Would our witnesses be so kind as to use their little devices in order to bring the two solitudes closer together?
Mr. Marit, you used the expression “matter of commitment”. I really like that expression. Ms. Kolebaba also talked about quality of life, governance and the government's role at all levels. I understand that.
We have been talking about funding in particular. I would like to start with that. You are saying that the gas tax cannot be used because it is already being used for infrastructure. Do you think we should raise this tax to be able to provide other services or should we have a dedicated fund for infrastructure with a national public transit strategy? At any rate, we cannot have a national transit strategy if we don’t have an infrastructure strategy. At some point, we have to choose between rail and road. We are talking specifically about using those funds to maintain roads.
One of the problems we often encounter in Quebec is that the infrastructure has deteriorated over many years. As bus drivers say, we are moving backwards. What do you think about that? Where is the funding going to come from? The question is for the two witnesses and Ms. Kolebaba.
I am in favour of a dedicated fund for infrastructure with a transportation policy. You want to use a 50-50 approach. The Building Canada Fund can use the one-third, one-third, one-third formula. While respecting jurisdictions, are we able to have a real strategy involving a relationship between the Canadian government and the municipalities? Should we strictly be dealing with the provincial government? I know that the situation is very tricky in Alberta and in Quebec. Should we say that we will sign an agreement with a province and that we will make sure there is a dedicated fund for municipalities?