What does my colleague think about that?

[Paris Agreement, October 3rd, 2016]

Madam Speaker, the hon. member is obviously very committed to our finally taking action on climate change.

The government announced today that it would put a price on carbon, but we are getting feedback from a number of people who have worked on these issues for quite some time, like Clean Energy Canada, who are experts on pursuing avenues for cleaner power sources, and the David Suzuki Foundation.

Clean Energy Canada has said that on its own, the carbon price scheduled today will not get the job done. It is only one piece of the puzzle. They argue that the federal and provincial governments will need to pair carbon pricing with smart regs and a transition to clean power across the economy to get Canada on track to hit the national targets.

The Suzuki Foundation has said that the federal government will need to rely on additional policies to reduce emissions to meet the 2030 targets, given the modest carbon price compared to existing provincial policies. These additional emission reduction approaches should include quicker phase out of coal-fired electricity, a national energy public transportation infrastructure, and that the subsidies for the fossil fuel industry be taken away.

The member is saying that the government has said it has done enough and that we can now ratify the agreement. Does she agree with that, or with the people I mentioned who state that more needs to be done?

[Paris Agreement, October 3rd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, it looks like we will be doing a lot of chatting back and forth today.

I am looking forward to working with the hon. parliamentary secretary on moving forward on concrete measures.

I understand that he has worked in the clean energy sector, and the question I would pose to him is this. Does he share my concern that Canada has fallen back by 41% in our investments in clean infrastructure, when the rest of the world have their economies based on it and booming in this trillion-dollar economy?

Does he think that the $10 per tonne tax will spur investments right away in this sector?

[Paris Agreement, October 3rd, 2016]

Mr. Speaker, yes, the Conservatives had a plan of sorts and made a lot of promises over the 10-year period. One of those promises, as I mentioned earlier in this place today, was that they would issue regulations to govern the greenhouse gases from the fossil fuel industry. Those were first promised, I recall, by Mr. Prentice, who was the environment minister. Those never came forward.

Other measures that their government could have taken would have been to fast-track the phase-out of coal-fired power. They could have mirrored the measures taken by the premier of Alberta because of the clear evidence provided by the Canadian Medical Association of the serious health and environmental impacts of coal-fired power.

I wonder if the member would respond as to why her government did not take serious measures while it was in power to actually begin reducing greenhouse gases in a more rapid way.