Transport Committee on April 2nd, 2009

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

I could get in trouble for that.

I've had an opportunity to be involved somewhat with the issue of the Quebec City-Windsor high-speed corridor, just in relation to the study, because I am interested in a high-speed train, and I'm very interested in that as an alternative that's obviously better for our environment.

I understand what this committee can do. Maybe we could propose a study that could be constructive and provide some benefit. But after reading the background of this quite some time ago, I know that in this particular case, this new tripartite study that's being done involves five consulting firms. It's a study that's going to involve years. The new study reviews about eight different things.

I could go into detail, but this is actually the second or third study that has been undertaken for the same thing. Just for perspective, my understanding is that it's going to cost $18 billion for this possible rail, with 70% financing by the federal government or it's not going to be viable in any way, shape, or form.

The difficulty I have with a study like that is that I think we'd be doing nothing but scratching the surface of something that is, quite frankly, extremely complicated, and should be done, I believe, from a private sector...and maybe take that study, that they provide to us, or that they do, after a year of research or thereabouts, and spending millions of dollars of taxpayers' money, and take that and analyze it for the viability.

I don't really think we can do enough to study it sufficiently. I would like to see us do more of a macro study of different issues. If we got the report and did a study on that, I think that's a great idea. But to do so simultaneously, and really not have the necessary resources that they have.... I mean, there are probably hundreds of people involved in this study on a daily basis, and we're not going to do anything close to that.

I don't see it as a good use of time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I have Monsieur Laframboise.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Why do not we not hold one or two meetings with officials and some representatives of private business? There are major Canadian companies in this business and we could very quickly ask their representatives to appear so that we could find out if what Mr. Jean is saying is true. Two major provinces, Ontario and Quebec, are discussing the matter. I feel that we are not doing anything and that worries me a little. By holding a meeting or two, we could find out what can be done, what has been done in the past and whether it is true that we would have to wait a year before we can get studies.

We could first look very closely at the first aspects of the problem, which is something we have never done. There have already been studies. In Canada, three major companies specialize in this area. We could very quickly meet their representatives and ask them if it is doable or if much deeper studies are needed. We would then have looked at the problem and would have things clear in our minds. If we do not look at this while Quebec and Ontario are doing so, we are going to miss our opportunity, as I see it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Bevington, Mr. Volpe, and Mr. Jean.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

To start, I think I would prefer Mr. Laframboise's approach. It's one that I see as useful. I've had presentations in the last week, from Bombardier, on the issue of fast trains. I think there's a great deal of interest in the country right now on the subject. To get a perspective on what it means for this committee to understand the options that exist, even in one corridor, for the improvement to the rail system, I think would set the committee up for dealing with the study as it comes along.

I would think that to start in the fashion you've proposed would be quite useful, and it could be something we initiate in the fall. I don't see it as a priority item.

I'll wait to speak to another priority item after we're finished this discussion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Volpe.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Two things encourage me and one thing discourages me. The thing that discourages me--I'll deal with the negative thing first--is that Brian Jean has actually admitted that this is a complex issue that might be beyond the capacity of members of Parliament to grasp. That is discouraging.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

No, no, that's not what I said.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

But I am encouraged that he wanted to recognize that eventually this committee is going to have to deal with this issue, and that the best thing one could do is prepare oneself in anticipation thereof. I applaud him for that.

I think that perhaps

Mr. Laframboise is right. It is a good time to start with one, two or three sessions. After those first meetings, we could either go a little further, or wrap our studies up. We have to learn all the terminology, learn about the technology, the nature, the characteristics, the parameters, the studies that have already been done, and put it all into context for the committee.

If the three governments present us with a proposal towards the end of the year, it will not be a good time to say that we would like to start studying high-speed trains. I think that the good time is now. I congratulate Mr. Laframboise for the compromise he is proposing, and Mr. Bevington for the agreement that he seems to be giving us.

I hope that Mr. Jean agrees.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Jean.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

I want to mention two things before I comment on your persuasion.

Quebec awarded the contract to these five consultants on February 16, 2009; I just want to point that out. It's a $3-million contract. I'm of course not saying that we can't grasp issues that cost $3 million. I'm saying we don't have the resources necessary to do the on-the-ground study that they're going to do.

I like Mr. Laframboise's idea. I think it's a good idea. Actually, it was my colleague Jeff Watson who convinced me--thank you,Jeff--that this was a great idea. I just wanted to mention that.

So I do like that idea. What I would ask, though, before we schedule this, is whether, if at all possible—and I'm fine to tentatively schedule it in wherever the members would like—I could find out from the department when to expect to receive a copy of the report, or when the report is planned to be done, just so we have that information. I don't know how long it's going to take. I'm sure it will take longer than a few minutes to spend $3 million, but if I could find this out, it might give us an opportunity—

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

It's the end of the year.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

I don't know.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

It is.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

It is? I'm not certain; I don't have it listed.

But if we could do so on a macro basis on the issue itself and maybe on some of the technology that's available, that would be, from my perspective, more beneficial at this stage than trying to duplicate what they're doing, as far as a cost-benefit analysis and the viability of it are concerned.

But I'm prepared to do whatever the committee and the members want to do.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

I thank you for that, Mr. Jean, but there are other studies that have been done in the past. So for us, it's not that we want to pre-empt what anybody else is going to do down the road, but there are other studies. There have been two very major studies and eight very significant studies, and the department has access to all of them. We could share some of that information.

As Monsieur Laframboise said, we could bring some of the officials forward, we could begin to do our own study, and then what this latest group will say or do will make it more significant for us. That's what our focus is, from what I gather my colleagues are saying.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Monsieur Laframboise.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Perhaps we could give our analysts the mandate to contact Transport Canada, as well as Bombardier, Siemens, Alstom and other companies with expertise in the area. We would ask them to see how they could coordinate it. We would have to tell those companies that the committee intends to meet for a few sessions and see if they are prepared to provide us with documentation. We could have a report from our research service telling us that the companies have been contacted and here are the possibilities. This is no national emergency, but we could start contacting the companies.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Bevington.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

It might well be that we bring forward the consultants who are doing the study to present to us what they're accomplishing with the new study. We can put that in context, as well. That would certainly set the tone and might give us some answers as to what this new study is going to show us, above what we already know about fast rail in this country.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Jean.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Mr. Watson was on the list, Mr. Chair. I'm not sure whether he was struck off.

After that, I have just have one comment to make, if I may.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Watson.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm not even sure I was going to say anything more, though I was wanting to speak a little while back, other than that I think the more limited approach of holding a couple of meetings on this to scope out some of the issues that are important..... Of course, important in all the discussion isn't just the cost of getting something up and running, but the cost of operating such a system as well, because that's an ongoing cost of doing high-speed rail properly.

So I guess I'm speaking in favour; I think it's important to get.... I just don't want us to bite off more than we can chew, as well, because we have to balance that against, I think, some of the other issues we have to deal with at the committee.

Maybe I sense there's some agreement to keep this a little more limited at the moment rather than something much broader.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Go ahead, Mr. Jean.