Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Yes, the Alto project is problematic because there are many factors that haven't been taken into account. The process was handled very carelessly by granting powers to a company that is using them against farmers.
In Quebec, the proposed route could affect more than 500 agricultural properties. To navigate a curve, a train will have to make an 11-kilometre detour. This makes it impossible to maintain flexibility in the use of farmland. Tunnels or bridges can't be built every time there's a need for them, especially not to allow farm machinery to pass through.
Given the way Alto is handling this project, we're likely to create a social crisis. I believe that as a committee, we have a responsibility to give a voice to those who currently do not have one. The consultations were botched. They were held outside of farming communities, where people could have had an impact. In addition, they were rushed through, essentially during the holiday season, before people had even heard about the project.
The Bloc Québécois had set four minimum conditions for supporting the project because, obviously, the idea of a high-speed train appeals to everyone. We're all captivated by the dream. In an ideal world, I'd even have one right at home in Abitibi‑Témiscamingue, but I think I'm getting a little carried away. What we're asking for is genuine social licence. That's far from guaranteed. No effort is being made in that direction.
We're also asking for an independent financial assessment. Again, there are no valid figures. All high-speed rail projects worldwide have exceeded their budget by at least 50%. So it is not far-fetched to think that $90 billion could rise to $150 billion or $200 billion. I believe it is also our committee's responsibility to learn more about these aspects of the project's financial assessment.
We're also calling for the removal of the violations of the Expropriation Act stemming from Bill C‑15, which makes it possible to force people to give up their farmland. Farmers were promised $1,500. If they refuse, a drone will fly over their land. Regardless, Alto will still get its way, because the law is on its side.
Finally, we're calling for real public consultations. Without them, I think it goes without saying that this project will not be viable. As a committee, we have a responsibility, because this is becoming a social crisis and creating significant distress among farmers.
Many of them made their voices heard on Parliament Hill last Wednesday, from both Quebec and Ontario. We have a responsibility to listen to them. There is psychological distress. This project will have a major impact on the mental health of these farmers. When you've been working the land for generations and, overnight, you're told that a train is going to cut right through it, you can't imagine ever having access to the other side of your land again. The train doesn't have the flexibility to yield the right of way. If there's a barn on the property, the barn will be gone.
For months, people and municipalities have been opposing the project. There are landowners who are affected and who are voicing their concerns. We have a responsibility to hear them as soon as possible.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.