Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  The government's first budget in May 2005 slashed climate change spending from $4 billion to $2 billion over the following five years. If we need money, this is the time to create a green fund, a carbon tax similar to that of Quebec, by taxing fossil fuels. Determine the size of the fund by the amount of money required to meet our targets. The design of that fund should be a top priority.

Business of Supply  Should we move using a domestic emissions trading system, an international emissions trading system or a carbon tax? Could they please explain to the Canadian people what it is they intend to do in this regard. I also asked the minister if he could tell us what the price of a tonne of carbon was today in the European and Chicago markets.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Would you use a science and technology approach? Would you use a research and development fund? We're not interested in a carbon tax, but what other compliance mechanisms would you use? We'd consider this in that context. Certainly there are some benefits to it. I think when we come forward with the targets, part of industry's capacity to meet those targets will be related to what the compliance mechanisms are, and obviously the domestic carbon market is a significant proposal towards that end.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Chairman. Thank you minister, and welcome. You initially ruled out the possibility of having a carbon tax, and by extension the possibility of having a polluter-pay policy. You then ruled out the possibility of having an international carbon exchange, and as a result, there will be no global emissions credit trading.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  We're not looking at a carbon tax. I know one of the leaders in the Liberal Party has proposed that. That doesn't mean we don't embrace the idea of “polluter pays”. We think we can achieve that through compliance mechanisms.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  I disagree with the notion of a carbon tax. Our approach will be to provide regulation for industry to ensure that we reduce both greenhouse gas emissions and air pollutants. We're not looking at a carbon-based tax. I know this has been a proposal that has been talked about by some leaders in your party, but it's not one the government has looked at.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Can you tell us, what is your feeling about the less costly and more efficient option when it comes to reducing greenhouse gases? Do you think a carbon trading market or a carbon tax would be more efficient for Canadians?

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Can you help Canadians understand and tell us what the difference is between a carbon trading system and a carbon tax?

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  A carbon trading system is certainly up and running in the European Union, whereas a carbon tax.... I suppose it would depend on what kind of proposal you were making. It would be in the eye of the beholder. You know, some people—

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Which countries, for example, have a carbon tax today, Minister?

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  A carbon tax is not a solution that I have explored, because I don't think the tax system is the regime to do that. We don't sit around the cabinet table dreaming up ways to increase taxes. That's certainly more common in the McGuinty family than it is in the Harper cabinet.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  You had mentioned a desire to perhaps expand on that, and I wonder if you would like to. Secondly, I didn't hear you speak specifically to carbon tax and your thoughts on its efficacy versus a cap and trade or a mixture. What would your thoughts be on that?

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Once we've looked at that, we conclude that carbon intensity therefore isn't an end, but rather a means. The second element is that the carbon tax isn't a universal tool. It's one tool among others, and it must be combined with others, but it's a tool that has the advantage of demonstrating a clear political will, of being simple to use, of requiring little investment by the government and of needing relatively little control.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  So a carbon tax doesn't necessarily penalize Canadian consumers and individuals. It can be used creatively to achieve greenhouse gas emissions without impacting too greatly on individuals.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  In terms of a carbon tax, revenue neutral, if I understand, means that the government does not benefit from the tax overall. Is that correct?