On 22 April 2013, Official Opposition Environment critic Megan Leslie issued a statement claiming that the federal government's recent changes to "fish habitat protection, the Navigable Waters Protection Act and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act", along with gutting existing laws and making cuts to science and research, "will be disastrous, not only for the environment, but also for Canadians’ health and economic prosperity."  On 26 September 2012, Leslie argued that with the changes to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act that came into effect 6 July 2012, "seismic testing, dams, wind farms and power plants" no longer required any federal environmental assessment. She also claimed that because the CEAA 2012—which she claimed was rushed through Parliament—dismantled the CEAA 1995, the Oshawa ethanol plant project would no longer have a full federal environmental assessment.  Mr. Peter Kent (Minister of the Environment) explained that the CEAA 2012 "provides for the Government of Canada and the Environmental Assessment Agency to focus on the large and most significant projects that are being proposed across the country." The 2,000 to 3,000-plus smaller screenings that were in effect under CEAA 1995 became the "responsibility of lower levels of government but are still subject to the same strict federal environmental laws."  Anne Minh-Thu Quach, MP for Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC, argued that the mammoth budget bill dismantled 50 years of environmental protection without consulting Canadians about the "colossal changes they are making to environmental assessments." She claimed that the federal government is entering into "limited consultations, by invitation only, months after the damage was done." 
There was high agreement and much evidence that stabilization could be achieved by 2050 using currently available technologies, provided appropriate and effective incentives were put in place for their development, acquisition, deployment and diffusion, and that barriers were removed.  For stabilization at lower levels the IPCC agreed that improvements of carbon intensity need to be made much faster than has been the case in the past, and that there would be a greater need for efficient public and private research, development and demonstration efforts and investment in new technologies during the next few decades.  The IPCC points out that government funding in real absolute terms for most energy research programmes has been flat or declining for nearly 20 years, and is now about half the 1980 level.  Delays in cutting emissions would lead to higher stabilization levels and increase the risk of more severe climate change impacts, as more of the current high-emission technologies would have been deployed. 
The Medical Services Advisory Committee (MSAC) is an independent non-statutory committee established by the Australian Government Minister for Health in 1998.
MSAC appraises new medical services proposed for public funding, and provides advice to Government on whether a new medical service should be publicly funded (and if so, its circumstances) on an assessment of its comparative safety, clinical effectiveness,cost-effectiveness, and total cost, using the best available evidence. Amendments and reviews of existing services funded on the Medical Benefits Schedule (MBS) or other programmes (for example, blood products or screening programmes) are also considered by MSAC. Listen