Debates of June 11th, 1998

Access To Information Act

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-227, an act to amend the Income Tax Act (income deferral from forced destruction of livestock or natural disaster), be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Income Tax Act

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)]

There being no further members rising for debate and the motion not being designated as a votable item, the time provided for the consideration of Private Members' Business has now expired and the order is dropped from the order paper.

[Marlene Catterall, Liberal, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Mr. Speaker, according to the order tabled and adopted yesterday I seek unanimous consent for the House to proceed to the adjournment debate.

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)]

Is there unanimous consent to proceed to the late show?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

[Jocelyne Girard-Bujold, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, thank you for this opportunity to re-establish the facts concerning the debate between the Minister of Transport for Canada and his Quebec counterpart on highway 175.

On June 4, I asked the Minister of Transport what game he was playing. I asked him why, in his response to the hon. member for Chicoutimi on June 2, he neglected to mention that the Quebec Minister of Transport had formally invited him to discuss a new strategic highway improvement program agreement, particularly for highway 175, at the meeting of the transport ministers in Edmonton?

In a letter dated May 27 and faxed the day before the Edmonton transport ministers meeting, Minister Brassard wrote as follows:

A new agreement strikes me as necessary in order to continue and complete projects begun under the strategic highway improvement program. It would also make it possible to initiate a new and top-priority project to bolster the economic development of Quebec.

He goes on to add:

Recent statements by Minister Massé when in the Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean and north shore regions open the door to new negotiations on highways 175 and 169 in the Laurentides wildlife reserve, as well as highway 389.

At the end of his letter, Minister Brassard stressed his availability to discuss a new strategic highway improvement program with his federal counterpart at the Edmonton meeting.

How then are we to interpret the words of the Minister of Transport for Canada, when he neglects to mention the existence of this letter or its contents, and claims Minister Brassard did not mention highway 175 to him in Edmonton? The least one can say is that his words are not very transparent, and hide his inability to act on this.

What is clear, however, is that Quebec is prepared to negotiate a new SHIP agreement. The Government of Quebec will, in December 1998, table the conclusion to an opportunity study for a divided four-lane highway in the Laurentian wildlife sanctuary, which includes a section on funding possibilities.

From what the minister has said, are we to conclude that, if the Government of Quebec decides to go ahead with a four-lane highway, the federal government is prepared to fund its share of the project?

In the short term, the people of Quebec and more particularly the people in my riding would like to know whether the minister is prepared to start new negotiations for a new SHIP agreement.

I have the following questions for the minister. First, I would like to know whether he convinced his cabinet colleagues to increase funding for the national highway system, as his provincial counterparts have asked, or whether, on the contrary, he was turned down. Second, if cabinet is open to his request, would the minister tell me when he intends to give his officials the go-ahead to begin bipartite negotiations to conclude a new SHIP agreement?

These are clear and precise questions. I ask the parliamentary secretary to answer my questions directly, because, like me, the people in the riding of Jonquière want to know whether the federal government is prepared to invest in repairing the roads in Quebec and thus return the millions of dollars it collected with its 1.5 cent tax on gasoline.

[Peter Adams, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, first of all let me thank the hon. member for Jonquière for her interest in the national highway system. I apologize for reading this reply in English but if I were to read it in French, it would take too long.

The federal government has recognized for some time that a significant additional effort will be required to maintain and upgrade Canada's national highway system.

As the minister stated in response to this question on June 4, the minister of transport for Quebec did not raise the question of funding for highway 175 during the Edmonton meeting, but he did raise the matter shortly afterward. Also he raised the subject of this highway in a letter dated May 27 in a broader perspective.

Transport Canada officials are presently looking at all the issues that were raised in the letter and the minister will be responding to that letter in the near future. In the meantime, the federal government will continue to work closely with all provinces, including Quebec.

If we succeed in developing a new funding program for the national highway system, highway 175 will undoubtedly be eligible for funding by the federal government if the Government of Quebec also agreed that it was a priority.

I would ask the member to convey my regards to my friends in Jonquière. I greatly enjoyed the month that I spent there.

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)]

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 6.26 p.m.)