House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2015, with 46% of the vote.
Climate Change November 20th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, the member is absolutely wrong. This government has made it very clear. Canada wants an international binding treaty that includes all the major emitters. All of the major emitters have to be part of the solution.
One hundred and ninety-two countries will be at that table in Copenhagen. This government will ensure that any treaty will include Canada's economic, geographic and industrial realities. We will not sign a deal that would be bad for Canada.
Business of Supply November 20th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, the member well knows that Canada first came up with the target of a 20% reduction by 2020. The United States is following the lead of Canada in adopting very similar targets. Canada was also the first to introduce new fuel efficiency tailpipe standards for automobiles. Again, the United States are following our lead. The 2011 model will have very similar standards.
At committee, he heard the witnesses from the U.K. and the EU. They said clearly that the world is counting on Canada to commercialize the technology of carbon capture and storage. It has been demonstrated in Canada. Canada has the number one per capita financial commitment to see commercialization of carbon capture and storage.
We are so proud of what we are doing. The world recognizes that. They recognized that at committee yesterday. We will get it done. We will make carbon capture and storage affordable so that other countries that are burning coal will be able to capture that carbon and put it back under the ground from whence it came.
Business of Supply November 20th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, during my speech I did say that, at both the G8 and the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate, Canada and all the other world leaders acknowledged the broad scientific view that the increase in the global average temperature above pre-industrial levels ought not to exceed two degrees.
That is known. That is committed to. That is an international understanding. There is science that supports that. We asked this member to support a balance in order to ensure that jobs are not destroyed in Canada and that we also have a healthy economy and environment. This member knows very well that if his target of 25° is accepted, it would mean dramatic increase in cost to every Canadian through energy prices.
The witnesses are saying that we would have to adopt the prices that Europe is spending. It would double the price for gasoline and to heat our homes. There would be massive increases in energy costs and a major loss of jobs. Our government's plan is a balanced plan to protect the environment and protect jobs in Canada.
Business of Supply November 20th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with one of the most respected members of Parliament in this House, the Parliamentary Secretary for Status of Women.
Climate change is one of the most important public policy issues and global challenges of our time. That is why the Government of Canada is taking a multi-pronged approach to addressing the challenge of climate change through domestic, continental and international efforts.
The government has committed to reduce Canada's total greenhouse gas emissions by 20% from 2006 levels by 2020. By 2050 we are planning for a 60% to 70% reduction.
This government will reduce greenhouse gases in a way that will achieve real results. Canada's economic action plan, tabled as part of budget 2009, is very clear on that.
The plan builds on previous investments by providing almost $4 billion in additional funding to support a cleaner and more sustainable environment and to help meet Canada's climate change objectives. This includes $1 billion over five years for a new green infrastructure fund to support projects such as the generation of sustainable energy.
Under the clean energy fund that was launched in May of this year, another $1 billion is provided over five years for clean energy research and demonstration projects, including carbon capture and storage. We are world leaders in this technology. This support alone is expected to generate a total investment in clean technologies of at least $2.5 billion. Per capita we are number one in the world on carbon capture and storage.
The government is committed to achieving our target by taking actions that are comparable to those of other industrialized countries in the global fight against climate change.
South of the border, the American clean energy and security act, also known as the Waxman-Markey bill, has passed the House of Representatives. This bill sets a greenhouse gas emission reduction target of 17% below 2005 levels by 2020. The Kerry-Boxer legislation has commenced its journey through the U.S. Senate. The Kerry-Boxer bill currently talks of a 20% reduction below 2005 levels by 2020. Both of these bills are similar to our Canadian target of a 20% reduction by 2020.
The U.S. bills require utilities to generate 15% of electricity from renewable sources and show annual energy savings of 5% from efficiency measures.
Canada has set a very ambitious energy objective. By 2020, 90% of Canada's electricity needs will be provided by non-emitting sources such as hydro, nuclear, clean coal or wind power.
This ambitious clean energy objective, as well as a host of other policies and measures, are clearly demonstrating our commitment to undertake efforts that are comparable to those of our international partners.
Internationally, Canada is working actively and constructively through the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. At the 15th meeting of the Conference of the Parties in Copenhagen, we will work with our international partners to lay the foundation and the framework for an effective and ambitious post-2012 global climate change agreement.
Canada's position at COP15 in Copenhagen is built on five fundamental principles. We will focus on the development of an effective international climate change agreement that, one, balances environmental protection and economic prosperity; two, has a long-term focus to fight climate change; three, supports the development and deployment of clean technologies like carbon capture and storage; four, supports constructive and ambitious global action; and five, includes commitments from all major economies. We all have to participate in this fight against climate change.
This government's resolve to have a successful outcome in Copenhagen is evident in its international engagement in a myriad of international negotiations and meetings.
The Prime Minister and the Minister of the Environment actively participated in discussing the challenges of climate change with leaders from the G8, the G20, and the 17-member United States-led Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate that was launched by President Obama in March of this year, as well as with leaders of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, and most recently, at the pre-COP15 ministerial meetings in Copenhagen that the minister just returned from. It was hard work along with our international partners, and it was very successful.
Earlier this year the G8 leaders agreed to an aggregate global greenhouse gas emissions reduction target of at least 50% by 2050. This implies that global emissions will need to peak as soon as possible and decline thereafter. On top of this, the G8 leaders also committed to reducing the aggregate greenhouse gas emissions from developed countries by 80% or more by 2050 from those of 1990 or more recent years.
In July of this year, the leaders of the Major Economies Forum committed member countries to work together before Copenhagen to identify a global goal for substantially reducing global emissions by 2050. The declaration also announced the establishment of a global partnership to drive transformational low-carbon, climate-friendly technologies. The partnership's goal is to dramatically increase public sector investments in research, development and demonstration of these technologies, while recognizing the importance of private investment, public-private partnerships and international cooperation.
At both the G8 and the Major Economies Forum, Canada and other world leaders acknowledged the broad scientific view that the increase in global average temperature above pre-industrial levels ought not to exceed 2°C.
The Government of Canada recognizes that robust domestic actions and international engagement are not enough. Any international agreement to fight climate change will need the participation of the United States. Without the United States, it will be impossible to stabilize greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere at a safe level.
Given the environmental, economic and energy interdependence between Canada and the U.S., we need to ensure a harmonized approach within a continental commitment to fight climate change. I am glad that the member said he does support the government's commitment to a continental approach. I am actually quite surprised, because traditionally he has voted against that.
We are working with the United States to create an effective North American climate change regime with national policies that are harmonized and consistent as well as a continental system composed of national policies and regulations that are equal in value and of similar effect, so we foster fair competition and maintain free trade in the integrated North American market.
We are well down the path of policy harmonization. In February President Obama and our Prime Minister announced the establishment of the Canada-U.S. clean energy dialogue. This will serve to enhance collaboration in the development and deployment of clean energy technologies to reduce greenhouse gases and combat climate change.
Our government has been very clear on our commitment to fight climate change. Our commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20% by 2020 is very ambitious and comparable to all the other industrialized countries. We are working closely with President Obama and the U.S. administration through the clean energy dialogue to ensure that all of our energy policies will be harmonized through a continental approach.
Canada wants an international binding target that includes all the major emitters. One hundred and ninety-two countries will be at the negotiation table in Copenhagen. Our government will ensure that any agreement that comes forward will include Canada's economic, geographic and industrial realities. We will not sign a deal that is bad for Canada. Quebec is part of Canada.
I have appreciated this opportunity to describe Canada's commitment to a new international agreement on climate change. We are confident that our ambitious actions and committed leadership on this important topic on the domestic, continental and international fronts will contribute toward the collective effort to address this global challenge.
Business of Supply November 20th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, I listened closely to the comments of my friend and colleague across the way, as well as the Liberal member's comments, and much of what was said was not accurate.
I want the member to comment on what we have all heard from every witness at the committee that has been studying Bill C-311. Every witness said that there should be a continental approach. The government's plan has been to have a continental approach.
Yesterday, we heard from witnesses from the EU and the U.K. who shared how Europe has a collective target. Twenty-seven different countries are within the EU target and they are doing it collectively. Some are higher and some are lower in their commitment but they have a collective. There was a real logic. I asked the witnesses why they would not do it separately and whether there was not a logic to do it collectively and they agreed that it should be done collectively.
This is what Canada is doing now through the clean energy dialogue with President Obama and the U.S. administration. A strong leadership from Canada is providing for a collective North American strategy. Together, we are harmonizing our approach to tackle the issue of climate change.
Why is the member opposed? Why does he continually vote against and speak against having a North American collective harmonized target for fighting climate change?
Points of Order November 18th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, I was surprised to see that member making those gestures of which he is now accusing the member. If you would check the blues and check the cameras, you will see that member making the gesture.
It is not appropriate for him to be attacking a member over here when he is doing that.
The Environment November 18th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, the member is misleading this House. This government's plan is clear. We now have in effect a North American target of 20% by 2020. We are also making progress on tailpipe emissions standards, aviation standards, carbon capture storage, and a North American integrated cap and trade.
We are getting it done. Why will that member not support good environmental legislation?
The Environment November 18th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, the answer to the member's question is, no. Our targets are the toughest in Canadian history; that is, a 20% reduction by 2020.
What he is asking us to do is support something that does not exist.
Canada is hard at work with our international partners, striving to come up with a new international agreement on climate change. That member needs to support our government.
Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act November 17th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, I listened intently to my friend across the way.
Three and a half weeks ago I was in Copenhagen on an environmental conference preparing for a new international agreement. While I was there I met a legislator from Colombia and asked him if he was happy with this new agreement and how important it was for Colombia. He said very similar words as we just heard from the member, that it was important to give a country a chance to turn its back on some of the past atrocities and concerns and help it move forward.
If we bind Colombia's hands by not permitting it and Canadians to prosper, we are harming both countries. I would ask him to comment on how important it is that we work with other governments.
Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act November 17th, 2009
Mr. Speaker, I listened intently to my good friend, the Bloc member, who raised the environmental issues. I have a question for him regarding the environment.
Why is it that the Bloc has voted no to every environmental program that the government has proposed? The Province of Quebec wanted $300 million for its environmental programs and the federal government gave it $350 million. What did the Bloc members do? They voted against that.
The member well knows that carbon capture and storage is a technology. We went to Berlin together and we heard that carbon capture and storage is a technology that the world is counting on. The reduction of 25% of greenhouse gas emissions are coming from carbon capture and storage. What did the Bloc do? Those members voted against carbon capture and storage. They voted against fuel efficiency standards.
Does the member really believe in climate change? Does his party really support getting tough on environmental issues?