Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Do you mean as CEPA is written, or as we deal with air pollutants now?

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  It's as Bill C-30 is written.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  The recommendation, we said, was to clarify the use of the word “objective”, and suggest replacing it with the word “standard”. By standard, we mean something that's legally enforceable.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  At the moment, even before Bill C-30, we have standards. As for whether they're legally enforceable or not, they haven't been court challenged yet. They're just a standard. The bill itself suggested objectives that didn't hit the nail on the head, if you will, for the fact that t

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Yes, I read that document. It came out maybe a year to a year and a half ago. The Fraser Institute is a well-known institute that writes things with a particular slant.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  It's not a slant that the Lung Association necessarily agrees with, and in a few instances in that article they are actually misportraying the truth. However, they are correct in saying that air pollution levels have gone down. We've done a pretty good job in North America bringi

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  The numbers you're quoting come from scientific studies done by well-respected scientists at Health Canada and elsewhere. They're published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, and whenever you get a peer-reviewed journal, I wouldn't hesitate....That's what the Lung Association

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  I know that's some people's perception, yes.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  No.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  But we're very much aware of other people who have done other analyses. We have not. But we're aware of other people's analyses, like Ralph Torrie of Torrie Smith and Associates, and they've done fairly good cost accounting of how Canada could meet those emission reductions.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  I'm not familiar with that level of detail in it.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  I think at the next level down from what is actually in the bill, the bill discusses an intention to reduce air pollutants and greenhouse gases. I think the bill does not specify how.

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  I think maybe it's the English translation, but that's not what I meant. You suggested it doesn't look like the bill could reduce fossil fuels. I'm just saying that the bill specifies an intent to reduce. Even if you look at CEPA, the existing act, it does not specify how the a

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  I'm not sure of the percentage reduction we're going to need to achieve our Kyoto commitments, for example. We have some air quality targets, and I'm not quite sure how they relate to percentage reduction in fuel use. However, there are many examples of how you can do this. You c

Bill C-30 (39th Parliament, 1st Session) committee  Yes.