QUESTION PERIOD — Environment and Climate Change
Carbon Tax—Carbon Emissions
November 5, 2020
My question is for the Government Representative in the Senate. It is a follow-up to the question asked by Senator Smith yesterday afternoon.
I think it is worth remembering that Alberta, in 2003, was the first jurisdiction in the whole of North America to propose a price on carbon, and it was former prime minister Harper, in 2007, who said, during a speech he gave in Germany on climate change, that it was “. . . perhaps the biggest threat to confront the future of humanity today.”
At that time, we were talking about CO2, yet methane is 84 times more potent than CO2.
Senator Gold, methane from various sources, including flaring, venting and leaks from the fossil fuel sector account for 13% of Canada’s current greenhouse gas emissions. Despite being the most inexpensive to reduce, Environment and Climate Change Canada predicts Canada will miss its commitment to lower methane emissions by 40% by 2025. However, Environment and Climate Change Canada is at the same time in the process of finalizing equivalency agreements with two provinces for regulations that are inadequate for fulfilling the 2025 commitment.
Senator Gold, how does the government intend to strengthen the measures while agreeing to accept provincial regulatory frameworks?
Thank you for your question and your ongoing commitment to this important issue. It is the position of this government, and it has been ever since it took office some five years ago, that it is determined to find the right balance for all Canadians between protecting the environment, and sustaining our economy and the economic well-being of Canadians.
To that end, the government has introduced a suite of measures, many of which have been discussed here and many of which found their way into legislation that this chamber passed.
There is always a trade-off between competing interests in a country as vast as Canada, but the government remains committed to achieving its net zero targets by 2050 and remains committed to working with the provinces, the resource sector and others to make sure that we can continue to develop our resources in a cleaner and more sustainable manner.
I have a subsequent question. Now, hearing your answer, what we don’t have in hand is the comparison of the cost of inaction, because by not doing what we promised to do in Rio de Janeiro, Kyoto, Copenhagen and Paris, we are already paying a price, which is very expensive. It’s translated in the health of Canadians and in the pandemics that we are suffering today.
I wish that when you compare things, we have bananas and bananas, and apples and apples, so we can decide and make a better decision.
There was no question in your comment. I think the government would agree with you, that it is important when we’re addressing climate change as a challenge, that we be mindful that there is a cost not only for our action — and there inevitably is; life is full of trade-offs — but there is also a cost for inaction. Thank you for making that point.
