Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 121-135 of 223
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Environment committee  At the moment, we don't have anything like this particular provision, where there would be an obligation nine years in advance of a target to publish a high-level description of the overall approach the government intends to take to achieve that next target.

May 26th, 2021Committee meeting

John Moffet

Environment committee  Well, the amendment that's been proposed describes “high level” as something that is similar to Canada's nationally determined contributions. There is guidance under the United Nations framework convention about what a nationally determined contribution submission should include

May 26th, 2021Committee meeting

John Moffet

Environment committee  It's argued that the amendment is not redundant in the sense that the bill requires setting multiple targets en route to 2050, but there is nothing in the bill, without this amendment, that requires that each successive target be more ambitious than the previous one.

May 26th, 2021Committee meeting

John Moffet

Environment committee  I'd remind members that the bill is primarily focused on political accountability and speaks to the obligations of future governments, which would have discretion to set whatever interim target they chose. This provision would require that each such target be more ambitious than

May 26th, 2021Committee meeting

John Moffet

Environment committee  The government released modelling with a strengthened climate plan in December, which showed that the measures in the strengthened climate plan, on top of the already implemented measures, would achieve 31%. That is without any additional provincial-territorial or business action

May 26th, 2021Committee meeting

John Moffet

Environment committee  I didn't address that issue, and I don't know that I have it right now. I apologize.

May 26th, 2021Committee meeting

John Moffet

Environment committee  I'd rather not speculate. I apologize.

May 26th, 2021Committee meeting

John Moffet

Environment committee  I would agree with the interpretation of the act that there's nothing in this act that precludes the government or any government from jumping higher than the bar is set, to continue with Ms. McLeod's analogy. This would add greater legal certainty, but it doesn't change the lega

May 26th, 2021Committee meeting

John Moffet

Environment committee  I'll jump in again and say no. There would be no new legal obligation placed on the government of the day as a result of this amendment. This amendment would serve to signify to the public, to Parliament, that urgent early action and achievement of net zero is desired, but it wou

May 26th, 2021Committee meeting

John Moffet

Environment committee  That's well said.

May 26th, 2021Committee meeting

John Moffet

Environment committee  I can answer that, Mr. Chair.

May 26th, 2021Committee meeting

John Moffet

Environment committee  In clause 2, the last definition is the definition of net-zero emissions, which is defined to mean that anthropogenic emissions of GHGs are balanced by anthropogenic removals over a specified period of time. The chair was correct in his interpretation of net zero, and Ms. May's m

May 26th, 2021Committee meeting

John Moffet

Environment committee  That's my interpretation. The amendment would require 90% reductions—

May 26th, 2021Committee meeting

John Moffet

Environment committee  Then, in order to achieve net-zero, there would be a remaining 10%, which could be either reduced or offset.

May 26th, 2021Committee meeting

John Moffet

Environment committee  That's correct. Nothing in the bill as it is written currently precludes achieving the goal of net zero before 2050.

May 26th, 2021Committee meeting

John Moffet