Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Gaspar, I listened to your presentation. I think I understood your point of view on this bill, however, I do not think I fully share it. I consider myself a client, and from that perspective, I have reservations regarding a possible connection between Quebec and Sept-Îles. If there were to be only one air carrier for that flight, tariffs would be very high. People would then say something which we hear quite frequently, in other words that the flight from Quebec to Sept-Îles is more expensive than that from Quebec to Miami. You may say that, in this case, there are more passengers, but as legislators, it is important for us to give organizations control mechanisms to ensure that there is competition. In that regard, I would say that your arguments were not compelling to me.
That being said, as my colleague said earlier, gas falls under federal jurisdiction. It costs 87¢ a litre, and that includes everything. Some may choose to kindly point out that three quarters of that cost are due to taxes. Further, it would be good for people to know that a ticket will cost $172.50 rather than $99. I think we have to be fair to the client. That what they expect from legislators.
Moreover, when there is a merger between two carriers within one airline, I think it is incumbent on the legislator to defend the public interests and make sure that there is some control over tariffs. It is possible we may see an increase in mergers. We have to make sure that they remain competitive, or at the very least, that profits remain reasonable.
I could take you out in the field. You would most probably enjoy the experience. But for the time being, I believe that this bill has merits and I hope we will be able to bring it to fruition rather quickly.
You referred to airport tariffs. Perhaps you find there are some aspects missing from the bill. I would invite you to apprise the committee of that, if the committee is willing.