Evidence of meeting #75 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was clause.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Yes, Mr. Aubin.
We have adopted our subcommittee report. We've completed Bill S-2, and we can now look at your motion, Mr. Aubin.
Are you moving it now and introducing it officially?
5 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Thank you.
You have already tabled this motion some time ago, so you are free to go ahead and speak to it.
5 p.m.
NDP
Robert Aubin NDP Trois-Rivières, QC
Thank you.
I will be very brief because we already talked about this.
Again this morning, I had the pleasure of being invited to the consultations conducted by the Department of Transport. One of the important questions we discussed concerned the means to take to reduce greenhouse gases and improve our transportation strategies.
In addition, yesterday, my colleague tabled a private member's bill concerning VIA Rail.
It seems really essential that in 2017—it could be 2018, we are easy to get along with—we take the time to do a study on Canada's passenger rail needs. In my opinion, not only is the train the best way of allowing the population to travel in as important a corridor as Quebec-Windsor—and that is not the only one we would discuss—but it is also the best way we have of removing cars from circulation.
These days we talk about electric and hybrid cars, and all sorts of other attempts to reduce greenhouse gases—I am not against any of these measures—and it seems to me that train travel is something we should examine as quickly as possible.
This is all more necessary since VIA Rail has submitted a certain number of projects that just seem to have been on the back burner for several months; we could perhaps agree to hear the various parties and send recommendations to the Minister of Transport that will allow him to accelerate putting in place this 21st century means of locomotion.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS
I have a suggestion, and depending on Mr. Aubin's response, potentially a subamendment as well.
I actually like the idea. I think it's an important one for moving people across Canada.
We're about to eventually get to a study on transportation corridors. It strikes me that building passenger rail into our study on transportation corridors might be an effective way to build it into a big study we've already taken on. If you're happy with that idea, I propose a subamendment that we add the language “as part of its study on transportation corridors”.
If you would rather do it separately, I'll go with your wish.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
On what Mr. Fraser is suggesting, point number 8 of the report, where we talk about the meetings devoted to the study of the Canadian transportation and logistics strategy, it also suggests that this study should address the transportation both of passengers and of goods.
I see that this study is already contemplating something that's being moved, so whether we support the motion because we're already thinking of doing that or whether we need the motion because we're already thinking of doing that, the committee needs to decide.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Vance Badawey Liberal Niagara Centre, ON
I would agree with both the former speakers. When I put forward the motion to study transportation logistics distribution corridors, the intent was to look not only at trade corridors but also passenger corridors.
That said, I would also add that yes, Ms. Block, we can pass this now and make it part of that, or we can just leave it alone. I'll leave that up to Mr. Aubin.
If you're not satisfied that the former motion would cover it, I have no problem supporting this motion. It would just work in alignment with the former motion.
One thing I do want to mention, though, is that there is going to be a need within that process to include our provincial counterparts, simply because they have jurisdiction over a lot of the passenger services. More importantly, we need to align the passenger services with other passenger services, including rail, of course, whether it's the GO train in Ontario or high-speed rail and the possibility of high speed. I think it's about time we had that dialogue. Add to that road and buses and other methods of transportation that carry passengers as well. It does evolve into a bigger dialogue with other partners, such as those from the provincial and the municipal levels.
Thank you.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Robert Aubin NDP Trois-Rivières, QC
I agree totally with including the other partners in the discussion, since that is inevitable if we want an efficient network. However, I think we need to define the topic, that is to say that we should not group the various modes of transportation; we need to devote a study to passenger transport with the various partners concerned. If that is the plan, I am in.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Mr. Aubin, right now the report adopted by the subcommittee says that the study should address the transportation of both passengers and goods as part of the transportation and logistics strategy. We have adopted that. Do you want to incorporate your motion, or would you like us to vote on your motion separately? Your motion is already incorporated in the work plan.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Robert Aubin NDP Trois-Rivières, QC
If I understood correctly, we could discuss the two topics separately within this work plan; we would have a certain number of meetings specifically allocated to passenger transportation. That suits me.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Vance Badawey Liberal Niagara Centre, ON
That raises a good point, Mr. Aubin. We have dedicated four meetings to this, but quite frankly, it might take more, because it might branch out into those other methods of transportation with respect to trade and passengers. We have to be cognizant of the distribution and logistics part of it as well, with trade but also with passenger travel. We've dedicated four meetings, but to your point, it may in fact take more.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Mr. Aubin, do you want to have a vote on your motion? Are you satisfied that what we've already adopted through our subcommittee is sufficient to cover off the passenger rail that you're talking about?
I think we're all saying the same thing. We want this to happen.
5:10 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
5:10 p.m.
An hon. member
We're going to give you this one.
5:10 p.m.
An hon. member
Let's vote.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Yes.
We have Mr. Aubin's motion before us:
That the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities conduct a study on Canada's requirements for passenger rail service.
(Motion agreed to)
Thank you all very much for your co-operation today, including Mr. Lobb, Mr. Chong, Ms. Block, and the rest of the group over here. Thank you also to our staff.
The meeting is adjourned.