Transport Committee on Feb. 23rd, 2026

[Chi Nguyen, Liberal, Spadina—Harbourfront, ON]

On a point of order, we are here to talk about Via Rail and ports, and while I am very excited about Alto, I know that the focus of today's conversation is on those pieces.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Clarke, ON]

The minister is happy to answer. I would also say that one of the government's responses to Via Rail's poor service is the creation of the Alto high-speed rail, so I think it completely fits in the four-square.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you for your point of order, Ms. Nguyen.

Mr. Lawrence, it's a valid point.

In the framing of everyone's questions today, please make it clear how they relate to the study at hand; I think it would be helpful, and we'll avoid points of order.

I'll turn the floor over to you. We stopped your time, so you'll have three minutes and 10 seconds left.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Clarke, ON]

Thank you.

Minister, my next question is with respect to the crossings. People agree that it's a laudable goal to be able to get from Ottawa to Toronto in less than two hours; that's great. However, one of the other concerns I've heard from my residents is that their communities are going to be bisected by this high-speed rail. There will be students separated from their classrooms, workers separated from their offices, farmers separated from their fields and, perhaps most troubling, patients separated from their hospitals.

What guidelines or restrictions are you putting on Alto in terms of the distance between crossings?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

I want to start at the beginning and say that the first and most important thing is that we're talking about, at maximum, a 60-metre-wide corridor. Maps have been published, obviously, to study options on the entire alignment right from Quebec City to Toronto.

Consultations are happening as we speak to get community voices involved to deal with exactly the kinds of things you're discussing, Mr. Lawrence: “We need a crossing here. We need a livestock accommodation here, and we don't want to split this field in two.” It's exactly that kind of anecdotal and other data that Alto is looking for. We're obviously very well aware of the kinds of concerns you're raising.

I can't answer for every spot along the alignment of a 1,000-kilometre linear project—

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Clarke, ON]

I understand that.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

—but what I can say is that we will be very sensitive. For those who have those kinds of concerns or questions, I would direct them to the Alto consultation currently occurring so that their voices may be heard.

If you specifically have residents expressing those things to you, send them to us, and we'll aim to get them some satisfaction.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Clarke, ON]

I appreciate that, Minister.

I don't mean to interrupt here, but my specific concern—and, quite frankly, that of people right across eastern Ontario—is that quite a few of the hospitals and other infrastructure are located around the Highway 401 corridor. For the people from north of where the projected line will be, regardless of whether it's just a metre, the fact that there is no crossing means that instead of it taking 20 minutes to get to a hospital, it could take you an hour or two hours, so our residents really do need information on that as soon as possible.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Both you and I are probably very eager to land on the final alignment, and I understand that it raises concerns in some places.

This phase that we're going through is important, to hear those exact stories so that access to hospitals, fields, agricultural operations and so on is not affected. That is why we have this ongoing process.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Clarke, ON]

I have one quick question before my time is up, Minister.

It's been reported that there is going to be a financial analysis and that you have brought in consultants. Will you make that public and will you commit today to sharing that?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Is that with respect to high-speed rail?

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Clarke, ON]

Yes.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

This is a very transformative, ambitious project, and it will require major investments on the part of the Government of Canada. This is a decision that will be made by Parliament, so Parliament will have all the information it requires to enable it to make that decision.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you, Mr. Lawrence.

Thank you, Minister MacKinnon.

Next, we'll turn the floor over to Ms. Nguyen.

Ms. Nguyen, the floor is yours. You have five minutes, please.

[Chi Nguyen, Liberal, Spadina—Harbourfront, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Hello, Minister MacKinnon. Thank you for joining us today at the transport committee—one of the best committees in Parliament, I would argue.

As Canadians and our government work to diversify our exports and reduce our dependence on U.S. trade infrastructure, can you tell me a little bit about how Transport Canada is prioritizing investments in Canadian-controlled gateways—like east and west coast ports, but also speaking to the St. Lawrence Seaway—to ensure that exporters have resilient alternatives within our own jurisdiction?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you for raising the St. Lawrence Seaway. This is, as has been observed many times, a singular Canadian accomplishment and a major piece of infrastructure. It is very much the spirit that animated the investment in the seaway that we want to ignite and rely upon in the face of our current challenges with respect to the United States.

The seaway, unfortunately, is underutilized. It is not operating at capacity. I believe you heard from the Hamilton-Oshawa Port Authority—to cite but one, albeit very important, port on our Great Lakes system, on the St. Lawrence. We want to make it easier to get to, and we want to be able to rely upon service to those ports and expand the market share—if I can call it that—of the marine option with respect to moving goods, bulk materials and so on into the heartland of Canada's economy, which is clustered around the Great Lakes.

This is a very important objective. We can take a lot of trucks off Highway 401 if we do that. It's an important objective in terms of developing those communities where we will be able to enhance port access. More generally, I think it's important that Canada utilize its strategic assets, like the St. Lawrence Seaway, to much greater effect.

[Chi Nguyen, Liberal, Spadina—Harbourfront, ON]

Thank you.

I would love it if you could speak to how the government is responding in terms of strengthening the resilience of our domestic supply chains, especially if we're thinking east-west as well as north-south, so that Canadian producers and companies are less vulnerable to external shocks that are beyond our control.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Canada—all governments—has underinvested in our trade-enabling infrastructure and supply chains. Let's all agree, as members of Parliament, as politicians around this table, that they're not always, perhaps, the most appealing. Monsieur Barsalou-Duval just illustrated why communities in some cases have discomfort around hosting some of these assets. I talked about the Lower Mainland in British Columbia too.

However, we need to do it. Too many jobs in manufacturing, mining and energy are stymied because our supply chains and transportation networks do not suffice. We need to expand our supply chain infrastructure in big and small ways. We need to expand and improve the digitization and our ability to measure the performance of our supply chains. As Mr. Albas pointed out, we need better predictability in terms of labour relations in the sector broadly.

These are important objectives. They are objectives that we will be pursuing and objectives that I've been talking about to all of the players—to the extent that that's possible—inside the transport sector and in our other economic sectors, to make sure that we have a network that's performing adequately for the very high ambitions we have for our economy.

[Chi Nguyen, Liberal, Spadina—Harbourfront, ON]

Thanks.

I want to ask a little bit about the role the federal government is playing in terms of supporting efforts to expand export-handling capacity through the modernization of elevators, improved storage and more efficient scheduling. How can this help support the Great Lakes seaway in particular, which benefits both Ontario and Quebec?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Every part of this great land has unrealized economic potential. Underpinning this economic potential is our ability to move products from the point of origin to markets elsewhere. Obviously, we want to increase trade within Canada. We want a manufacturer in the Beauce to be able to move his products to Alberta as well as Europe. In both cases, it requires nimble, agile, modern, reliable and predictable supply chains.

The Great Lakes do not have access as ports of first arrival in Canada. The budget spelled out the fact that we are looking at expanding this, on a business case level, to ports in the Great Lakes network. That will help communities, from Thunder Bay right up through the St. Lawrence, meet their economic aspirations as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you, Minister MacKinnon.

Thank you, Ms. Nguyen.

Over to you, Mr. Barsalou‑Duval.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister, I'll pick up where I left off. I don't know if you're familiar with my riding. It is 50 kilometres long, extends along the St. Lawrence River, and a railroad cuts through it from one side to the other. We directly experience everything that happens on the river, everything that happens on the railways, and even everything that happens on the highways, because we have Highway 30. Obviously, a project like the Contrecœur terminal can't not have an impact. It will have some impact locally. Let's not bury our heads in the sand. To some extent, the government is asking people to sacrifice part of their quality of life.

At the same time, for years, various cities in my riding have been asking the federal government for a feasibility study for the redevelopment of the rail line in Boucherville, an interest in the Verchères wharf, which has been abandoned, and the return of the shoreline protection program for residents living along the river. At the moment, none of these requests have gotten a response from Ottawa.

So, instead of solving problems, the government is going to add problems. Is there a way to make commitments to solve some of these problems before adding others?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Mr. Barsalou‑Duval, one day, we'll go and visit the places in question together. I'll be pleased to analyze all of these requests one by one. Some are municipal and some are provincial. If they're related to Transport Canada, I'll be happy to work with you on that.

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

So you're not saying that you're going to solve one issue in particular. A concrete example I can give you is that there were no consultations on the project in Boucherville or Varennes. People are sort of in the dark. Obviously, given all the train cars that will be passing through, I can't not have plans. How is it that people weren't informed? How is it that, for example, the rail service plan for the sector isn't disclosed? These are all things that people would like to know so that there's some transparency, and also to consider and put in place mitigation measures to limit the disadvantages associated with this project.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

The Port of Montreal is in charge of the project. I think you and I can pass on the residents' request on these issues.