[2Yh2592HBg0]

In Copenhagen, and again just last week in Doha, Canada committed to a process that will not take legal force until 2020. However, science warns us that if we do not ensure that greenhouse gas levels stop rising and begin to fall by 2015, not just here in Canada but also globally, it will be too late to take action.

The time is now to move from rhetoric to action and recommit to Kyoto, which in five days we will have legally exited.

Take action! Sign the petition at http://keepkyoto.ca.

The post Statement – Climate Change appeared first on Elizabeth May.

[hURH64uVINw]

Given that all of these things are occurring faster than anticipated, when was the last time the Prime Minister was briefed on the scientific aspects of this crisis, and who briefed him?

Right Hon. Stephen Harper: Mr. Speaker, I am very surprised at this question from the leader of the Green Party.

Just last week on behalf of the government and the minister from Newfoundland and Labrador, we announced one of the most important green energy initiatives in the history of this country, an initiative supporting the Lower Churchill and related developments that will take 4.5 megatons of greenhouse gas emissions out of our system.

Yet the Green Party of Canada stood against it. On this side, we are for helping the environment and making sure there is energy security and prosperity—

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

The post Question Period: The Environment appeared first on Elizabeth May.

[2ah-t2ytR_Y]

“At this conference, even more than the previous 17, the carbon-reduction negotiations will have a real sense of urgency – as nations negotiate a follow-up to the Kyoto protocol after a year of destructive, often tragic, climate-change-related weather,” said May. “I sincerely regret that I cannot be there at this historic time.”

May cancelled her planned participation in Doha at the last minute when it became clear that her 80 substantive amendments to the Harper Conservatives’ second omnibus budget implementation bill would be in the House of Commons over the next few days.

In Doha, countries are aiming at an agreement by 2015 to establish a new global, climate-change protocol by 2020. As well, countries are negotiating the second phase of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which targeted emission reductions for developed countries between 2008-2012, commencing January 1, 2013.

At last year’s UN Climate Conference, in Durban, South Africa, the European Union, other European countries, and Australia agreed to participate in phase two. Russia, Japan, and Canada refused to. (The US never ratified Kyoto.) On the day after the conference, Environment Minister Peter Kent announced Canada would drop out of Kyoto completely. This comes into effect on December 15.

“Incredibly, despite having announced our legal withdrawal from Kyoto, Environment Minister Kent plans to participate in the Kyoto process as though we were still a full party,” said May. “After turning their backs on the entire process, what will they have to offer? My fear is that, as with past years, they will obstruct the proceedings.”

[lm6XU3No_lI]

The Green Party leader said it was a bad indication of things to come that Canada received the Fossil of the Day award Wednesday after Kent refused to contribute new funding to help poorer countries tackle climate change, in spite of a commitment at the 2009 UN conference in Copenhagen to do so.

May pointed out that scientists are now concluding that the speed of climate warming is faster than they had predicted. Canada and most of the world committed to reducing emissions to ensure global climate would stabilize at less than a 2-degree increase above pre-industrial levels. Instead, scientists are warning we could stabilize at 5 or 6 degrees. This will spell disaster for civilization.

In Canada’s north, not only the ice cap is melting, but, in the Arctic and throughout much of the Canadian boreal, water once trapped as ice in glaciers, permanent snowpack, and permafrost has begun to melt.

The “refrigeration effect” of the Mackenzie River in the Northwest Territories on the rest of the continent is declining, and we may have lost up to 300 glaciers in the Canadian Rockies between 1920 and 2005. Based on September averages, water levels in Lake Huron have declined by 115 centimetres between 1997 and 2012. Over the last twenty years, the increased area of algal blooms and growing presence of toxic cyanobacteria in Lake Winnipeg are a warning of larger eco-hydrological problems throughout the region.

“Given the already disastrous impacts of climate change in Canada, I hope the Harper Conservatives find it in themselves to reverse their previous conference direction and join with the EU and others to, in effect, save the planet,” concluded May. “Even a recent issue of the respected business magazine Bloomberg Businessweek stated: “It’s Global Warming, Stupid.’”

The post May calls on Prime Minister to change course at UN climate talks appeared first on Elizabeth May.

When: 9:30 am, Thursday, November 29
Where: Room 130-S, Charles Lynch Theatre, Centre Block

The post May to Comment on Critical Issues Facing UN Climate Negotiations in Doha appeared first on Elizabeth May.

Certainly there were no mistruths, as she characterized them, in my statement. We still do not know from her statement if Canada plans to go to Doha, and what the composition of the delegation will be.

I do need to correct a few things she said. The idea that a delegation of the Canadian government can only include members of Parliament who agree with the government position is absurd. In the past I can recall that the Liberal government took along a terrific guy, Bob Mills, a former member of Parliament for both the Reform and Conservative parties. Bob did not happen to agree with the Liberal Party policies, but he was part of government delegations because in international fora we are a country. We are international and not just one party.

The Liberal climate plans were late, but they were good. They were cancelled by the Conservatives. We do need to have more countries in Kyoto, and the way to do that is to participate in the second phase of Kyoto.

Michelle Rempel: Mr. Speaker, to address my colleague’s comments, first of all, it is important to speak with one voice. That is not necessarily one party’s voice, but it is one unified voice on something as important as climate change.

Our government feels quite strongly that the approach we are taking to global greenhouse gas reductions is an action-focused one. It is one from which we will see real results over the next few years. I certainly hope that we can work together to refine that approach, because I also have regard for the hon. member.

That said, it is important to note the following about the Kyoto protocol as it stands right now. The hon. member just stated that if we signed onto it or signed on for a second commitment period, we would see action. We would not. Major emitting countries do not have binding targets under this agreement.

Contrary to what the hon. member says, we do have as a country the legal right to withdraw from this, and we also have an obligation as a country to ensure that we have an agreement where all major emitters come to the table to see real action.

The post Adjournment Proceedings – The Environment (B) appeared first on Elizabeth May.

[9LGkRlOA66M]

The matter relates to the composition of government delegations to international conferences, in particular to the 17th conference of the Parties that took place in Durban, South Africa at the close of 2011 under the framework convention on climate change. Members may recall that there was a change in government policy and a decision was made to exclude members of the opposition from the delegation that took part in COP 17 in Durban.

Given the passage of time, I am hoping that I will be able to determine from the parliamentary secretary what the position of the government will be in relation to the composition of the delegation to COP 18 when it occurs in Doha. I am particularly interested to know whether, at this point, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of the Environment can confirm whether Canada plans to participate in COP 18 which will also include negotiations relating to the Kyoto protocol.

The reason for this question will be obvious to those who have been attentive to this issue. On return from Durban, the hon. Minister of the Environment announced that Canada had no intention of participating in the second phase of Kyoto and that we also intended to legally withdraw.

There has not been sufficient attention to the fact that when the Minister of the Environment made this announcement he did not legally withdraw Canada from Kyoto. That is not possible In one fell swoop, so he sent a letter to the UN secretariat on climate change. The effect of that letter was to give a one year notice of Canada’s intent to withdraw. This creates an interesting dynamic for the Privy Council in that the legal withdrawal from Kyoto will not take place until after the conclusion of COP 18 which is taking place in Qatar in the city of Doha.

I want to explore a couple of future prospects that I am hoping the government has considered. Will we participate in negotiations relating to the second phase of the Kyoto protocol, as we did in Durban, undermining the progress that other nations intend to make in that second commitment period? Will we stay home from Doha? If we attend Doha at COP 18, will we return to the practice of decades, not merely of a previous Liberal government or a previous majority government or a previous minority government, but going back in time, at least as far as the government under former Prime Minister Trudeau, certainly the practice of former Prime Minister Mulroney and so on through the decades, until we find ourselves in a situation where opposition members for the first time were excluded by the current government?

Will Canada be participating in COP 18? Will members of opposition parties be included? If we participate in COP 18, will we have the effrontery to participate in negotiations under the Kyoto protocol when we have already signalled our legal intention to withdraw?

Michelle Rempel: Mr. Speaker, I am glad to be able to speak to my colleague opposite’s questions this evening, because there are a lot of mistruths in her statement.

First, I will address her question with regard to the composition of the delegation leading into Durban. Our government has been quite clear in our approach to priorities, that we have a strong mandate to ensure that our economy continues to thrive and that we see job growth in this country. From that, I think in the lead-up to Durban, we felt it was very important for our government to speak with one voice at Durban, because of the varying positions that would be in violation of, or in a dichotomy with, that initial principle.

When we look at the NDP, they actually have worked against the interest of the country by going to the United States and lobbying against our jobs in the energy sector. The Liberals have a track record of complete inaction when it comes to climate change. The former Liberal government signed on to Kyoto with no plan to implement it. We also saw greenhouse gas emissions rise under its tenure. My colleague opposite’s party has been varied in its policy stance on how to approach environmental stewardship while balancing the need for economic growth.

By contrast our government has been very clear. We have said that we need to ensure that we take real action with regard to greenhouse gas emission reduction, but we also need to do that in a pragmatic way to ensure that our economy retains a competitive advantage.

That said, we felt it was very important to have our country speak with one united voice at Durban, including a recognition of the fact that we are taking strong action here at home domestically. We are leaders. The International Institute for Sustainable Development said in a recent report that our government’s policy is a good start. We are making actual progress with our sector by sector regulatory approach. We have seen regulations come into place in the transportation sector. We are now looking at the coal-fired sector. We have plans for other sector reductions and regulations as well.

Thus, number one, we have had a strong domestic approach. Number two, our government has said that the Kyoto protocol is not something we should just be standing still on with regard to an international approach to greenhouse gas emission reductions. We need to see all major emitters come to the table.

My colleague opposite has to acknowledge that the Kyoto protocol now includes less than 20% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions at present. Therefore, we need a new agreement. We need to have all of these countries come to the table and sign on to an agreement with binding targets.

We did not feel that the opposition parties had that stance. As such, because we are proud of the approach we are taking and because we want to see real action, our government was proud to go to Durban and take that message forward.

With regard to some of the other questions the member asked, we do have a very clear position. We have been very transparent. We withdrew from the Kyoto protocol because it does not work. The international community needs a new agreement to see real reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.

Therefore, we will continue on the good work that was started in Copenhagen and continued in Cancun and in Durban this year toward that new agreement, but we will also continue with our pragmatic, balanced action-focused approach, a sector-by-sector regulatory approach to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, while ensuring that our economy is not competitively disadvantaged while we do that.

The post Adjournment Proceedings – The Environment appeared first on Elizabeth May.