Can I respond in English? It is easier for me.
I think that in general road pricing is an important tool. It won't be appropriate in all cases, but particularly where you're talking about a large new piece of infrastructure.... I remember that in 1967 the La Fontaine tunnel in Montreal was built and was established as a toll tunnel for a considerable number of years. I don't know whether the tolls eventually paid the cost--perhaps not--but that approach was used. We've seen Highway 407 as a toll road around Toronto, which seems to be working quite effectively and delivering some benefits, though it has also been controversial.
But what we have seen are other schemes not used in Canada, such as the congestion charging in central London, where a specific objective was not only to reduce the number of cars passing through the centre of the city but also to in fact speed up the movement of the automobile traffic that was there, to allow taxis to effectively move twice as fast through the city centre, and to fund a substantial increase in the number of buses. There was a case where that wasn't a tax grab: the congestion charging was specifically used to fund the transit improvements that were necessary to replace the lost capacity by excluding car drivers who were not prepared to pay.
As for tolls, although they may be difficult to impose, as they require a very high level of technology to do them effectively, as with Highway 407 or with the London congestion charging, I think it can be done, and in some cases it will be important. Obviously, the cost of replacing the Champlain Bridge, as you mentioned, is going to be very high. If it can be done sooner, and if those motorists who benefit directly from that can be involved in the financing of it, then I think that's probably a good thing.
I hope that responds to your question.