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

Results 16-30 of 161
Sort by relevance | Sorted by date: newest first / oldest first

Environment committee  It's not necessary that this happens. In fact, this plan suggests that over time this situation can be reversed. However, it is the case that given the structure and evolution of GDP for the longest period of time, greenhouse gas emissions have actually increased with economic ac

May 17th, 2007Committee meeting

Paul Rochon

Environment committee  We have a number of studies on the website using general equilibrium models, primarily to look at the costs of mitigating greenhouse gas emissions.

May 17th, 2007Committee meeting

Paul Rochon

Environment committee  As I said, we have engaged in two fashions. We published a number of economic studies that are now somewhat dated. Also Environment Canada has undertaken a fair bit of work, and we've been involved with them. As to the costs and benefits of climate change per se, there's a fair

May 17th, 2007Committee meeting

Paul Rochon

Environment committee  We haven't done it on Bill C-30.

May 17th, 2007Committee meeting

Paul Rochon

Environment committee  Oh, I think that would be high. Yes.

May 17th, 2007Committee meeting

Paul Rochon

Environment committee  Mexico would be significant.

May 17th, 2007Committee meeting

Paul Rochon

Environment committee  The benefits are quite difficult to quantify. They could take the form primarily of new technologies and innovations that are developed. That's a very uncertain process.

May 17th, 2007Committee meeting

Paul Rochon

Environment committee  I believe it is a reasonable study.

May 17th, 2007Committee meeting

Paul Rochon

Environment committee  That's a good point. We need to take into account the fact that our economy is growing at a rate of 2 or 3 per cent a year. A 0.5% drop in GDP is not huge—the impact would correspond, say, to a loss of 50,000 jobs.

May 17th, 2007Committee meeting

Paul Rochon

Environment committee  It would be much more significant. In the very short term, it would probably lead to an economic recession—a drop in both output and employment—within one or two years.

May 17th, 2007Committee meeting

Paul Rochon

Environment committee  It would be a fairly significant recession in comparison with what Canada has experienced so far.

May 17th, 2007Committee meeting

Paul Rochon

Environment committee  Yes, that is what we believe.

May 17th, 2007Committee meeting

Paul Rochon

Environment committee  An econometric model would pick that up implicitly through investment, but unless one had an endogenous growth model that was specifically geared towards measuring that impact, typically models do not have an explicit variable for measuring technological progress.

May 17th, 2007Committee meeting

Paul Rochon

Environment committee  It would be factored in, as Denis mentioned earlier on, via the impact on investment, because there would be a positive impact on investment.

May 17th, 2007Committee meeting

Paul Rochon

Environment committee  I'm not aware of consultations with industry; you'd have to check with Environment on that. A key element of models is what's called the elasticity of substitution, or the extent and the ease to which firms can substitute technologies in the face of a change in price, which is es

May 17th, 2007Committee meeting

Paul Rochon