Gasoline Additives Mrs. Rose-Marie Ur (Lambton Kent Middlesex, Lib.): Madam Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36 I wish to present a petition on behalf of constituents living in Parkhill, Thedford, Grand Bend in the riding of Lambton Kent Middlesex who call upon parliament to protect the health of seniors and children, and save our environment by banning the gas additive MMT as it creates smog and enhances global warming.

Does the Commission consider it appropriate to grant derogations from the rules already adopted on exhaust gases so that gas-fuelled light vehicles may continue to be sold after 2006, or does it take the view that new rules should be introduced that are adapted so that gas-fuelled cars have no greater difficulty than petrol-fuelled cars in satisfying the exhaust gas requirements (whilst of course not emitting greater quantities of the regulated substances than petrol-fuelled cars, e.g. along the lines of a principle similar to the EEV levels for heavy vehicles)?

Does the Commission consider it appropriate to grant derogations from the rules already adopted on exhaust gases so that gas-fuelled light vehicles may continue to be sold after 2006, or does it take the view that new rules should be introduced that are adapted so that gas-fuelled cars have no greater difficulty than petrol-fuelled cars in satisfying the exhaust gas requirements (whilst of course not emitting greater quantities of the regulated substances than petrol-fuelled cars, e.g. along the lines of a principle similar to the EEV levels for heavy vehicles)?

Does it intend to regulate the quantity of these substances permitted in petrol?

Does it intend to regulate the quantity of these substances permitted in petrol?

Under the North American Free Trade Agreement Ethyl Corporation in the United States was enabled to sue the Canadian government for $350 million for banning the dangerous and toxic substance MMT from gasoline.