Thank you, Mr. Coderre.
First, I have to say that Mr. Lebel, whom I did not necessarily meet at a convention, but at another meeting, seemed to be very open. Quite recently, I met with Mr. Strahl, who said he was genuinely looking for a solution based on fairness.
We know what happened in Quebec: the negotiations were not between the municipalities and the federal government, as the law requires, but between the provincial government and the federal government. We did not receive the authorizations and we were not informed about the rules of the program until the end of January this year, in some cases. We can't do the impossible.
Trying to be fair raises a question. While 97% or 98% of the provinces have been able to meet the deadline, there is only one exception: Quebec. The reasons are easy to understand, and you know what they are. Why should Quebec municipalities have to make a larger contribution to their government's economic recovery, through property taxes? That would be very unfair.
So give us different deadlines, and make sure we are able to meet them. I reiterate that if the municipalities in Canada had not had projects, the recovery plan would probably have been a big failure. There have to be people who have infrastructure projects. Municipal government is always the one that is closest to the people and is, in fact, most essential in their everyday lives. There is no ill will. Quebec municipalities haven't wasted their time, but they aren't capable of making up the time that was wasted. They are here before you today to avoid being penalized, and to avoid property taxes becoming too high for Quebec taxpayers and Canadian taxpayers in other provinces to bear.