I support the need for Canada to play a significant role in reducing global emissions.
Let's make sure that when companies make investments to reduce emissions that they're rewarded for that and encouraged to do more.
I believe those that produce the least emissions in autos will also be those who have the greatest success worldwide.
We have to ensure politically that what's doable can indeed by translated into law, but what's not doable mustn't become European law. Otherwise, the auto industry will work somewhere with higher carbon emissions - and we can't want that.
The methods that EPA introduced after 1970 to reduce air-pollutant emissions worked for a while, but over time have become progressively less effective.
It is simply economically impossible to require controls that even approach zero emissions.
Whilst the developed world may say it wants to see much greater commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, this may only be politically feasible if there is strong support for adaptation measures in those countries at greatest immediate risk.
The media when it focuses on climate change at all, does so in terms of carbon emissions and how to reduce them. Only rarely do our leaders advance arguments about adapting our environment and our economy to the effects of climate change that are already inevitable.
In the Labour Party we are absolutely united in our belief that shipping must define its 'fair share' of tackling climate change, and develop an emissions reduction plan for the sector.
It is impossible to talk about slowing climate change without talking about reducing CO2 emissions. Equally, it is impossible to talk about adapting to climate change without considering how we will feed ourselves. And it is out of the question that we can adapt agriculture without conserving crop diversity.
