Bill C-279 (Historical)

VIA Rail Commercialization Act

An Act respecting the commercialization of VIA Rail Canada Inc.

This bill is from the 37th Parliament, 1st session, which ended in September 2002.

Sponsor

Jim Gouk  Canadian Alliance

Introduced as a private member’s bill. (These don’t often become law.)

Status

Outside the Order of Precedence (a private member's bill that hasn't yet won the draw that determines which private member's bills can be debated), as of Feb. 26, 2001
(This bill did not become law.)

Similar bills

C-203 (38th Parliament, 1st session) VIA Rail Commercialization Act
C-255 (37th Parliament, 3rd session) VIA Rail Commercialization Act
C-255 (37th Parliament, 2nd session) VIA Rail Commercialization Act

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Bill numbers are reused for different bills each new session. Perhaps you were looking for one of these other C-279s:

C-279 (2022) An Act to amend the Criminal Code (criminal organizations)
C-279 (2021) An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act (voting age)
C-279 (2016) An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act (length of election period)
C-279 (2013) An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code (gender identity)
C-279 (2011) An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code (gender identity)
C-279 (2009) An Act to amend the Employment Insurance Act (amounts not included in earnings)

Via Rail Commercialization ActRoutine Proceedings

February 26th, 2001 / 3:05 p.m.


See context

Canadian Alliance

Jim Gouk Canadian Alliance Kootenay—Boundary—Okanagan, BC

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-279, an act respecting the commercialization of VIA Rail Canada Inc.

Mr. Speaker, I am reintroducing this bill which I had introduced in the previous parliament. It deals with several problems with VIA Rail, the biggest one being the use of taxpayer money.

VIA Rail has a subsidy of $500,000 a day 365 days of the year and had a recent injection of $400 million in taxpayer money to keep it going.

It competes with the private sector. The private sector is able to operate this company. Why should taxpayer money continue? The bill will see an end to that taxpayer subsidy and put it in the hands of the private sector, which will run it without cost to the taxpayers.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed)