House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2015, with 46% of the vote.
The Environment December 13th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth from a Liberal member. It was that party that got 86 fossil awards. Shame on them.
This government has made a U-turn on emissions. No more are the days where emissions are going up. It is absolute reductions of emissions because of the hard work of the Prime Minister. We are getting it done.
The Environment December 12th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, with our government's turning the corner plan, Canada is taking real action on climate change.
This morning the Minister of the Environment put industries in Canada on notice that they will have to submit their air emissions information within the next six months.
We have one of the toughest targets in the world and we are going to enforce those targets. The previous Liberal government talked about protecting the environment and did absolutely nothing.
This is the government that is getting it done on the environment.
The Environment December 12th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, the member talked about the gift that kept giving and giving. Canada did not want the Liberals to keep giving and giving more in greenhouse gas emissions factors. It was the deputy leader who asked, “Why didn't we get it done?”
The deputy leader also said:
I accept the point just so it's clear... the next... Kyoto phase has got to have mandatory emission controls for all [major emitters] otherwise the agreement’s not going to work.
I thank him for his endorsement.
The Environment December 12th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, I am sure the member is well aware that after 13 long years of Liberal government, emissions rose. In 2006 this government took over. We now have a plan, a U-turn on emissions. We are getting it done after the previous government was a total failure.
The Environment December 12th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, the member has asked that before and the answer is the same. The carbon market is part of our regulatory framework and the market will decide where that will happen. Whether it is Montreal or Toronto or Winnipeg, the market will decide.
National Sustainable Development Act December 11th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, it was interesting to hear from the last speaker, one of the Liberal critics on the environment, saying that the reason why we need this is because we did not get it done. I just want to let him know that there was an election almost two years ago and things have changed in the House. We now have a government that is getting it done.
There is no doubt, in light of the actions already taken by this government, from the management of toxic chemicals to the protection and preservation of sensitive lands, to improving our air quality, to taking action on climate change, that we are committed to delivering a safe and healthy environment for Canadians.
I appreciate therefore having this opportunity to lay out what measures are underway to strengthen the role that sustainable development plays in the work of government organizations.
In December 2006, less than a year after the election of this government, the Environment Minister tabled the fourth round of departmental sustainable development strategies as required by the Auditor General Act.
At the time the minister noted in a press release that, although the latest round of strategies represented a step forward from the previous government's work, the government agreed with the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development and the previous assessment that more needed to be done to improve sustainable development planning and reporting.
Officials were instructed to begin the work of examining a range of options and to reviewing global best practices as Canada makes further progress toward putting sustainability at the heart of the government's activities.
By October 2007, this work was already well under way when the government was fortunate to receive additional guidance from the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development.
As hon. members may be aware, after 12 years and four rounds of sustainable development strategies, the commissioner conducted a detailed retrospective assessment of the existing legislative obligation that was tabled in the House this past autumn.
Noting the continuous failure of previous Liberal governments, the commissioner recommended that this government undertake a thorough, documented review of its current approach through the preparation and use of sustainable development strategies and that it should act on those results.
The government has accepted that recommendation and in conjunction with the work begun after the tabling of the fourth round of strategies is reviewing specific issues such as: federal goals for sustainable development, including specific performance expectations; indicators and targets, against which process can be measured; how departmental sustainable development strategies should fit into and contribute to the achievement of federal goals; strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and constraints associated with current approach in key areas for improvement; and roles and responsibilities, including what departments and central agencies must do to ensure opportunities for improvement are acted upon, so that they have necessary authorities and can be held accountable.
It is important to reflect upon the history leading up to this recommendation. The shortcomings of the existing sustainable development strategies process are by no means new. For example, in 1997, the commissioner noted weaknesses with the existing approach to sustainable development, planning and reporting. In particular, difficulties with performance measurement, cross-cutting issues, and awareness and understanding of requirement.
In 1999 the commissioner noted that departments had not systematically identified priorities or defined responsibilities for achieving them.
In 2002 the commissioner stated that weaknesses persisted, at which point it was noted that the strategies were not the strategic documents that they were meant to be. All this was under the former Liberal government. Further evidence that they did not get it done.
In 2004 the Commissioner noted that while it was easy to include commitments of strategy, managing and implementing the commitments were another story, and we heard that time and time again about the Liberals not getting it done.
In fact, the Commissioner has repeatedly stated that departments are not following through with the necessary steps to turn their words into action and demonstrating that commitments were being taken seriously.
The commissioner has not taken issue with the legislative instrument, only with its implementation. Notwithstanding consistent identification of systemic weaknesses by the commissioner, little effort to address the situation appears to have been made.
Throughout the 12-year history of this initiative, the commissioner has repeatedly expressed the view that the federal government needs to prepare a compelling, explicit vision of a sustainable Canada and a government-wide strategy to realize that vision.
Specifically, the commissioner noted that trying to gauge progress toward sustainable development by examining a collection of disjointed strategies that listed thousands of activities was like trying to assemble a complicated jigsaw puzzle without the picture on the box.
Previous governments have made commitments to preparing such a strategy on more than one occasion, including internationally at the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development, held in Johannesburg, and in response to recommendations made by the commissioner in 2002 and again in 2005. No federal strategy has ever been prepared. A new legislative instrument requiring one is not likely to improve matters.
Notwithstanding the commissioner's audits and subsequent recommendations, it would seem that there has been little progress. The commissioner has noted that in many instances the recommendations made in the reports, all of which were accepted, appear to have fallen on deaf ears.
It is clear, based on 10 years of the commissioner's audits, that the existing legislative requirement as it is currently being applied is not working.
The current review, this review, that we have committed to complete by October of next year will ensure that we learn from past efforts, reflect on the commissioner's recommendations, and implement the existing law in a way that will position the government to deliver real results to Canadians. That is what this government is all about: real results and getting it done.
The Environment December 11th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, the reality is that without all the major emitters participating and reducing greenhouse gas emissions, emissions will continue to rise. That is why Canada has taken the leadership role of requiring a mandatory regulatory framework that reduces greenhouse gas emissions by 20% by 2020 and by 60% to 70% by 2050. That is a historic low. We are on the right track. Mr. Steiner says our approach is the right approach.
The Environment December 11th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, one of the delegates with the Canadian delegation to Indonesia is the minister of environment from Quebec. She said that “we believe that mandatory targets must be imposed upon everyone, and that is, yes, countries must participate in the fight against climate change, including the United States and emerging economies like China and India”.
She is absolutely right. We all need to put our oars in the water and we all need to start fighting against climate change.
The Environment December 11th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, that is from the member who did not get it done. I have a great quote: the Kyoto protocol is “too bureaucratic”, and its shortcomings must be addressed to eventually draw the United States into a new climate-change deal.
Do members know who said that? The leader of the Liberal Party.
The Environment December 11th, 2007
Mr. Speaker, the fact is that after 13 years of Liberal inaction emissions climbed 33%. That is what embarrassed Canada.
We now have strong leadership with a target of a 20% reduction by 2020. That is 150 megatonnes. That is the toughest target in Canadian history.