Finance Committee on Feb. 12th, 2009

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

It can't come out of the Building Canada Fund because that requires the Quebec government to nominate it.

We'll have to look at the various program authorities in other initiatives to see where it will come from. I didn't think the people of Shannon should have to wait. As a former Minister of the Environment, I place a huge priority on clean water. The cabinet made a decision to provide support outside of Building Canada for that. It will come from the consolidated revenue fund.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

In order not to penalize other municipalities, projects being funded by the infrastructure fund for Quebec should not be taken from the same envelope. You were telling me that they receive separate funding.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

It's certainly separate from Building Canada, because we can't fund it under Building Canada. I think it requires the Quebec government to nominate a project, so it's not eligible in Quebec. I would ask that the CRF write a cheque.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

You talked about an framework agreement, the Canada-Quebec framework agreement for infrastructure, that was signed in September 2008. To date, no project has actually started because a specific agreement must be signed by Quebec and Ottawa, specifying which projects should be subsidized.

The Government of Quebec is intent on establishing its own priorities and maintaining control over the master plan. I think you mentioned this. Can you give us the reassurance that the Province of Quebec will continue to be able to decide on the projects it wishes to implement and that requests made by the municipalities shall continue to be put to the Government of Quebec?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Since my appointment as Minister at the end of October, there was an election in the province of Quebec. Since then, I've not had the opportunity to meet with Minister Jérôme-Forget, who is responsible for major infrastructure projects. However, I did meet with her in Montreal at the beginning of January. We were very close to reaching an agreement on several projects. She was very clear and talked about Quebec's strategy for infrastructure, which I respect. I also conveyed to her the priorities set by my colleagues in the House of Commons, and we are very close to making a major announcement. I respect the provincial government's area of jurisdiction.We are also working very hard on small projects, with Minister Normandeau and his team.

I should point out that I myself am a former provincial minister, and that I respect provincial areas of jurisdiction. That is how I intend to work.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

I have a question with respect to VIA Rail. The most recently tabled budget includes an increase of $407 million to optimize VIA Rail's efficiency, particularly in the Montreal-Toronto-Windsor corridor. Improvements to punctuality, speed, etc. are being planned.

What portion of that amount would be set aside for the Quebec segment? Were funds from that envelope also be available for the Montreal-Quebec corridor?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Of course.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

That will not be restricted to—

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

It will not be restricted to the Montreal-Quebec corridor exclusively, but will also be applied to Montreal-Toronto corridor. The proposal was made by VIA Rail. As a minister, I would be pleased to ask VIA Rail to organize a three-way briefing session, if you would like one.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

He did not answer my question concerning the part of the $407 million that will be allocated to...

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I do not have the percentage.

[Jean-Yves Laforest, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

I assume that it is prorated according to the number of kilometres.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I do not have that piece of information, but VIA Rail will be making the proposal regarding the Quebec and Windsor corridor. The majority of the land is located in Ontario, but this matters for Montrealers who are travelling to Toronto.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you, Mr. Laforest.

Mr. Mulcair.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In his opening remarks, the minister told us that according to someone else, “the Navigable Waters Act was the biggest job killer, and we agreed.”

Could he tell us exactly what it is in the Navigable Waters Protection Act that kills job?

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I think all provinces and territories and a significant number of municipalities told us it required a significant amount of paperwork that could delay projects anywhere from nine to 17 months. The Standing Committee on Transport did a significant study of this issue in the last Parliament. I was impressed when I heard the concern that was expressed by premiers and infrastructure proponents. I looked at the work the standing committee had done. I was impressed by the four-party consensus that they'd developed on changes. The proposals we've come forward with respond to all of the requests that the standing committee--

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Can the minister tell us, because he just mentioned municipalities, if a mayor wants to backfill a precious wetland, why does it matter that the project is under $10 million or over $10 million? Isn't it the value of the ecosystem...? As a former environment minister--both of us--doesn't he look first at the value of the ecosystem, not the value of the project? If you're destroying an ecosystem with something worth $11 million, is that worse than destroying it with something worth $9 million? Why have this artificial limit they want to bring in on the value of projects? He made the same mistake in his introductory remarks, talking about a stretch of road that costs so much, as if the cost of the project had anything to do with the value of the wetland or the ecosystem you're trying to protect. What's the relation between the cost of the project and what has to be protected? There is none.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Let me correct the record. When I talked about a 300 kilometre stretch of highway, I talked about there obviously being a need for substantial first nations consultation if it was going through a first nations territory, as opposed to a $1 million upgrade or a $25,000 repaving of a road.

Perhaps I could respond to that, because I think you'll be pleased. If you want to backfill a wetland, that will not be allowed under any of the proposals we bring forward. So you'll be very pleased.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

That's not true.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

We haven't brought the proposal forward.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

It was clearly indicated--you know and we know, because of the documents that were leaked, and no one in your government has tried to deny it--that you have a plan to get rid of environmental assessments, and the triggering mechanism is going to be the value of the project, not the value of the ecosystem. You know that.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

You'll be very pleased, Mr. Mulcair. There was a document, apparently, that made its way into the public domain that talked about parliamentary legislative changes to the federal Environmental Assessment Act, and it used the $10 million figure. In fact, the government has no plans to come forward with legislation on environmental assessments. We can use existing authorities. Wetlands are something that we will not be able to get around. The South Fraser Perimeter Road in British Columbia went through a bog. Obviously there will have to be a full federal EA for a project like that.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

The reason you're here today is because in the budget there's a clear reference to a new rule-making power. That's legislation, even if it's delegated legislation.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

That's about navigable waters, not environmental assessment.

[Thomas Mulcair, NDP, Outremont, QC]

Under the Navigable Waters Protection Act right now, the only thing that holds back

but despite the wishes of certain municipal and provincial elected officials, they simply do not have the ability to carry out environmental assessments. Thank God for the Navigable Waters Protection Act. Thank God there is a Federal Department of the Environment here in Ottawa that is doing its work to protect the environment.

I will give you the opportunity to say that your government has no intention of streamlining or reducing, under the new provisions and regulations, the measures to protect the environment, as provided by federal legislation. If, today, you give us the guarantee that there is absolutely no intent on the part of the federal government to reduce environmental protection, I will be the first to congratulate you. Please go ahead.