Debates of October 26, 2009 (day 7)
QUESTION 77-16(4): GREENHOUSE GAS STRATEGY AND SUGGESTED TARGETS
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to follow up on my statement earlier today where I was recognizing people working hard on the issue of climate change. I know they appreciated the Minister of Environment and Natural Resources and my colleague for Great Slave participating in the Climate Justice march this Saturday, but the public is wondering what is this government’s position on climate change and the need for greenhouse gas reductions, recognizing it in context with the science that tells us we need at least 25 percent reductions by 2020 and 80 percent by 2050. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The honourable Minister responsible for Environment and Natural Resources, Mr. Michael Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The government and this Legislature recognize climate change as one of the most important issues facing us. It has an impact on everything we’re trying to do as a government almost everywhere we look, whether it be with wildlife, with our communities, with transportation, with permafrost issues. Not only are we committed to reducing greenhouse gases, we are, in fact, spending tens of millions of dollars to put in infrastructure to actually reduce our greenhouse gases, as we speak, with biomass. We’re going to invest in wind, we’re going to invest in mini-hydro and all those different areas. Thank you.
Thank you for those comments. I’m sure that this government recognizes that our current Greenhouse Gas Strategy is out of date and needs a tune-up, and I think we’re acting within that context. I’d like to ask the Minister, Mr. Speaker, are we urging the federal government to meet these science-based targets that have been so well demonstrated? Mahsi.
We’re taking the approach of making sure in our own area and our own bailiwick that we are being as responsive and responsible as possible to try to deal with this issue, investing, as I indicated, the money that we are, trying to change how we do business, how we’re delivering hydro and energy, generating energy. We have had discussions with the federal government. We’ve indicated what we’re doing, as opposed to what they’re doing. The federal government will be, at the end of the day as they want to do, making up their own mind. Thank you.
Unfortunately it is clear, and I do believe in the power of example, as the Minister obviously does, but it is clear that it’s not working with this federal government, it hasn’t worked to date and we are running out of time. I think that’s well acknowledged now. So I’m wondering what role -- assuming that this government is participating in the negotiations in Copenhagen, and I’m sure we are -- can this government plan to try and move forward this science-based target adoption by Canada as our citizens are demanding during those negotiations. Thank you.
We will continue to, we think, be the voice of reason, speak to the examples, point to the urgency in the Arctic, not only in the Northwest Territories but in all the circumpolar countries and, like many of our circumpolar neighbours, we will be making the case that we are paying the biggest price, we’re feeling the most and greatest impact and that we have to take the steps necessary. We will continue to state those points of view. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Your final supplementary, Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I hope that’s done in the strongest possible terms in recognition, again, of the efforts that our citizens are taking on and the actions across the North and, really, across Canada. I’m wondering, just to be complete here and comprehensive, what options does the Minister see having for our public, our concerned citizens, to try and influence Canada’s position at the negotiations in Copenhagen. Thank you.
I believe, looking at the press and having been travelling around, most of the options are being exercised that are available to people. What we have is two different perspectives on an issue, and that is the challenge, and the government-of-the-day, the federal government, is going to make its determination of what it sees in the country’s best interest in balancing all these factors.
While there’s many that may not agree, that’s going to be the responsibility that they have. For those of us that want them to do more, we will have to continue to press them and we have to acknowledge, I think, that there has been a shift from the time that the federal government first got elected to where they are today, where even they now recognize that there is growing urgency in this area. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The honourable Member for the Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.