Chuck Strahl

[Infrastructure, October 26th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times in this House, we are going to be very fair and reasonable on the deadline. In fact, one of the earlier requests from Quebec dealt with the deadline that they put in place, the December 31 deadline. They have asked for that to be extended, and I have agreed. That should be extended.

We will continue to be fair and reasonable. That is why we are continuing to scope the projects, we are reinvesting excess funds from other projects, and in fact, I continue to sign off on Preco projects in the province of Quebec. I signed off on two or three again this week.

[Air Canada, October 26th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the law is in place. The Air Canada Public Participation Act is in place. Air Canada must adhere to the law. I met with officials at Air Canada and they told me that they would absolutely adhere to the law. We will hold them to that and I expect parties on all sides of the House will be watching.

However, Air Canada will adhere to the law and we will make sure of it.

[Air Canada, October 26th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, of course Air Canada will respect the law. We have the Air Canada Public Participation Act. We have made it clear that it must adhere to the law and it has made it clear that it will do so. That is the expectation and we will hold Air Canada to it.

[Transportation, October 21st, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, of course, things such as airport rents are important. After we took office, we reduced the rents for airports by half. They have been cut in half from what they were up to 2005. So there are some savings there.

Last night, I was speaking to the Senate committee. It is starting a study on the whole airline industry, as well. I have encouraged its members to look at not only things such as airport rents but also the governance structure of the airport authorities themselves and other issues. It is a pretty wide-open study, but I think right now we are in that mode where it is time to re-examine the policies for Canada. We want it to be very competitive.

[Transportation, October 21st, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, we were quite clear yesterday. I read from the agreement that was signed between the Government of Quebec and the Government of Canada. It was a previous government but it was signed by the prime minister, to agree to a certain dollar figure on phase one. I can tell the hon. member that phase two would not have even happened if the hon. member down here, the member from Quebec, the regional development minister, had not gone to bat, because he gets no help from the members over there. He has to do it all himself.

[Quebec Bridge, October 21st, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, it is not our bridge, but we continue to work with CN. All railways and all bridges have to be safe. They are inspected regularly and repairs that are necessary to ensure they are maintained in a safe manner are always in place.

As far as the future of bridges is concerned, whether it is the bridges in and around Montreal, the highway bridges, other bridges throughout Quebec and across Canada, often they are part of plans on which we work together with the provinces to enhance the repairs and rehabilitation. However, these bridges are always safe and that is never in dispute.

[Quebec Bridge, October 21st, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, CN is responsible for the bridges on which it runs. We continue to work with the provinces and with proponents on infrastructure projects right across Canada.

However, I think I understand the problem when it comes to infrastructure and the Bloc members. The problem is we are working with a program called building Canada and whenever we do that, they are always against it.

[Transportation, October 20th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, it is in black and white. I have a copy of the agreement between the Governments of Canada and Quebec. It states that the respective contribution to the project of Canada and Quebec will be 50% of eligible expenses, up to $262 million each, for the first phase of the project.

In fact, we not only committed to this and paid this; we have also funded 50% of phase two of the project. We have not only met the terms of the agreement; we have exceeded them.

[Infrastructure, October 19th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, when the provinces approached us about the Preco project, they had put forward a December 31 deadline. We did not know why that was necessary. We have always been in favour of the March 31 deadline but Quebec wanted an earlier one. Now it wants to delay it further. We want to be fair and reasonable.

There is an important question that we are asking ourselves on this side of the House. With all of these projects that the members of the Bloc Québécois are so concerned about, why did they vote against all of them when we brought them forward? I do not understand it.

We want to do good things in Quebec just like everywhere else in Canada.

[Infrastructure, October 19th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, we continue to consult with the provinces and municipalities about the status of infrastructure projects across the country. There is a lot of good news out there. Nova Scotia said that 98% of its projects were on course. British Columbia said that almost 100% were on course and on budget. Alberta is about the same. Saskatchewan said that if the good weather continues it should get them all done as well.

Of course we are going to be fair and reasonable. We are working with the Province of Quebec as well to ensure that we get all the data in place so that we can be fair and reasonable on any dates and other adjustments that we can make to the infrastructure programs.