Government Operations Committee on July 29th, 2026

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Welcome, everyone, to meeting number 48 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates, also known, of course, as the mighty OGGO.

Before we start, I want to thank members for their interest in the 106(4) meeting today, mostly because I've had some OGGO withdrawal over the last couple of months.

We are meeting today pursuant to a request under Standing Order 106(4) to discuss a study on the situation of the Gordie Howe bridge.

Mr. Albas, I see your hand is up. We will start making up the speaking order.

Please go ahead, Mr. Albas.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It's regrettable that we have to be here today, because I know there are many different events that different members could be at. Events aside, this is an issue of national prominence, and I hope that today's committee proceedings give it its due.

It is incredibly important for us as parliamentarians to have factual information. Obviously, if a minister makes a misrepresentation in the House of Commons, there are rules that allow for us to immediately challenge it and for the Speaker to ask that minister or even a prime minister to come into order. In the House of Commons, it's important for us to have accurate information so we can make good decisions on behalf of our constituents.

When it comes to the Gordie Howe bridge, I welcome the new bridge. This is something the Harper government worked very hard to secure a strong deal on that worked both for Canadians and for the other side. It was decided, because of the politics at the time, to make it so Canadians would fund the bridge, but this was no small undertaking. Since then, Canadian workers have worked very hard to fulfill that end of the promise and to build a great bridge that we can use to the benefit of our economy.

It troubles me that the Prime Minister, in his statement to the press at the Stampede, regardless of what he was wearing, whether it was a cowboy hat or otherwise.... He said what was in the deal and gave specific details of what was in the particular agreement that he had come to with the Trump administration. Then, at a second press conference of his on July 17, he reiterated those same points, and what we found out from the media was that was not the case at all.

Some Liberal members took umbrage with the fact that Conservatives were pointing to these media reports, and they said that we were spreading misinformation. That turned out to be untrue. It turns out that the Prime Minister made statements that directly contradicted what was in the agreement, and he did so multiple times.

Unfortunately, the rules of the House do not apply at the Stampede, and they do not apply at a prime minister's press conference, but this is a democracy, and our rules do apply in this chamber. It's important for the opposition and for Liberal members themselves to hold the government to account to make sure that Canadians are being given factual information so that we can make good decisions.

The fact that these statements were contradictory and that Minister Robertson, the minister responsible for infrastructure, told media that he will not be releasing the fiscal impacts of this side deal arrangement with the Trump administration on revenue raises a whole host of questions.

I believe that, firstly, we need to make sure we have proper transparency. Holding a hearing is a first step towards that. Having the Parliamentary Budget Officer model the financial impacts the side agreement will ultimately have on the Canadian taxpayer, who has funded....

I have to give the Canadian taxpayer full credit. We all collectively felt this was an asset that we needed to have. To see the Prime Minister capitulate to the American side and then to see him try to give a false view of it, whether it was from a lack of personal knowledge—I don't think we can say that of someone of his position and background—or, worse than that, whether it was a plan by the Prime Minister to convey incorrect information on purpose.... To me that's unfathomable as well. I believe the highest office in our country deserves to have the highest standards, and I think we as parliamentarians should demand better of our officials.

Canadian taxpayers have paid lots of money for this. We all know that there are challenges in dealing with the American administration, but Canadians—the taxpayers—are due an explanation as to why this agreement was ratified, why the Prime Minister gave contradicting statements and why we only found out through the media. Lastly, we need more transparency, including with financial modelling.

As we've heard from professional economists from across the sphere.... There's a National Post story this week that says there are so many announcements and so many impacts to the fiscal framework with zero transparency, and even the Parliamentary Budget Officer is having difficulty reconciling what the government says in announcements with what actually happens. That's incredibly disheartening for me as a parliamentarian, because I care about this place. I believe we can make good decisions if we have the right information.

I hope that all members will be supportive of the following motion. I move:

Given that the Prime Minister capitulated to American demands regarding Gordie Howe International Bridge toll revenues and subsequently provided inaccurate information to Canadians about the deal, and given that many serious questions remain about the impact of the deal on Canadian taxpayers and businesses, the committee:

a. order the Department of Housing, Communities and Infrastructure to produce all drafts of the “Proposed Agreement in Principle” for the new deal related to the Gordie Howe International Bridge within two weeks of the adoption of this motion;

b. send a request to the Parliamentary Budget Officer to conduct a net present value analysis of the Gordie Howe International Bridge;

c. conduct a study of no fewer than five meetings into this matter, provided that the committee invite the following witnesses to testify separately for two hours each:

a. Dominic LeBlanc, Minister responsible for Canada-U.S. Trade,

b. Gregor Robertson, Minister of Infrastructure,

c. François-Philippe Champagne, Minister of Finance, and

d. officials from the Windsor-Detroit Bridge Authority; and

d. in the interim, report to the House that it calls upon the Prime Minister to incorporate transparency, accuracy, openness and honesty in all public communications regarding the Canada-U.S. relationship to ensure that Canadians have the reliable information they need to navigate the real-world impacts of this strained relationship.

I hope this committee will treat this issue with as much seriousness as it deserves and that it will not simply be dismissed. These are basic questions of transparency, something that Canadians should always expect of their government and of their parliamentarians.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you.

Foreseeing a motion, I did make a speaking order. Just so everyone knows, I have Ms. Lantsman, Mr. Lewis, Madame Gaudreau, Mr. Gill, Mr. Danko, Ms. Desrochers, Ms. Rochefort, Mr. Gasparro and Ms. McPherson.

[Marie-France Lalonde, Liberal, Orléans, ON]

You forgot Madame Lalonde. I sent my name to Natalie.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Okay. We will add you.

We'll start with Ms. Lantsman.

You have the floor.

[John-Paul Danko, Liberal, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON]

Mr. Chair, can I request that we suspend for a minute? We haven't had this provided in advance, and we'd like an opportunity to have a quick discussion before we proceed with the rest of the meeting.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Sure.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

We're back.

We'll start with Ms. Lantsman, please.

Welcome to OGGO.

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Thank you very much. This is exactly the right opportunity to be in Parliament. It's exactly what Parliament is for. I appreciate being a part of this committee. It is nice to see some colleagues in person, although I know there are other important things going on in constituencies, so it's a shame we have to be here.

Look, on this issue, there have been many questions swirling for the last number of weeks about a multitude of stories that have been told on the same topic. That's the Gordie Howe bridge. We'll go back a second: Canada built that bridge. It was our idea. It was our initiative. All of the risk was on the backs of Canadians. It was our tax dollars that built it. We paid 100% of the almost $6.5-billion cost of that bridge.

We are expected—and were expected by the deal signed by former prime minister Harper—to get 100% of the revenue. We've learned from the multitude of stories that the Prime Minister is giving 50% of the toll revenue to Washington. That's not exactly what he told us when he was asked the question in Calgary. He said, “We get the revenues”, implying that toll revenues would not be split until the debt of the entire bridge—that's $6.5 billion of taxpayer money—was paid.

We now know that was false. I think Canadians have a number of questions around why that is. We've learned that Canada will now split the revenues fifty-fifty, despite being the only country that put $6.5 billion in. If that is not the case, then I'm sure members of the committee will provide all of the documentation to this committee about all of the details of the deal, to make that clear to Canadians. At the end of the day, we're here on behalf of constituents and Canadians from all our different regions to get to the bottom of this and get to the answers.

The Prime Minister was supposed to be the guy in the room where things happen. He was supposed to be the negotiator on all of this. We're wondering why it took Conservatives and a number of different media stories—all of that pressure—to have the agreement released.

We want just a simple answer to why the Prime Minister didn't answer the question in the way that the agreement is spelled out. We certainly want to know the impact on the fiscal framework. I know that government members of this committee voted not so long ago on Canada's budget. They voted to spend a certain amount of money on a certain number of programs. This bridge, and the cost of this bridge, could impact the fiscal framework to the tune of maybe hundreds of millions of dollars.

We want to know where the 50% is going—if it's going to the Ambassador Bridge and to the friends of the U.S. President for a fund, given that it is not going to Canadian workers and Canadian families and to repaying the cost of the bridge. We want to hear from ministers involved in this negotiation. I think there's been a lack of transparency around that and around where Canada is. We'd like to hear from the minister of Canada-U.S. trade negotiations, Minister LeBlanc. We'd like to have the finance minister at this committee to talk about that fiscal impact. We think Canadians deserve those answers. We want to hear from the Minister of Infrastructure, Minister Robertson, on the bridge, and certainly from officials from the Windsor-Detroit Bridge Authority, to make things clear to Canadians and give them answers.

More than anything, what my colleague has brought forward in this motion is that we want to know why the Prime Minister's answers don't match the reality of the deal. The only way we can know that is by having the deal presented in this committee. We want to know why he said the thing that he said. He probably knew the details of the bill. The Prime Minister has billed himself as the guy to negotiate with the President, the guy who's in the room, the guy who understands economics.

[Caroline Desrochers, Liberal, Trois-Rivières, QC]

I have a point of order.

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

What we don't know—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I'm sorry. I have to interrupt you. We have a point of order.

[Caroline Desrochers, Liberal, Trois-Rivières, QC]

I'd just like to remind the member that all of the documents she's talking about are actually public. They were made public.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

That's not a point of order.

We'll continue. Thank you.

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

I'll certainly continue with the motion. I'm sure my colleague will have the opportunity to speak.

We want to know why the Prime Minister told a number of different stories to Canadians and why the story of what he told doesn't match the agreement in place. I think Canadians want to know that. I think there have been questions swirling around that for now weeks at a time.

That's exactly what this committee is here to do. It's exactly what this meeting is here to do. I hope all members of Parliament and all members, including those on the government side, want to know those answers too.

Thanks.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you.

We'll go to Mr. Lewis, please, and then to Madame Gaudreau.

[Chris Lewis, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It's an honour to be here today at the OGGO committee for this very important topic. The Gordie Howe bridge is about a kilometre and a half, maybe two kilometres, from my riding, which borders that of the great member for Windsor West. It was important to come to Ottawa today to discuss this motion.

I want to start off by congratulating and saying thank you to the 6,500 skilled trade workers who put blood, sweat and tears into one of the most amazing bridges I've ever been on. I would just say thank you to them and congratulations. This is their celebration. It's all of Canada's, but it's certainly theirs.

I got to visit that site three or four times over the last six or seven years. What they've done is really second to none. I was also there last Friday for the opening of the bridge. I would just say thank you to all of those who made it happen.

About eight or 10 days ago, I did an interview with a local radio station called AM 800. One of the questions they asked me was this: “Do you believe, MP Lewis, that we'll ever see the full deal or that Canadians will ever know the full deal?” This was before it was released by Bloomberg in the United States. I said that I was not so sure it would be tabled before July 27, at least not by the government. They said, “Okay.” I said that I was cautiously optimistic but knew for sure that our workers, our businesses and the nurses and doctors who use our bridges to go over to the United States to work to put food on their table and their family's table, and who pay an exorbitant amount in tolls, wanted to know exactly where the tolls were going. They want transparency, and they deserve accountability. Quite frankly, it should have been tabled and they should have been told the absolute truth from the get-go.

I won't be overly long, but I want to say one thing to my wife and daughter back home. We have four horses at home, and they ride horses basically every weekend competitively. They both wear cowboy hats. I just want to let them know that just because someone wears a cowboy hat, it's not an excuse to not tell the exact honest truth. It's not an excuse to forget something, so I don't blame them.

When I went across the border yesterday, I took the Gordie Howe bridge. I took the tunnel over to Michigan. I had a meeting and I took the bridge back. I was in awe. It was amazing. When I got through customs, there was a great CBSA officer there. I paid my eight-dollar toll with my debit card.

On the way home, as I was going down the 401, I got to thinking: Where does that eight dollars go? We understand that we're splitting it. It was going to be profit, but now it's revenue from the tolls. We know that 50% is going to the States, to Michigan specifically. We don't know what it's being used for. We don't know what the 50% of the remainder of the money is going to.

One question I would ask is this: Is any of that 50% going to the Ambassador Bridge? Surely it will be in this agreement. Surely the three ministers and the bridge officials—

[Vince Gasparro, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Go ahead, sir.

[Vince Gasparro, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Mr. Chair, this is all public. The information has been made public—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I'll interrupt you, sir. That's not a point of order. You will have your chance to speak.

I'll ask colleagues to stick to procedural points of order or those on translation issues, so we can hear everyone's—

[Vince Gasparro, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Well, there's clearly a translation issue.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Okay. Thanks.

Continue, Mr. Lewis.

[Chris Lewis, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Certainly, if we had Minister LeBlanc, Minister Robertson or Minister Champagne here, they would be able to answer the questions of this committee. These are not unreasonable questions. They're actually very reasonable questions that my office is being inundated with, and rightly so. How can I do my job effectively as the member of Parliament for Essex and answer my constituents' questions if I don't have the answers?

There are a lot of questions. I cannot fathom or even perceive how any member sitting around this table wouldn't have constituents with these same questions and wouldn't want to call on the ministers to be totally transparent and accountable. Just give us answers to our questions so that we can be fully transparent and accountable to our own people.

I just want to reiterate that this is not about the fact that I'm upset about the Gordie Howe bridge opening, because it's going to help the Windsor-Essex region and all of Canada greatly. It's about being true to our constituents and ensuring that we are doing the right thing by answering their questions.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks, Mr. Lewis.

We'll go to Madame Gaudreau and then to Mr. Gill.

For those who are new to the committee, I'll always announce who's up and who's next, but it's up to you as members to get yourselves on the speaking list. I won't remind you past that.

Madame Gaudreau, please go ahead.