Government Operations Committee on May 28th, 2009

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

I want to go back to the question about federal buildings.

Each time we come across asbestos that has not been used properly, and we know that it has not been used safely, we remove it. If Mr. Martin wants to launch other debates or call me names, let him go ahead. I will reiterate that the Government of Canada's policy is to move towards controlled use of chrysotile, that is the issue. Let's not mix things up.

Saying that there is asbestos everywhere and that we are being poisoned by it is rhetoric. That is not the issue, Mr. Chairman, and so I am answering the question.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Sir, there's a multi-billion-dollar liability—

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

If we find asbestos in federal buildings and we see it, because it has been sprayed and not used properly, we remove it, that's all.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

—in your buildings alone.

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

There are funds available for that.

[Pat Martin, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

There's a multi-billion-dollar liability in your buildings alone that I don't believe you have budgeted for to make these buildings safe again. No human being should be exposed to a single fibre of asbestos ever, and our buildings are littered with them.

The threshold that Health Canada recognizes, of 0.1 fibre per cubic centimetre, doesn't even apply on Parliament Hill because we're a labour-code-free zone. Part III of the Canada Labour Code was never given royal assent, so it doesn't apply to these buildings. We have no confidence that we're not exposed to 10 parts per cubic centimetre.

You have to get this asbestos out of these buildings. It's your job, even though you represent the asbestos mines in Quebec. Your bias shouldn't put public servants at risk, or myself and my staff. Your prejudice, your boosterism of the asbestos industry, is putting us at risk.

[The Chair, Liberal, Derek Lee]

Mr. Martin, this is your time, and we have free speech, but the minister does represent the government here today. He's not here as an individual member of Parliament.

In any event, Mr. Minister, the time has expired, but I'll give you a brief window to reply.

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

I will be brief, Mr. Martin's comment leads me to believe that he did not want to get involved in a debate on asbestos. I agree with him, and I am not here for that.

However, for the past two or three minutes, a number of unacceptable things have been thrown at me. So I will answer the question. Let's stop the rhetoric, enough is enough. In the West Block alone, eight air quality tests are conducted each day, so that is enough.

[The Chair, Liberal, Derek Lee]

Thank you, Mr. Martin.

Now to Ms. Hall Findlay. We're back into five-minute rounds. We recognize the minister's time is limited. Maybe we can squeeze out two five-minute rounds. I don't know.

Ms. Hall Findlay, over to you.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am going to try to share my time with my colleague, even if I only have five minutes.

My question deals with central funds allocated by Treasury Board, more specifically vote 35. Public Works and Government Services Canada has an allocation of $100 million to fund infrastructure projects linked to construction, acquisition and maintenance, to undertake work that will support federal investments in infrastructure for the restoration and improvement of accessibility of federally-owned buildings, repairs to federal bridges, and the development of a plan for the Manège militaire in Quebec City.

Despite considerable hesitation surrounding the budget, we supported vote 35, only because we knew that it was necessary to stimulate the economy immediately. We hear all the time that no money has been injected into the economy. There have been announcements and allocations, but no money.

Minister, can you tell us what has been undertaken with this $100 million? Where is the money starting to be spent? What jobs have resulted from that? Don't tell me about announcements or allocations, tell me what is being done now, where, and how many jobs that has created.

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Earlier on, we discussed the restoration of federal buildings and the project to improve accessibility. Projects are underway throughout Canada. Of course, I cannot provide you with exact amounts that have been committed, because a report will be tabled. We will see that in due time. I am telling you that candidly.

However, I can tell you that there are a number of projects. For example, there are seven projects in Newfoundland and Labrador. Sixteen are underway in Prince Edward Island, 49 in Nova Scotia, 75 in New Brunswick, 326 in Quebec, 482 in Ontario, 4 in Manitoba, 5 in Alberta, 3 in Saskatchewan, 76 in British Columbia, and 12 in the Northwest Territories. That is why we needed $100 million under vote 35. Work is currently underway throughout Canada. Once the report has been tabled, I will be more than happy to use the figures to show you more.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you. But there again, those are projects and announcements.

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

I am not talking about announcements...

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

We want to know what jobs have been created...

in addition to what would otherwise have been. That was the whole reason for our supporting vote 35. I will leave it at that.

I have a host of other questions to ask, but I will give the rest of my time to my colleague.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Minister.

I want to go very quickly back to the well-known issue of relocation. I think that you may not have had time to look at the entire issue. Later on, we will raise it with your officials.

About two and a half years ago, the Standing Committee on Public Accounts studied the issue. I had asked what was in the submission. Much to my surprise, I received a huge quantity of documents. I was not surprised at receiving them, your department had said it would provide them. I received the documents, and they were voluminous. We must consider the short amount of time your department has to study the submission and the time that will be left over for the winner of the submission to put the process in place.

Did you know that there are more than 20,000 issues to be dealt with in this contract? It's impossible.

If you continue, without an extension or without delaying the process, there will only be one bidder, the same one that had bid when some of the issues were tainted, a few years back, that had been decried at the Standing Committee on Public Accounts. You will recall talk of potential bribes and malappropriations. That is why the committee suggested not automatically renewing the contract, and your department, correctly, had accepted to review the tender offer. Unfortunately, your department showed up at the last minute, with little time left, which runs counter to what the Standing Committee on Public Accounts had recommended. There will not be any other bidders, and the same bidder will again be privileged.

I also wanted to talk about federal buildings on the Quebec side of the national capital region. Just over two years ago, your predecessor and one of your colleagues made an announcement. They called for tenders. For some vague reason, the process was cancelled. It was resumed with a wait-and-see attitude. Invitations to tender went out, it was open. We still do not know where the project is at. However, one thing is clear. There is not even one more Government of Canada job on the Quebec side of the river.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

We will discuss that with your officials, Mr. Minister. I understand that you have to leave us; that is too bad.

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Proulx.

A relocation process is currently underway. Our officials are currently negotiating with industry. There is no red flag. Things are unfolding as planned. I don't think that saying anything more and commenting on hypotheses is appropriate. Let's let the situation unfold. There are no red flags at present. We are confident it will work. As you pointed out, there were some irregularities during the first process. We took actions so that would not recur, but it is a complex file. Huge client departments are involved. We have taken steps to ensure the file is dealt with properly.

Having said that, let's go back to the building in Gatineau you were talking about. Indeed, we had to start the process over. There were two. First of all, the bids did not respect regulations. There is not a lack of good will on the part of the government. So we started over in February. It ended in the month of March. Requests for qualifications will be announced shortly. That is how we want to proceed. Once these sites have been completed, we will have virtually reached the ratio we had committed to, the famous 75:25. That will be good news.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

You don't have the right ratio. You were talking about physical space, whereas we are talking about jobs.

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

No, you are talking about buildings.

[The Chair, Liberal, Derek Lee]

Thank you.

[Marcel Proulx, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

That's very different. Warehouses are measured in square feet, but are not jobs.

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

You asked me about buildings so I'm talking to you about buildings.

[The Chair, Liberal, Derek Lee]

Thank you.

Mr. Roy, you have five minutes.

After that it will be Mr. Brown's turn.

[Jean-Yves Roy, Bloc, Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Minister, are you leaving or staying with us?

[Christian Paradis, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

I have to leave at noon.

[Jean-Yves Roy, Bloc, Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

In any case—