Finance Committee on June 4th, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Thank you, Minister, and Mrs. DeBellefeuille.

Time is up.

We'll continue now with Mr. Kelly for five minutes.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Crowfoot, AB]

Thank you.

Thank you, Minister.

I, too, have questions about the affordability and viability of this project. I understand that there is no route and there is not an actual estimate yet. There are some working assumptions and working numbers. I understand your government's working number is a range of $60 billion to $90 billion. These things, on average, exceed these kinds of numbers by generally, I think, about 45% across the world with similar projects, so let's say the real range is maybe up to $130 billion. Let's hope it's not higher than that.

Within these working numbers, have you given thought as to what the ticket price would have to be to cover the debt, repay the principal and cover the operating expenses?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Madame DeBellefeuille just expressed the same concern. Obviously, we will choose an operating model. I had an interesting conversation with my Spanish counterpart, and his recommendation is to make those fees as fair and as accessible as possible. Obviously, that's what we'll do.

I will say this: We continue to put in the work and do the analysis. Unfortunately, your leader did not. He came out against this project, made all kinds of assumptions—just as you just did—and expressed opposition to this very popular project, all while advocating for other pieces of infrastructure that he cannot possibly know the cost of either, like energy infrastructure.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Crowfoot, AB]

If I may, then—

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

I'm very puzzled by the policies of the Conservative Party. When it comes to this project, you have no idea what some infrastructure costs, but you demand it. You have no idea what some other infrastructure costs, and you reject it. I don't get that approach at all.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Crowfoot, AB]

You had your opening statement to make those kinds of comments.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

I get to answer your questions, though.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Crowfoot, AB]

No, you didn't answer my question. The only part of the answer that I heard was that you want to keep it reasonable, which is, of course, what Canadians would expect. I'm not making any assumptions that are not either—

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Your leader does. That's the point.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Crowfoot, AB]

This is my time. I'm going to ask a question. You can answer it.

If you are at, say, $90 billion—and that's a reasonable starting point, as it's within the range of your government's statements already—the cost, at the rates that you borrow on $90 billion, would be, let's call it, $144 billion.... I'm sorry. If you had a ticket price, that would be $3.6 billion. If you had a ridership of 12 million per year, which is what McGill University thinks you'll have, that would be about $300 per ticket. Is that a fair assumption?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

No.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Crowfoot, AB]

Okay. How would you get to a lower ticket price if that's your ridership and that's your purchase number?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

We will work to keep fares as low as possible. This system, like European and Asian systems—

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Crowfoot, AB]

How low would the cost of the project have to be in order to see cost recovery, pay the principal and pay the debt? How low would you have to keep the cost to keep the ticket price reasonable?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

I appreciate the skepticism, but permit me to be skeptical as well. You've already decided you're against this project. I think that Canadians will wake up more and more, and understand that the Conservative Party would end the dream of high-speed rail in Canada.

I don't go into such things with these preconceptions. We'll continue doing the analysis as the engineering progresses, as decisions are made and as we are able to invest, having a clearer picture. We will give, transparently, that information to Canadians as it becomes available.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Crowfoot, AB]

Okay. Thank you.

The train system you currently run has a 50% on-time rate. It receives a two-dollar subsidy for every dollar it collects in fares. Earlier, my colleague asked about bonuses at Alto.

Can you tell me if that is meeting a performance metric, and have bonuses been paid on that performance?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

As soon as I became transport minister, or very shortly thereafter, I expressed to the board and, eventually, management of Via Rail that I was not satisfied with their performance. I do understand that some performance issues are beyond their control, inasmuch as they share, with cargo railways, some of their alignment in the corridor. I understand that, in some cases, they're using extremely outdated equipment. I would note that we are procuring new equipment and new rolling stock for Via Rail outside the corridor, as we have inside the corridor. I've asked them to take a long look at these performance issues. We want people on Via Rail. It's an essential service.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Thank you, Minister. That concludes the time that we have.

Thank you, Mr. Kelly.

We'll continue now with Dr. Martin for five minutes.

[Danielle Martin, Liberal, University—Rosedale, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for appearing before the committee this afternoon.

I would like to ask you a few more questions about the data we wish to access on behalf of the Government of Canada.

Can you help us understand a bit more the kinds of data we need, as a government, in order to do comprehensive regional planning for growth in Canadians' transportation needs? I come from a region where a lot of people come and go, so we need to understand what the future looks like. In order to understand that, we need to have data.

Talk to me a little more about what that looks like.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

That's a very important question.

Thank you for your efforts to speak French. It's nice to see a new colleague speaking the language of Molière.

Business development and economic development follow transport development. What you see, for example, at Pearson is a multimodal complex that employs tens of thousands of people. We want to be able to project. It will always be at the heart of the Canadian economy. It will always be at the heart of our transportation system—rail, hopefully high-speed at some point as well, but cargo, air and other modes. Trucking is obviously an essential ingredient as well. What this performance data at Pearson will give us is a good picture of growth trends, of passenger growth.

We are seeing enormous interest from new markets in serving Pearson, in serving Toronto, from other airlines, from other national carriers and so on. This will only grow, and we want to understand and calibrate our assumptions against those of the airport authority so that we can do all of this planning and ensure that opportunity and growth will always be there for the people of, let's call it, Mississauga, but also obviously Peel and York regions.

[Danielle Martin, Liberal, University—Rosedale, ON]

Just building on that, I think about that surrounding infrastructure. I'm a big user of the UP Express that takes me to Pearson from very close to my home in downtown Toronto. Understanding growth then yields other information about the surrounding infrastructure that's required to serve an airport the size of Pearson.

What kind of data do we need to be able to access, and what would the provisions in Bill C-30 enable us to understand about those future needs in the surrounding infrastructure?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

There are basic financial indicators, financial statements and others, but the underlying assumptions and the underlying data—passenger movements, cargo movements, assumptions around required capital spending, debt load—all help us to not only properly value that asset but also integrate that into our planning.

It's interesting that you mention UP Express. Highways will always play a role in the Canadian transportation system, but for those who live in dense urban areas, I think the goal should always be to leave your home, start with public transit and end with public transit. It's taking that very important airport link or public transit to that airport link, getting on a plane, getting on a train and going where you want to go. Then hopefully at the other end, it's unfolding that in the same way and getting back home with your suitcase. Only having taken public transit should be our objective. I think it's something that can be realized in the GTA and all over the country in dense urban areas.

[Danielle Martin, Liberal, University—Rosedale, ON]

Maybe this is a longer conversation, but I'd be interested to know if there are categories of data or information that you feel are particularly important or where, perhaps, the excellent relationship-based voluntary compliance universe has been less effective—in order to understand why the provisions in this bill are so important.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Unfortunately, you will have to answer that another time because that concludes the time that we have. You have my apologies, Minister McKinnon.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

We're at the outset of this process. It's very early, and those things will become evident as we go on.