Liberal climate plan for net-zero emissions by 2050 | Power & Politics

Liberal climate plan for net-zero emissions by 2050 | Power & Politics
Liberal climate plan for net-zero emissions by 2050 | Power & Politics
And just this morning we committed to exceeding this Target and to join in countries around the world in reaching Net Zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. That means not putting any more carbon into the air, then we take out it’s an ambitious Target, but it’s doable. This is a crisis of Epic Proportion, and in the face of this crisis we see Mister Trudeau, who continues to just say pretty words empty promises, but no action. What one thing we’ve seen with Justin Trudeau over the last few days is: he is just be the mastered improv, coming up with things on the Fly, no details making these types of statements in a desperate attempt to distract from the Scandal and eruption legally binding five Year milestones Montreal nice to see. Thank you for making time for a program. What legally binding means is that the government will have to meet those targets. They will be law in Canada that that that that that we need to Target and what will it be legally binding – is a 2050 Target that we are setting, but we will have a five-year used to make sure that we are on path 2. Meeting this 2050 Target, but we’ll have something we haven’t written. The bill will have to define the different measures that will be included in in that bill that and what incentive or penalties would be included in such a bill. Tissot answer for other environmental laws where it’s. If you defy those laws, you will be fine., That’s common practice in in a country like Canada and many other countries. Well, as soon as possible, I mean it’s groundbreaking. Some countries have done it and then States like California, Norway and and some others, but there’s not so many examples of this going around. So we would have 52b doing it then, and I think doing it right, but I I would argue that it’s something that would would happen and very soon in the man, it’s not something that would be pushed back to 2 to the later on in the mandate. Exactly what it is a group of the appointed experts and advice supposed to take, but there’s two things here after the consultation I mean they will be consultation on the bill, but but this does consultative group. This group of experts that we want to put together is not to elaborate the bill, but it’s 2-2 to help us make sure that we are on the path to me are Target’s. This group will help us do the 5-year reviews on that. That will happen on the way to 220 50, evaluate our progress, but maybe also provide provide advice, ideas of new things other things week, the two to further reduce our pollution in Canada. That your party will adhere to these more aggressive targets that it says it wants to set hasn’t been able to fulfil the ones that it that it that it borrowed from the from the previous government. Why would you say we haven’t been able to meet our Target from from the previous government? Show that that that the government is not sleeping from its own department at this point show that the government is not on track to meet those targets. The government has been able to come up with a plan that gets us. quarters of the way where we need to be 9 and 20199 in 20/20, but in 2030. So we have ten years to to to develop the rest of the plan for the other 25 %. If you wish of the plan to get us to meet our our Paris, Paris Target, Miss McKenna and mr. Trudeau, what exactly are you going to do doesn’t mean that we haven’t been able to terms of what will be the impact on pollution reduction for Apple Transit, Historical investment in transit or happening in this country because of the Trudeau government projects are popping up left right and Center all across the country. I’M it’s hard. We will be able at some point to evaluate how much pollution does Pro it will help us reduce butt, because some of these projects take take time getting off the ground. It’S hard right now to put a number, but we will be able to do that. We know that that we can win a couple of years. Yes, but, as I said you know, the target is for 20-30, not for 2019 or 4 for 2020. We know that some projects, I’m trying to project if I come back to that example, are – will be deployed really quickly. We know that by 20 22:20 three some of them will be operational, so we will be able to start to start having an idea of how much pollution will be reduced through these projects, pictures introduced by the by the government. It’S a little party forms, government and and field for the government. We just before the last budget play the number of suggestion. The proposal to the government, which war included in the budget, the $ 5,000 rebate for electric vehicles. That was not part of the de previous analysis in terms of how much pollution does the climate change to Canada’s climate change plan would would help us to achieve 3 million. Billion dollars. Sorry for the Canadian Federation municipalities to help municipalities put put together projects to do eco-energy, retrofits right across the country cook. That was the point really quickly and right now, by the way, the fourth most sold vehicle in Canada since April is electric vehicle thanks. Thanks of its encouragement by the federal government will take a bit more time to be deployed, but but these projects will happen across the country, for these are new things that are not part of the analysis that has been done so far. But yes, we need to do more, we need to do better and we need to do it faster and that’s exactly what our government is committing to doing it. For really. I know there are lots of different things that the government have proposed and that will enact over the next few years. Is it as it stands enough, or do you think that their needs other measures, perhaps a higher price on carbon post 2022 or other measures that will be necessary in order to meet those 20-30 Target? Stand show me to happen on underpriced of carbon. We have a price until 2022. They will need to be consultation and discussion. What happens after 20 22, but yes, there needs to be more measures. Plan was adopted to help us further reduce our pollution in Canada, the opposition some some parties in the opposition, their number one critique after this announcement was made today was around the. I think the ndp’s release that you bought a pipeline, and that is the critique of the liberal so far that while on one hand there talk about all the things they were today, on the other hand, they also purchased this pipeline in. You in fact, have been a vocal critic of the party that you’re now a member of I’m looking at tweets. You know back in March of you Kinder and Morgan position in March and today, you’re saying that this is this plan that they’re presenting is a right one, valuation of an entire government based on one single project. I said that I disagreed with the government ID on this particular item, but I agreed on a whole bunch of other elements that they that they have been doing and I’ve named a number of them during this interview and it record level. Investment in transit are green infrastructure, phasing out of coal fired electricity by 2030 investment, electrification, Eco energy, retrofit and so many of us. I disagreed with one project, but I agree with a whole number of other projects. I believe in many of argued that this government has done more on climate change than any other before and and I’m frankly, not just in Canada, but challenge someone to show me a government that has done more in 4 years than this government has I’m kind of Training understand, though, for a lot of Canadians who hold climate change near and dear to their heart and action on it. As the prawn issue, that they’re voting on in this election at the purchase of that pipeline undermines the ability of people like Mr to go to get out there and say the other guys won’t do any we’re the only ones who well. I can understand why some people might be angry, but I’d like my message to these people is for $ 1 that the traitor government has invested in pipeline they’ve invested 15 in the fight against climate change. America, if you wish that has done that, has such a ratio of investment for measures in the fight against climate change. Frankly, I can’t think of any. We inherited the Target that the conservatives sat and did nothing on. We made our way 3/4 of the way that Target in just four years and over the next 11 years, we will meet and surpass those targets unless we elect another conservative government and promised more, among other things, the liberal say they would exceed Canada’s 20-30 and Mission School by pledging to chop corporate taxes in half companies, developing technology and products with zero emissions, it also claims all federal buildings would run on clean electricity by 22. But has the level government done enough in the last 4 years to convince Canadians do more on the environment time for the power panel to away in in Toronto for more conservative cabinet ministers, Stockwell de David ortel, former Quebec, Liberal immigration and environment minister is Montreal here With me right here in studio clinical commentator and former Indie P & P Francois as well, that and the CBC Zone, Aaron wherry hello, everyone nice to see you aspirational goal. How do you think it will play anything that contributes to trying to get back the liberal campaigns? Any kind of normalcy after last week is a step in the right direction, especially this a quest with the big climate conference in New York and the march on on Friday, everybody’s asking of each party will. What are you offering? What do you putting on the table? Now what Justin Trudeau’s talking about in terms of targets? First of all, he did inherit as he’s saying, a conservative Target, but nothing nothing prevented him from changing it. So he wasn’t tied to that Target and that Target was incredibly low because other countries and provinces like Quebec, who chose the reference basis as to 1990 as the base level. The conservative Target and the liberal Target was 2005 very high. But when you put it in terms of 1990 levels, it’s 18 % reductions by 2030, so it’s actually not a very high number to begin with. So it’s not that ambitious or gold now going to 25th is following a trend. That’S been started because, just like in Paris, where would he was saying? Well, we have ambitious goals. We want to cut down and remember. In 2015, the big buzzword was to limit to 2 % 1.5 %. What the big bust everybody was falling in line to that and Canada was back according to Justin Trudeau. Well now it’s zero Net Zero by 2050, so everybody’s falling in line, but nobody’s saying really how they’re going to do it. But what is Justin Trudeau’s be here is trying to one get back to normalcy after last week, but also also, very importantly, be the serious, credible alternative for the conservatives, if you’re really serious by climate change going into the election. That strategy, that David so so accurately points so do you think it works for us was well. I think the two key words from David is serious and credible, and I have a problem with both words and the liberal party at in the same sentence because they’re they sign Kyoto, didn’t do it. They have the Paris Accord. We hear from the commissioner that we won’t even be closed and now they appear with that wand, magic wand and claimed that by 2050 it’s going to be a zero net admission. I was just flabbergasted when I heard that I wish it would be if, if need be, I wish it would be with a plan that is developed and I think it was a party to change the tune. Yes also because it is the week of of the big marches at everywhere, it’s Greta’s week, they want to join an in and they they know that they have that image, although sometimes I wonder why? Because I mean you, you interviewed Stephen guilbault, I’m from Quebec and I’m sure David had enough of Stephen guilbault in his ears for years. I’Ve, Minister and two here and give some of the answers, gave you just in shock. I don’t know you say that, but he had a line that was it. That was all you either walk that line or you weren’t. You were bad for the end of it, for the climates and and and right now I mean to to to justify not and really well. Your question on the pipeline, which is going to be on top of the every liberal candidate had, is, is unbelievable. to make that trade-off to buy the pipeline. Can they and they still remain credible with him? Can they convince other Canadians? Have the same thing find the question because I don’t think they convinced even Gil both. I don’t think he’s that naive I’ll use that word, that’s polite to think that they would. They would do certain thing and change certain things he’s smart enough that if he, but it’s something you would have had it in writing before had if you entered some some party and they come to see you and get you as as their image for for climate Change specialist: if you’re credible, you come with the list of of of a pizzeria that we say in French and I don’t think he did that. I think he was. He wanted to go in politics and that’s where, for me, credibility, he’s lacking V. I lost a bit of my let’s say: admiration I used to have for the guy was so convinced and convince me sometimes and I’ll wonder if he was right to try to convince the more aggressive nature of the targets and the kind of Topline stuff. And I, as I as I said, it’s beginning to run a lot of details, but the top line on the conservatives to be more be more aggressive in their own targets. But I think the conservatives should resist – and I agree with David that when you had an incredible meltdown as the blackface issue was last week and was never seen anything like it on a prime minister in Canadian history – and you know, we thought the four leaving is Caucus and saying they can’t work with him and we thought that was the worst it would ever get, but this got even worse. So I think some of what he’s doing, including avoiding the Munk debate, not even showing up to debate to debate, are all as a result of that so now to take off some of that Focus to a so-called up these goals, and especially in the light bashing Of what was put out by the head of the of the General Secretary of the World Meteorological organization? That’S the organization that leads climate change initiatives. Man’S name is Talus batiri Talus. Two weeks ago he put out a report that said he was very concerned about climate extremists and alarmist the 10-year or were dead people. He said we got a problem, he’s been talking to the UN about that problem for 15 years, but the alarmist – and I quote his words at the end of his report – are destroying Society. He also said in the end they made note of this. Is the World Meteorological organization sent that report to 5,000 media outlets around the world? Hardly any publisher, so my advice to Andrew Scheer would be just to stay on the steady and methodical path of reduction that were on resist. These things are going to sand. Gasoline prices are people ready to be paying $ 0.75 more per litre. That’S like you’re. Still on the old system, I took over $ 3 a gallon heating fuel going through the roof added onto carbon tax. When, yes, we need to be looking at how we can deal with the sea patient, but in the light of what this the lead climate organization person in the world says the alarmist and its alarmist approach is not something we should be doing and that’s something under Sheer should be saying at the same time we’re hearing a very different message from everyone at the UN this week and at the same time, internal polling shows that affordability, climate is outside pools at 12, even for conservative voter so proposing today. What do you think? The strategy behind it is the biggest difference, the biggest difference in policies now between sort of the conservatives on one side and everybody else. On the other end, the Liberals have differentiated themselves from the conservatives in terms of, if you want to act on time, if you really want to hit a 20-30 golf at the choice between us and the conservatives, the Liberals are the choice. The problem is the Liberals that have on the other side, the NDP in the green saying we’ll go even further will go faster, will cut, steeper, will take more aggressive policies and who is the Liberals a little bit closer to the grains of the NDP going to Get wrapped as they did today for not having detail projections that show okay, here’s how you get to 2030. Do you have an auntie. Pain that either and said? Okay, here’s what we’re going to do and here’s exactly how it gets to here’s, how it gets to our Target today said: well, we’re going to set a goal of electrifying all public transit, which sounds, I think it sounds. It sounds like a step in the right direction, but they also haven’t really ended up those details. There’S a bit of a Brothers. There is, on the one hand, there’s the debate between the conservative one else and now there’s a debate between liberals and EP on the greens, and it’s going to be interesting to see how much everybody sort of puts up over the next few weeks to sort of Explain through the differences between those three parties, I imagine capello’s host of power in politics, see more of our show by subscribing to the CBC News Channel or click the link for another video
Justin Trudeau says a re-elected Liberal government’s environmental measures would push Canada to net-zero emissions by 2050 in order to combat climate change.
To read more:

»»» Subscribe to CBC News to watch more videos:

Connect with CBC News Online:

For breaking news, video, audio and in-depth coverage:
Find CBC News on Facebook:
Follow CBC News on Twitter:
For breaking news on Twitter:
Follow CBC News on Instagram:

Download the CBC News app for iOS:
Download the CBC News app for Android:

For more than 75 years, CBC News has been the source Canadians turn to, to keep them informed about their communities, their country and their world. Through regional and national programming on multiple platforms, including CBC Television, CBC News Network, CBC Radio,, mobile and on-demand, CBC News and its internationally recognized team of award-winning journalists deliver the breaking stories, the issues, the analyses and the personalities that matter to Canadians.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *