I thank Mr. Thériault for his comment, Mr. Chair. I assume he wasn't being flippant, because this is serious. Not a month goes by when there isn't a serious accident or collision on the highway. A long-time friend of mine actually died on that highway. This is very serious.
Until we have an alternative that safely connects us to the rest of Quebec, the Alto project will be a safe way for people to get to Montreal—in 40 minutes, no less. People will be able to get to the provincial or national capital in two hours instead of five hours by car or on Via Rail.
Often, Via Rail doesn't own the tracks. You're lucky if you make it to Quebec City in five hours. I know quite a few people who were delayed by three or four hours, sometimes by as much as eight hours. As everyone will recall last summer, an incident involving freight trains made headlines across Quebec when Via Rail passengers were stranded on a train between Montreal and Quebec City, having to spend the night on board. That illustrates how important this project is and how important it is not to waste time if we want to have a serious discussion on the matter.
Speaking of wasting time, I would note that when Mr. Barrett spoke to his motion, he said he had written to the Ethics Commissioner in the wake of media reports.
I wouldn't want to speculate on what the Ethics Commissioner will tell the committee, but if memory serves me correctly, the commissioner did state in a letter that the individual in question, the Minister of Finance and National Revenue, took the necessary measures and did what he was supposed to, and that there wasn't a conflict of interest. The question that comes to mind, then, is why we are considering this motion if everything was done according to both the letter and spirit of the Conflict of Interest Act.
I won't dwell on that point, because I want us to get on with this quickly. I hope my fellow members are open to that. I move that the meeting be adjourned.