Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise and speak today about Bill C-3, an act respecting international bridges and tunnels.
Since this bill incorporates part of Bill C-44, which was introduced during the 38th Parliament and which the Bloc Québécois supported, we naturally support this bill. However, we do have some reservations, which I will explain later.
This is the first time the Government of Canada has put legislation in place to allow it to exercise its authority over international bridges and tunnels. The new government tells us it wants to ensure that the security, safety and efficient movement of people and goods are in accordance with national interests. The events of September 2001, it must be noted, made clear the importance of protecting these vital infrastructures.
The proposed amendments would give the Government of Canada new and broader legislative powers to oversee approvals of international bridges and tunnels. These amendments would give the government power to approve, on the recommendation of the Minister of Transport, the construction or alteration of international bridges and tunnels and to formulate regulations governing the management, maintenance, security, safety and operation of these structures. The bill would also authorize the federal government to approve the sale or transfer of ownership of international bridges and tunnels. Note as well that it would strengthen federal government oversight of all new and existing international bridges and tunnels in order to better protect the public interest and ensure the flexible flow of international trade.
There are currently 24 international vehicular bridges and tunnels and five international railway tunnels linking Canada and the United States. These bridges and tunnels carry the vast majority of international trade between Canada and the United States and play a vital role in Canada's transportation system. Although only one bridge of minor importance is located in Quebec, the Bloc Québécois still recognizes the relevance of this bill. As we have always done in the past, we are making a constructive contribution to the development of government policies that benefit the entire population.
For example, during committee review of the bill we realized the significance of the new law we are discussing today when we learned that the Ambassador Bridge linking Windsor, Ontario, to Detroit, Michigan, in the United States, is privately owned by an American corporation. The current owner is opposed to this bill and we believe that the Canadian government must have oversight and jurisdiction over all international links between the two countries.
What concerns Quebec the most about this bill is a provision affecting international bridges and tunnels on the St. Lawrence River. These provisions correct the legislative anomaly in the Navigable Waters Protection Act which requires a permit for all work affecting navigable waters but which does not authorize the issuance of permits for the St. Lawrence River. This anomaly became apparent when plans for the highway 30 bridge crossing the St. Lawrence south of Montreal were being studied.
The minister declared, in his speech of April 28, that any new crossing over the St. Lawrence would be subject to federal approval. In the past, the federal government has too often demonstrated arrogance toward Quebec and its areas of jurisdiction. We need only think of the choice of Mirabel as the site of the new airport dictated by the federal government against the wishes of the Quebec government at that time.
The Quebec government plans the use of its land and we would not be in favour of the federal government exercising its authority to prevent Quebec from exercising its own powers.
I therefore hope that, in confirming this approval, the federal government takes account of the advice and concerns made known by the government of Quebec, in compliance with the fields of jurisdiction of all the levels of government.
While the bill corrects a legal void in the area of international bridges and tunnels, is designed to make those structures more secure, and has the consent of local stakeholders, it leaves us with certain reservations.
In the context of the international bridges and tunnels regulations, the bill seems to us to grant the government very broad, quasi-police powers, for example, a power to investigate without warrant and a very summary power of seizure.
The government is assigning itself legislative powers, but the financial responsibility lies on other shoulders. Ultimately, we believe that this situation can lead to disputes.
We note that responsibility for international bridges and tunnels lies within the exclusive legislative jurisdiction of the federal government under the British North America Act of 1867.
However, in most cases the Canadian portions of these structures are owned by the provinces. We should therefore ensure that the regulatory and financial implementation of this bill takes place in collaboration and in negotiation with the provinces.
In his speech of April 28, the minister stated that the federal government will be able to ensure that environmental assessments of international bridges and tunnels are conducted in accordance with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, when appropriate.
What does the minister mean in adding “when appropriate” to the end of his sentence?
Once again, it is important to us that the minister take account of the powers of Quebec, that he respect the fact that the environment is a jurisdiction shared between the federal government and the provinces, and that he not necessarily have the last word in this matter.
We have consulted the Bureau d'audiences publiques du Québec, the BAPE. In the wake of those consultations, we note that the agreement between that organization and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency is yielding good results and that the fields of jurisdiction of each of the agencies are being respected. Given the declared openness toward Quebec, we would like that respect to continue to be applied to the bill we are studying today at third reading.
The issue of fields of jurisdiction was also raised many times in committee, during the clause-by-clause adoption of the bill that is before us today. We have said that we place our confidence in the minister in certain emergency situations when he would assume exceptional powers in a major crisis.
In conclusion, the Bloc Québécois will support the bill at third reading, even though it is a very partial solution to the many remaining transportation problems that need to be resolved in Quebec and in Canada.