House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was environment.

Last in Parliament June 2019, as Conservative MP for Langley—Aldergrove (B.C.)

Won his last election, in 2015, with 46% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Business of Supply April 24th, 2007

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments made by my colleague across the way. As we have said, we support the motion.

Where the carbon exchange trading occurs will be decided by the market. There is a possibility of it being in Winnipeg, Toronto, Montreal or others. We agree with him on this. We also agree that it is very important that we have a government taking action on the environment, cleaning up greenhouse gas emissions and reducing them dramatically, but a question remains.

I have asked this before and have not received an answer yet. The member did talk about mistakes made. We are not trying to lay blame, but Canadians would really like to know why, when he was a member of the government for 13 years, the Liberals did not address the issue of climate change and greenhouse emissions. Would he please tell this House why when he was in government they did not take action and why we now find ourselves over 35% above the target?

Business of Supply April 24th, 2007

Mr. Speaker, I listened intently to my colleague across the way during his presentation. This House is still looking for answers to why the Liberals did nothing when they were in government after signing on to the Kyoto protocol. After ratifying the Kyoto protocol they continued year after year to do nothing to protect the environment.

There is proof that when the Conservatives took over government, Canada was 35% above the Kyoto target commitments. The government is committed to substantial reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. My party supports this motion, but the question that is still unanswered in the House is: Why did the Liberals not do something to clean up the environment when they were the government? Canadians want to know what was the reason for not getting the job done.

The hon. member has talked about courage. I would ask him and I have asked him many times to tell the House why his party did not get the job done when it had the chance? Why did the Liberals create the environmental mess with which we are faced?

The environment is incredibly important. Canadians want Canada to do something. We now have a government that is finally taking action on the environment. Why did the Liberals not get it done when they had a chance?

Business of Supply April 24th, 2007

Mr. Speaker, this again is from a member of the Liberal Party that signed us onto the Kyoto commitment and then did nothing about that. We saw greenhouse gas emissions go up to 35%. This is also from a member that was pleased with the announcements of a $100 billion tax increase on Canadians which was a carbon tax in the budget.

The hon. member asked about Nairobi. The minister invited members of the opposition parties to go to Nairobi with her. She was president of the Kyoto conference at that time and she spoke and shared with the delegates in Nairobi the condition in which Canada found itself, being the new government, which was that we were 35% above the Kyoto target because the previous government had done nothing. She did invite the delegates of the opposition party to attend.

We have remained committed. We are now up to date. The former Liberal government was behind in the reporting on the Kyoto responsibilities and in the funding. We are now up to date on our reporting and our funding.

Business of Supply April 24th, 2007

Mr. Speaker, the motion reads:

That the House call on the government to set fixed greenhouse gas reduction targets as soon as possible so as to meet the objectives of the Kyoto protocol, a prerequisite for the establishment, as expeditiously as possible, of a carbon exchange in Montreal.

We agree with this. The motion does not say only in Montreal. It is common knowledge that Toronto, Montreal and Winnipeg have all expressed interest. He knows well that there could be multiple people dealing with carbon trading right here in Canada.

We do support the motion as it is written and Montreal would be a contender for the market but it could be Montreal, Winnipeg and Toronto. However, we are a democracy and we are a free market. The opportunities to have trading are there and the market will decide.

I am quite surprised that the member would want to have it mandated by government that it could be only one exchange. We are a free market and the market will decide.

Business of Supply April 24th, 2007

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with my colleague and good friend, a member I highly respect, the member for Louis-Hébert.

On behalf of the government, I want to thank the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie for coming forward with his motion today.

Like the hon. member, I believe Canadians want real action on the environment. Canadians want to see climate change addressed and harmful greenhouse gas emissions reduced. They also desperately want to see greenhouse gases and air pollution reduced so that the air we breathe is cleaner.

Canadians demand leadership from their government for both a clean environment and a growing economy. Canadians also want their elected representatives and their government to act responsibly on both fronts.

In 1997 the Liberal government agreed to the Kyoto protocol. In the following nine years in government, the Liberal Party did nothing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Canada. While it promised big cuts to those harmful emissions, it instead sat back and watched them rise dramatically.

Let us consider the evidence. In 1997 when the Liberal government signed on to the Kyoto protocol, Canada was 22% above its target, but the good news was that we had 15 years to make it. By the time Canadians chose to change their government in 2006, Canada was already 35% above the target.

We accepted our international obligations and we will make our very best efforts. We are big believers in the need for international action.

The government has said very clearly that it is supportive of Canada remaining committed to the principles and objectives of the United Nations framework convention on climate change and the Kyoto protocol.

We would like to see more cooperation and leadership among all major emitting countries, particularly the G-8+5, which includes not only the big western economies like Britain, France, Germany and the United States, but also the big emerging economies like India and China.

Our government was elected to make decisions. The global challenge of climate change and global warming requires meaningful, decisive action. Reducing greenhouse gases and air pollution also demands leadership and resolve.

Already we have taken significant steps that not only prove our commitment to action but will also make a difference in Canada's environment for the health of all Canadians. We have unveiled a wide range of initiatives to promote clean energy and clean transportation, the two biggest sources of greenhouse gases and pollution.

We are increasing the use of renewable fuel through regulation and supporting the growth of our biofuels industry.

We are providing financial and tax incentives to Canadians to drive eco-friendly vehicles.

We will regulate mandatory fuel consumption standards on the vehicles that Canadians buy.

We are supporting the growth of renewable energy resources like wind and tidal power.

We are providing incentives to Canadians to improve the energy efficiency of their homes.

We have partnered with the province of Alberta to create an ecoenergy carbon capture and storage task force that will recommend the best ways to deploy technology to capture carbon dioxide from the oil sands and store it deep underground.

We have provided $1.5 billion to the provinces and territories to support concrete energy efficiency technology and other projects they have identified to achieve real reduction in both air pollution and greenhouse gases.

Budget 2007 also demonstrates our commitment to the environment with an investment of $4.5 billion to clean our air and water, to manage the legacy of chemical substances, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and, most importantly, to protect our natural environment.

Combined with over $4.7 billion in investments made since 2006, the resulting investments in environmental protection total over $9 billion.

However, these investments alone will not drive the changes in energy efficiency, technology, innovations and investments in industrial facilities that must occur if Canada is to do its part to reduce the global burden of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

Our focus is now on implementing tough but realistic regulations to reduce greenhouse gases and air pollution from large industrial sources while ensuring that our economy continues to prosper.

We are exploring the use of emissions trading as part of those regulations. I would remind the House it is the private sector that makes those choices and it is the private sector that should provide any trading infrastructure.

There is nothing that says there must only be one exchange here in Canada. In Europe, for example, there are several carbon exchanges. None was established by a government. I believe it was Jean-Charles Robilliard, the spokesman for the Montreal Stock Exchange, who said that there was room for both exchanges to operate in emissions trading.

Our government cannot take responsibility for the inaction and mistakes made by the previous Liberal government but we will take responsibility for cleaning up the mess that we inherited from the Liberals. By doing nothing to reduce the harmful greenhouse gas emissions, the previous government focused far too much on the economy.

While industry pushes for minimal action and the environmentalists push for perfection, the problem is getting worse. It is time for Canada's government to act, and we are acting. Soon we will unveil our regulatory framework for industrial air emissions. Our strategy will ensure real reductions in both greenhouse gases and air pollution.

We will include tougher rules and regulations that will require Canada's industry to reduce pollution that threatens the health of Canadians and that causes climate change. For the first time in our country, we will have a strategy, one that is real, concrete and realistic for reducing greenhouse gases and air pollution.

Of course, Canadians will need to make some adjustments. We all need to take on more responsibility. It is something we believe Canadians are prepared to do. Our citizens want urgent action on the environment and they are ready for some tough but fair medicine.

However, how much is too much? Where do we draw the line? Canadians expect us to deal with these issues with responsibility and balance. We also need a balanced approach that reduces both greenhouse gases and preserves Canadian economic growth.

Will everyone like our approach? Probably not. Some will say that it is too weak, while some in industry will say that it is too tough. Someone must take the lead, though, and that is the responsibility of the Government of Canada. Leadership means making tough choices. We were elected to make those tough choices on behalf of Canadians and not to duck them.

In closing, I want to remind the House once again that we agree wholeheartedly that urgent action on greenhouse gases is needed and we will be coming forward shortly with our plan.

I also want to say again that the government supports the principles and objectives of the Kyoto protocol and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Therefore, we will be supporting this motion. As for carbon markets, I have indicated in our notice of intent that we support emissions trading, and the motion does not specify that Montreal must be the only carbon market in Canada.

The Environment April 23rd, 2007

Mr. Speaker, this is the first government in years that is taking action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, to clean up the environmental mess left after 13 years of Liberal inaction. We are getting the job done. They did not.

The Environment April 23rd, 2007

Mr. Speaker, we do not support the Liberals' plan and their amendments to it. For example, political interference in setting air quality standards is not acceptable either.

Here is an interesting quote from somebody that was a witness. He said, “It would be devastating for the whole community...It would be suicidal for our economy”. Do Canadians know who said that? Buzz Hargrove.

The Environment April 23rd, 2007

Mr. Speaker, that was one of the questions that was asked of the sponsor of Bill C-288. We asked, what is the cost? Unfortunately, the Liberals would not bring the cost, so we had to do the work for them, as it is too often.

This is what Mark Jaccard said:

--the Kyoto Protocol is likely to trigger a major economic recession. From what I understand of our legal options for compliance with Kyoto and my knowledge of the energy-economy system, I concur with this conclusion.

He is right. The Liberal way does not work.

The Environment April 23rd, 2007

Mr. Speaker, I would suggest maybe that member is a little frustrated because we are getting the job done.

He said that when Canadians find out what it is going to cost for their plan, they are going to scream. The Commissioner of the Environment said, “When it comes to protecting the environment, bold announcements are made and then often forgotten as soon as the confetti hits the ground”.

It was shameful what the Liberals did. We are getting the job done.

The Environment April 23rd, 2007

Mr. Speaker, imagine that, a Liberal trying to make recommendations on the environment.

After 13 years of doing absolutely nothing, we now have a government that is moving forward, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and cleaning up the environment.

I have a very interesting quote. This is from the Commissioner of the Environment speaking about the Liberal Party. It says, “There is a gap between what the government said it would do and what it is actually doing”. Good intentions are not enough. We are getting it done.