Government Operations Committee on July 29th, 2026

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks.

We've had a few people added to the speaking list. After Mr. Gasparro, we have Ms. Lalonde, Ms. McPherson, Ms. Lantsman, Mr. Danko, Madame Gaudreau and Ms. Desrochers.

Mr. Gasparro, the floor is yours, sir.

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

Thank you, Chair.

I am against this motion for many reasons, which I'll get into. The primary reason is that the motion fails to discuss the significant economic benefit to Windsor, the province of Ontario and the country more broadly.

The fact of the matter is that Canada and the United States have the largest trading relationship in the world. Approximately $1.3 trillion in goods and services cross our border every year. The Windsor-Detroit gateway is the busiest commercial land border crossing between Canada and the United States, carrying approximately 30% of all Canada-U.S. trade. The corridor is one of North America's most critical trade routes, and it is essential to continental supply chains.

The Gordie Howe International Bridge will improve the movement of people, goods and services by providing additional border capacity, a new crossing alternative, modern border processing capabilities and, for the first time, a direct highway-to-highway connection. Canadians who live in Windsor know full well that those who travel across the Ambassador Bridge have to travel through residential areas, impacting hundreds of residents every single day. The bridge will improve the reliability of cross-border supply chains, particularly for the automotive and advanced manufacturing sectors, where goods and components may cross the border multiple times during production. Reliable border crossings, as we all know, are critical for just-in-time manufacturing, where delays can disrupt production, increase costs and put Canadian jobs at risk.

What's interesting is that Conservative Premier Doug Ford supports our government's decisive action to open this bridge. Clearly, he knows what the Conservative opposition does not: The total trade between Ontario and Michigan was valued at $81 billion back in 2022 and is critical for Ontario's economy—

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I'm sorry, Mr. Gasparro. I have to interrupt you for a point of order.

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

I'm wondering if that member's prepared notes have anything to do with the motion, because we've heard a lot of this but nothing yet on the motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

As before, we allow wide latitude, but if you can, get to the motion, please.

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

Sure. If the honourable member had been paying attention and not playing on her phone, she would have heard that I led off with why I'm not supporting—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I'm going to interrupt you there.

Colleagues, all around, I'll just ask that we keep it to the motion and keep everyone away from such comments.

It's back to you, Mr. Gasparro, please.

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

Getting back to why I do not support this motion, the motion does not address the broader economic benefits to our country. The bridge itself is estimated to contribute approximately $1.3 billion to Windsor's contribution to our country's gross domestic product. Approximately 75% of the project's steel was sourced from Canada, and 25%—

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I apologize for interrupting you, Mr. Gasparro.

Ms. McPherson, go ahead on your point of order.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I have to agree with some of my colleagues that none of these interventions seem to be addressing the motion. We all agree that the Gordie Howe bridge must be open. We all agree on its importance. We all know the facts about the workers and how much steel came from Canada. However, we are discussing the motion, and this appears to me to be an attempt to filibuster and not actually discuss the motion.

I would like the member to return to the motion we are debating today, please.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you, Ms. McPherson.

This is going to be one of those times when Ms. McPherson and I agree 100%.

Can we get to the motion, please?

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

I am speaking to the motion, Chair, and to why I do not support it.

The motion fails to address the broader economic impacts to our country. As I was saying, 75% of the project steel was sourced from Canada, with 25% coming from the United States. More than 455 co-op students got experience from the building of this bridge—right from Ontario universities. Members of the ironworkers union, LiUNA and others benefited from the opening of this bridge.

I am confused. The Conservative opposition is trying to celebrate the opening of the bridge yet is critiquing the opening of the bridge at the same time.

To conclude, I do not support this motion. It does not address the broader economic benefits that this bridge has.

I look forward to being added back onto the speakers list.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you, Mr. Gasparro.

Ms. Lalonde, welcome to OGGO. I don't think you've been with us before.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Yes, this is my first time here. I encourage all my colleagues to use their little earpieces, because I will be speaking French.

I am very proud to represent the most beautiful riding in Canada, Orléans. I hope everyone is enjoying being back here in Ottawa. I hope all my colleagues here today are having a good summer, especially you, Mr. Chair.

I, too, would like to echo what my opposition colleagues have said about the exemplary work done and the contributions made by workers over many years to give us this bridge. I'm not an engineer by training, but the engineering that went into this bridge is extraordinary. My colleague talked about that. I also had the pleasure of visiting it last year, and I was proud to know that some of my colleagues, Mr. Gill and Mr. Lewis, were just there for the opening of the bridge.

It was really important to me to thank the workers. I know my colleague, speaking in English, referred to the statements made by the Ontario Trucking Association, by Eric Lombardi and by the Premier of Ontario on the bridge's opening.

What I'm not hearing from the opposition is how long they would have kept the bridge closed. I think that's also very important. I'm going to read the motion, because my colleagues seem rather sensitive to the idea that we might be deviating from the subject of this motion.

It talks about transparency, but this is transparent. The agreement was made public on July 22, I believe. It was made public to everyone. Taxpayers, Canadians and the people of Orléans can read this great agreement.

Another very important point, when we're talking about honesty and openness.... Once again, the bridge is open. That's a key point. I think we can all agree that this is important for the economy between Michigan and Ontario. As a proud Franco-Ontarian, trade is definitely extremely important to me. I'm also a former businesswoman. However, what's even more important in all this is that the agreement signed in 2012 by—I'll say it, because the Conservatives like to hear this name—Stephen Harper, the former prime minister of Canada, remains in effect. The 2012 agreement is still in place. Nothing has changed. A parallel agreement has been reached.

I know some of my colleagues have suggested or mentioned that the Prime Minister is in his element. I listened to a press conference on July 26, I believe, during which he spoke transparently and humbly, saying that he should have perhaps been more clear in his initial remarks. However, that's exactly what he did and what he communicated to all Canadians about the 2026 agreement that will be in effect for the next few years and that will also create a strategic economic investment fund for the regions in Michigan and Ontario. So we're talking about a fund that will help the local economy.

I'm looking through my notes. I don't want to focus too much on the numbers, because that's often not the most important aspect, but there are some members from Windsor here. Because I do like numbers, I think it's worth noting that it is estimated that the bridge will contribute about $1.3 billion to Windsor's gross domestic product. That's just for Windsor, all attributed to the bridge's opening. About 7,500 cars and trucks have already crossed in the first 12 hours.

So we are here to discuss a very important motion. I think everyone here recognizes the importance of our role in parliamentary committees. As you mentioned, Mr. Chair, this is my first time on this committee. I don't have any prepared notes, but I have a lot of information.

Another point that hasn't been mentioned so far about this bridge, which is now open, might interest the Conservatives. I visited the bridge last year. Another one of the reasons for building it, apart from supply chains and transport, is border security. I think that's something we all need to remember. The inspection facilities, which are now state‑of‑the‑art and equipped with the latest technology, will enhance the ability to detect illegal goods, contraband and unauthorized persons, while supporting the efficient and secure flow of legitimate trade and travellers.

I didn't hear any mention of how long the Conservatives would have kept the bridge closed. We've taken a practical and pragmatic approach. We signed a bilateral agreement between Canada and the United States that will create an economic fund for the region, which benefits our small businesses and people in those areas. Indeed, the fact that the bridge is open will benefit small businesses, as well as the auto and manufacturing sectors. Everyone will benefit.

So the bridge is open. That doesn't alter the fact that, for some, this bilateral agreement was made public after it was signed. I was a businesswoman, and I never negotiated in public. I would negotiate, and then the agreement would be made public. Unless the Conservatives have a different idea of how negotiations should happen, we negotiate at the table, and once the negotiations have concluded, the agreement is made public.

Projections are also being made in terms of what this will bring in. I was a businesswoman. When I was opening my retirement homes, my budget projections often assumed it would take three or four years before I could expect a return. So, yes, it's very important to be transparent, and that's why the agreement has been made public.

Once again, what I want to know is how long the Conservatives would have kept this bridge closed, to the detriment of an economy that is of great importance not only to Windsor and Ontario, but also to the rest of Canada.

I don't want to go on too long, but I wanted to make this point, because the security aspect is super important to me, and so is trade and the fact that this motion talks about these important matters. We're talking about transparency. Transparency means making an agreement public after it has been signed, and that's what we did. The bridge is open, and I know some of my colleagues were there. I would have liked to have been there, too, to witness the historic opening of this extraordinary bridge.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak, Mr. Chair, and I'll now let other colleagues speak not only to the motion, but also to the fact that the bridge is open.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks.

We'll go virtually to Ms. McPherson and then back to Ms. Lantsman.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I will take a few moments to speak to the motion that has been brought forward by my colleague Mr. Albas. I want to start by saying that, of course, all of us understand the importance of the Gordie Howe bridge. All of us in this room know how important it is that this bridge opened. Absolutely, we do.

I want to congratulate all of the workers who built this bridge over the last number of years. What an incredible accomplishment it is. What an incredible testament it is to the workers in this country. I have to give a shout-out to my colleague Brian Masse, who was the member of Parliament who pushed so hard for so long to make sure that this bridge got built.

What we're talking about in this motion is getting the clarity we require. We as Canadians, parliamentarians and opposition members received information from the Prime Minister that misled the media and misled Canadians. It was deeply unclear. People didn't have a good understanding of what the negotiations looked like and what the agreement was.

Yes, we all absolutely want to see this bridge open. Every single person, and I honestly believe every parliamentarian, recognizes the value of this bridge, but Canadians deserve answers. They deserve to know why the Prime Minister misled the media and misled Canadians—

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

I have a point of order, Chair. The member is assigning motive to the Prime Minister. That is unparliamentary.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

That's not a point of order, Mr. Danko.

All of us should be careful with that.

Go ahead, Ms. McPherson.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thank you very much.

It's actually a fact that the Prime Minister gave the wrong information and said it was because he had a cowboy hat on. As an Albertan, I spend an awful lot of time every year at the Stampede, and I hope that the hat on my head does not influence my ability to share information accurately.

Canadians look at what we are seeing right now, and they are seeing another appeasement by the Prime Minister. I will agree with my colleague from Windsor West, who brought up a number of appeasements that the Prime Minister has already done. It would be one thing if we were giving up the digital services tax or if we were giving up the retaliatory tariffs. Even today, news is coming out that we are now allowing the web giants to get off scot-free instead of paying their fair share—

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

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

I'm sorry. I have to interrupt you, Ms. McPherson.

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

I do not like to interrupt. I thank all members who allowed me to speak, but I spoke to the motion. I don't think Ms. McPherson is speaking to the motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

We've so far allowed a very wide latitude in the debate.

As I did with everyone else, I will ask you to get to the motion, Ms. McPherson.