Transport Committee on Feb. 25th, 2021

[Fayçal El-Khoury, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

My second question is for Mr. Campbell.

Mr. Campbell, Canada is one of the world's biggest investors in infrastructure, partly because of its large public pension funds. However, in the past, there have been relatively few infrastructure investments in the country.

Given that the returns generated by these funds are used to provide a secure and respectable retirement for hundreds of thousands of Canadians, it seems that everyone would benefit from further investments in Canadian projects. We've already seen a successful example, when the Canada Infrastructure Bank joined forces with Quebec's largest pension fund to invest in Montreal's REM public transit system.

What do you think the Canada Infrastructure Bank should do or should continue to do to attract more investment in the Canada pension fund?

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Mr. El-Khoury and Ms. Gillis.

Thank you to the interpreters for resolving that problem.

It seems to be resolved now, Ms. Gillis. You can proceed

in French.

[Kelly Gillis]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The Canada Infrastructure Bank is a tool for attracting investment in infrastructure projects in Canada, particularly in priority areas for the government. This helps attract institutional investors, such as pension fund managers, who come here to see investment opportunities.

One role of the Canada Infrastructure Bank is to inform the provinces, territories and municipalities of projects that are likely to attract investment in ways other than through traditional tools.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Ms. Gillis, and Mr. El-Khoury.

Ms. Gillis, do you the bottom icon turned to en français when you're speaking French?

[Kelly Gillis]

No, right now it's on English. If I turn it to French, would that fix the problem? I'm sorry if I did not.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Yes, when you speak French, if you can just switch it to French, I think that will fix the problem.

[Kelly Gillis]

Thank you. I will do that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

I'll thank Mr. Sidhu for throwing that suggestion to me.

We're now going to move over to Mr. Baraslou-Duval for two and a half minutes.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Gillis, for several months now, the REM station at the Montreal airport has been making headlines. We're told that the station could be compromised because the federal government refuses to make the necessary investments. The Quebec government has already heavily invested in the REM project.

I want to know whether the project will eventually come to fruition and whether you're confident that things will work out.

[Kelly Gillis]

Thank you for the question.

Given the changes affecting air transportation and airports, the situation has evolved and discussions are under way. That's all I can say right now.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Do you know how long it will take to bring these discussions to a successful conclusion?

[Kelly Gillis]

No. I don't have a specific date.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

You know that the tunnel is being dug. It should happen sooner rather than later.

[Kelly Gillis]

I can tell you that everyone is aware of the deadlines and that discussions are under way.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, I had the chance to submit notices of routine motions to the committee. I would have liked to ask the minister more questions. However, unfortunately, I can't do so, since she isn't here. I want to take this opportunity to move these motions. There are three motions.

Can I read the first motion now?

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Go ahead, Mr. Barsalou-Duval.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

The motion reads as follows:

That the clerk inform each witness who is to appear before the Committee that the House Administration support team must conduct technical tests to check the connectivity and the equipment used to ensure the best possible sound quality; and that the Chair advises the Committee, at the start of each meeting, of any witness who did not perform the required technical tests.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

I'm assuming, Mr. Barsalou-Duval, that you're going to present the three motions that are very similar.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

I could move the three motions right now. This may be quicker, Mr. Chair, if you agree.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Why don't we do it that way? It would be more time-friendly. If you can present all three motions, then I'll ask for a vote on all three separately of course, but you'll have already put them on the floor.

Mr. Barsalou-Duval, go ahead.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

The second motion reads as follows:

That all documents submitted for Committee business that do not come from a federal department or that have not been translated by the Translation Bureau be sent for prior linguistic review by the Translation Bureau before being distributed to members.

The third motion reads as follows:

That the text of any substantive motion or any motion in amendment of a substantive motion be distributed in writing in both official languages to all Committee members before the Committee begins debate on such a motion.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Mr. Barsalou-Duval.

We're now going to move on to all three motions. I am going to deal with them separately.

Are there any questions or comments on the motions?

Mr. Bachrach, go ahead.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to my colleague for bringing these forward.

I agree with him that having adequate translation is an important component of our work. I'm a little concerned about the third one, which is that all motions and all amendments to motions need to be translated. I'm just wondering about the practicality of that. Occasionally, there may be motions arising that are perhaps less substantive but still come up over the course of our deliberations.

Perhaps I'd ask Mr. Barsalou-Duval, through you, Mr. Chair, if he feels there are some motions that are more routine in nature or less substantive and that could be made without translation?

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

I'm going to go to Mr. Barsalou-Duval. I also see that Ms. Jaczek has her hand up. After Mr. Barsalou-Duval, I'm going to go to the clerk so he can give us an update on some of the substance attached to what Mr. Barsalou-Duval's actually asking for.

Mr. Barsalou-Duval, you have the floor.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Mr. Bachrach's point is that, when we have a debate or discussion, sometimes items or amendments may be introduced directly in the meeting. It would be quicker to proceed with the debate if we didn't have to wait for a written translation. This would have less of an impact on the pace of the committee's work.

My goal isn't to prevent this type of situation. However, I want to make sure that everyone understands before a motion of this nature is passed. Sometimes, things happen very quickly. Unfortunately, if the translation is inadequate, decisions can be based on a misunderstanding.

In my opinion, we need the necessary tools to ensure that we have the proper information before we make a decision.