Mr. Speaker, I patiently listened to my colleague, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, talk to us about his government's investments.
Nonetheless, there is something he may not have understood. I enjoyed listening to him because he gave examples, but his examples do not apply to the matter at hand, namely help for the municipalities. I do not take issue with him talking about infrastructure investment for the Pacific gateway, but that has nothing to do with the $123 billion municipal infrastructure deficit. That is what we are talking about today.
I wanted to hear the parliamentary secretary talk about how he plans to settle this $123 billion city infrastructure deficit. This deficit was created by the federal government. That is what I have been saying all along.
Since the Liberals decided in the 1990s to achieve zero deficit, they have cut transfers to the provinces. The provinces offloaded more responsibilities on the cities. As a result, the cities have not been able to maintain their infrastructure.
Now the debt is $123 billion. Obviously this needs to be addressed. It is all well and good to say that we can invest in other infrastructures, and that there is money for Highway 30, but that is not what the cities are asking for. They need solutions to their water supply, sewage, public transit, cultural and sporting facility problems; they want to take care of their own infrastructure, not that of the provincial governments.
I wanted the parliamentary secretary to explain how he intends to deal with this $123 billion infrastructure deficit declared by the cities, according to a serious scientific study conducted by the Federation of Canadian Municipalities.