Environment committee  Right now, I would say that Canada does not have a credible track record with any goals. We've said three times internationally that we would reduce greenhouse gas emissions. We've missed the targets every time.

Environment committee  I would argue that there are no policy measures that have been proposed by the Government of Canada that would clearly show a path to those reductions.

Environment committee  As I said before, without identifying how you're going to get there, it's very hard to put a definite number on this. We could design alternative ways of getting there and cost each one of them, but you can't do this right now.

Environment committee  Yes.

Environment committee  My answer to that would be that based on the level of effort that we've done over the last 12 years, this is something that requires a fundamental change in the way we think of climate policy in Canada to get there. Is that a fair answer to your question?

Environment committee  In 2020 the target in Bill C-311 is more ambitious than in the U.S., but in 2050 the differences are minor.

Environment committee  The work that I've seen since the Kyoto Protocol was signed suggests that none of the plans put forward by any of the governments would get us there. This is true about this plan, as it was true about previous plans. I think we're not understanding what level of effort is require

Environment committee  I think it's a fair assessment. However, I do think that in the establishment of a target you have to know where you're going before you start putting a lot of measures in place. That's why I see this as a necessary step. Where do we want to get to and in what kind of timeframe?

Environment committee  I have said publicly, I have published, and I have testified before this committee of the House that an integrated North American approach to climate policy would be a better way to conceive of this problem.

Environment committee  There have been all kinds of estimates for costs for measures of this kind. As you know, the national round table has looked at this. More recently, the Pembina Institute and the Suzuki Foundation have looked at this and come up with different types of cost estimates. The point

Environment committee  No, I have not. Again, it is a global problem. The entire world must act to prevent this outcome. It is not only up to Canada to act and to ensure that the problems experienced in Canadian agriculture from one province to the next because of a lack of water are avoided, and that

Environment committee  Certainly, but it is not the emissions from Alberta, Saskatchewan or western Canada that will have a total impact on emissions. When we are emitting greenhouse gases, they are spread out throughout the atmosphere. It does not remain a concentration—

Environment committee  Certainly. The impact will be local, but the cause of the problem is global. The problem has to be viewed in this light.

Environment committee  Based on the conversations I have heard about the American approach, it would seem they favour the tradable permit approach. It is certainly possible to opt for a carbon tax, call it what you will. These two measures will have similar effects in some regards, but different in oth

Environment committee  The province of Alberta was the first North American jurisdiction to do so.