Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak to this issue today. I must share with you that I was on holiday.
When I first learned of the 2026 agreement in principle, I will admit that I was confused. I can therefore appreciate why there has been a misunderstanding, but for me, the confusion disappeared completely once I recognized that there were two separate agreements that work together.
The first agreement, the 2012 Canada-Michigan Crossing Agreement, remains fully in force. That's an important point that's been made that deserves to be repeated. That agreement established, back in 2012, the ownership, the governance and the financial framework for the Gordie Howe International Bridge. Under that agreement, Canada collects the total revenues and applies them to the operation of the bridge and the repayment of Canada's approximately $6.4-billion investment. Once Canada's investment has been fully recovered, the agreement specifies that net operating revenues will be shared equally between Canada and the State of Michigan. In other words, the concept of sharing future net revenues is not new. It has been part of the project's financial framework from the very beginning.
The second agreement, of course, is the 2026 agreement in principle. Rather than replacing the 2012 agreement, it builds upon it. In fact, it explicitly states that nothing in the agreement in principle amends, modifies or supersedes the 2012 Canada-Michigan Crossing Agreement. Instead, it commits both governments to developing the arrangements necessary to implement new commitments, including the establishment of the United States-Canada economic development fund.
I think it's our job as parliamentarians to look at all of the various documents. Read together, these two documents tell us two things. First, the 2012 agreement remains the legal foundation of the project. Second, the implementation arrangements of the 2026 agreement in principle must be consistent with that existing framework.
With that context, I would like to touch briefly on two or three points. The first is why the bridge was necessary. I think it's necessary to touch on that and why that decision has proven to be the right one.
The point I would really like to make today in my remarks is why the agreement in principle strengthens, not weakens, the original vision for this project. Quickly, we've touched on some of the points about why the bridge was necessary. Basically, it was about preparing us for the future. Governments in Canada, and also Michigan and Detroit, recognized that one of Canada's most important trade gateways could no longer depend on a single international crossing. The question was straightforward: What happens if there are disruptions, whether because of an accident, severe weather or infrastructure failure? The list goes on. These threats remain today. Actually, they are all more reasons why we did the right thing by opening the bridge as quickly as we could.
Windsor—some of my colleagues live in that community and the surrounding communities—needed a different route that did not bring increased trucking and vehicle activity through its city streets. It needed one with direct freeway connections, modern customs facilities, greater capacity and public ownership designed to serve Canada's long-term interests.
Looking back, it was 15 years ago that the agreement was drafted. That was a long time ago, but that decision has proven to be remarkably forward-looking. When governments approved this project, few could have anticipated the changes that have taken place over the last few years. COVID-19 exposed the fragility of global supply chains. Geopolitical instability has reinforced the importance of economic security. Today, countries around the world are investing in resilient supply chains, advanced manufacturing and so on, as we are doing here in Canada.
That is precisely where the Gordie Howe International Bridge fits. It protects Canadian jobs. It strengthens the Canadian manufacturing sector. It supports our exporters. It improves the resilience of our supply chains. It enhances—