House of Commons Hansard #19 of the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was money.

Topics

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Mr. Speaker, my colleague and I both share vast sections in northern Ontario and I think we understand the problems that many of our smaller communities are facing. In the past, when we have had these one-third, one-third, one-third programs, there were a few winners in every round and there were many losers. The backlog of infrastructure projects continued to grow, and especially the small communities tended to be left out.

What we are seeing with this announcement is that it is not an economic stimulus because it will be at least a year before the money flows. We saw that with the building Canada fund. Meanwhile, there are communities that are unable to access the money because they do not have the tax base to participate. It is a process that will create winners and losers, and that will happen right across Canada.

I think my hon. colleague would agree that in northern Ontario, especially with the aging populations and rural regions that we represent, our communities are going to suffer in some ways much more than larger areas that have the infrastructure dollars already and have the kind of tax base that can support this.

I would like to hear my hon. colleague's opinion on this.

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Liberal

Anthony Rota Liberal Nipissing—Timiskaming, ON

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Timmins--James Bay has made a very good point. As I said in my discourse, smaller communities do need that funding. It would be great to have the full amount go out to them, but by having the money go out now, it allows them to act, it allows them at least to get going with existing projects. So many small communities across northern Ontario are left out when it comes to the building Canada program. It is just not done in a timely manner and, more important, it costs money. It cuts into the money they have to run their organization. To put the capital into infrastructure, they have to take it out of operations or plan for it.

The hon. member for Edmonton Centre talked about borrowing money. It is nice to say that the communities can borrow money, but if they do not have the tax base or the credit rating and they are small communities, it really does not help. It does not take into account small municipalities in northern Ontario and much of rural Canada.

What is nice about this program is that on a per capita basis, the money is put into the community. It can upgrade, and if it wants, and if it is fortunate enough to have a certain amount of money put aside, it can still go the next step and apply for the other half and get the larger projects done. However, it is the day-to-day infrastructure that needs to be done. Especially nowadays, as we drive through a lot of the smaller communities in northern Ontario, as the frost comes out of the ground, we start seeing more and more potholes, bumps that we know were not there when the frost was in, and that creates some permanent damage. If they are not taken care of right away, they end up causing a problem. The important thing is that we get that money right out into the community and get that infrastructure in place so that Canadians can benefit from it.

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:20 p.m.

Vancouver Island North B.C.

Conservative

John Duncan ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to have the opportunity today to speak to some of the recent first nations infrastructure investments our government has taken through budget 2009, Canada's economic action plan.

Of course the action plan includes spending for other aboriginal groups in the north and elsewhere, but I only have ten minutes. I will be splitting my time with the member for Portage—Lisgar, so I will restrict my comments to first nations.

It is no secret that improved infrastructure lies at the core of healthy and productive first nation communities. Ultimately, improvements to infrastructure help stimulate economic growth and improve the quality of life on-reserve. The government is committed to doing just that, as it has shown over the last three years.

With Canada's economic action plan, the government provides $1.4 billion over two years for specific initiatives aimed at improving the well-being and prosperity of aboriginal people in Canada. These new investments include $515 million to accelerate ready-to-go first nations infrastructure projects, focusing on schools, water, and critical community services such as health clinics, nurses' residences and policing infrastructure, to name just a few.

These investments include $200 million over the next two years for building ten new schools on reserves and three major school renovations. I might add that the minister announced the new school in Burnt Church, New Brunswick, just today. Our government recognizes that first nations children need the best possible learning facilities to help them succeed in their studies and to start building a solid foundation for realizing their dreams.

Another $165 million will be invested in initiatives to accelerate water and waste water infrastructure projects. We all know that access to clean, safe and reliable drinking water is an essential requirement for the health and well-being of first nations communities and is vital to improving the quality of life for first nations on-reserve.

Our government recognizes it has specific responsibilities in regard to aboriginal issues such as housing, and we are determined to fulfill them. The hard truth is that too many residents of first nations communities live in substandard housing.

The causes are complex and varied. Many communities and individuals cannot access enough capital to build and renovate homes, while other communities lack the capacity to manage housing stock effectively. That is why we also announced $400 million over the next two years to support on-reserve housing. It is dedicated to new housing projects, remediation of existing housing stock and complementary housing activities.

Last week in British Columbia, the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development announced that up to $50 million will be invested in on-reserve housing within that province.

These investments are in addition to the $1 billion annually invested in first nations community infrastructure, which includes housing, water and waste water systems, education facilities, and other infrastructure such as roads and bridges.

More specifically, planned expenditures for 2008-09 include $236 million to support a wide range of school infrastructure projects, including operation and maintenance, study and design, renovations, minor repairs and new construction; $368 million to address water issues in first nations communities, including upgrading water and waste water facilities, on-reserve maintenance in the operation of the facilities, training, and moving forward with initiatives under a first nations water and waste water action plan; and $276 million for on-reserve housing needs. A portion of this annual investment provides an average of 2,300 new housing units and 3,300 renovations in first nations communities across the country. Finally, there is $442 million to support ongoing projects such as roads and bridges, electrification, and infrastructure in first nations communities across the country.

All these investments to support infrastructure in first nations communities focus on mitigating health and safety risks, maximizing the lifespan of a physical asset, ensuring infrastructure meets applicable codes and standards, and ensuring community infrastructure is managed in a cost-effective and efficient manner.

Our government is taking action to create change through strong partnerships and constructive leadership. We are helping to improve learning environments for first nations students, increasing access to safe drinking water and improving the quality of life on reserve with new housing projects. We are investing in projects that will provide lasting, sustainable benefits for first nations communities and we are doing all of this in partnership with first nations, other levels of government and ultimately all Canadians.

We believe that for real change, there is no other way to operate. We must do things and act together. No person, group, government or single level of government has all the answers. The answer to our shared challenges does not rest on having one level of government take action. That only sustains the status quo. Instead, we reach our goals through genuine partnership, and the potential life-altering results of this approach are evident all around us. Our partnerships are working.

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

NDP

Linda Duncan NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the comments from the hon. member across the way. It is good to hear that there might be new funding coming to the first nations of Canada, particularly in the area of safe drinking water.

However, I would ask the member if he could perhaps clarify. It is one thing to keep promising more money to resolve a problem attested to by hundreds of boil-water advisories; it is another thing to come forward with the actual legislation that was promised last year. In addition, it is my understanding that when these moneys are passed over for safe drinking water and waste water facilities, by a contribution agreement the liability passes to the first nations.

I understand that is a concern for the first nations. Could the member please address those matters?

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Conservative

John Duncan Conservative Vancouver Island North, BC

Mr. Speaker, I know that when we formed the government three years ago, we inherited a priority list of water systems that needed to be fixed. That list was something like 180 communities long. We have reduced the list to under 60 communities. We have an action plan to further reduce it over the next fiscal year. That is major progress. We are getting it done. Governments before us did not get it done.

In terms of putting those systems in place, there is also a training component, and the community is involved. We are creating a sustainable situation so that these systems do not fall into disrepair.

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Liberal

Jean-Claude D'Amours Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, I would like clarifications from my colleague on certain points. He speaks of hundreds of millions of dollars invested by his government in various projects. On the other hand, there are some specific projects in my riding. The people of the Eel River Bar First Nation have been waiting for two major things for years, ever since this Conservative government has been in place. There has been absolutely no movement on them. They are waiting for the water supply for their aboriginal heritage garden. There have been no announcements, no work has started. They are waiting for the rest of the funding to be able to go ahead.

It is all very well to talk of money here and money there, but where is that money? When will the work start? Or rather, when will they have permission to start on it, and when will the federal government give them the necessary money to finish the project?

The truth is that the Conservatives are giving absolutely nothing concrete. There are lots of fine promises, lots of fancy words, but when it comes right down to it, nothing is being done.

When will all this materialize into concrete actual projects?

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Conservative

John Duncan Conservative Vancouver Island North, BC

Mr. Speaker, I am unaware of the specifics of the question from the member opposite, but I will say that we have been delivering. We have been auditing. We have announced some real results and reductions in unsafe water systems. We have been delivering on other infrastructure needs in first nations communities.

Perhaps the member opposite does not want to hear it. He can talk quite loudly. However, I will say that we will take his question under advisement. If I can let him know anything specific, I will, but I can tell him that we are making announcements routinely. There will be a lot of school announcements upcoming. There will be water system announcements upcoming. As recently as today, the minister is in New Brunswick announcing a new school.

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Conservative

Kevin Sorenson Conservative Crowfoot, AB

Mr. Speaker, the member dealt to a great extent with aboriginal questions in his speech. That is not the angle I am going to take with respect to my question to him.

We are discussing infrastructure because it is part of a stimulus package. A lot of people believe that it is government's role, and government's role only, to stimulate a comeback in this global recession. That member is a good Conservative who believes the market has a role to play.

Certainly governments in some places also have a role to play, but there are some things the government has not done. Our government has not stepped forward to nationalize corporations. We have not stepped forward with protectionist legislation. We are trying to stay away from nationalization and protectionism. We are also trying to stay away from overregulation, but we have gone into deficit.

Does the member believe that the infrastructure spending we are bringing forward is the approach to take, rather than taking the approach of putting forward long, ongoing programs?

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Conservative

John Duncan Conservative Vancouver Island North, BC

Mr. Speaker, I absolutely do believe in these kinds of stimulus packages that deal with shovel-ready infrastructure.

For example, in order for the money in budget 2009 to go to the 10 new schools, the qualification is that they must be ready-to-go schools. This will help clear up some of the backlog and achieve the stimulus goal, while at the same time addressing a real need. That is obviously complementary to the question.

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Conservative

Candice Bergen Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to speak to the motion before us. The government has delivered unprecedented investments to Canada's economy through infrastructure programs. This fact is undeniable.

Back in November 2007, we announced the historic building Canada plan. This plan invests $33 billion in long-term predictable funding to help provinces, territories and communities of all sizes. It was a necessary boost to our cities, towns and municipalities, and will help modernize our roads, bridges, water systems and other infrastructure developments.

After 13 long years of inaction from the previous Liberal governments, we made critical choices to help benefit the quality of life for all Canadians. This is infrastructure money put towards the foundation of our country to create key investments to benefit future generations.

Earlier this year Canada's finance minister delivered Canada's economic action plan in this very chamber. It addressed the current economic uncertainty affecting Canadians, as well as people around the globe. This plan will stimulate economic growth, create jobs and support Canadian families.

By accelerating key infrastructure investments, this government will provide almost $12 billion additional stimulus for our economy, above and beyond our $33 billion building Canada plan.

Our economic action plan clearly lays out the framework that our government is taking to invest in our economy, create jobs and support Canadian families through sound investment in infrastructure.

This $12 billion boost to our economy is an accelerated infrastructure investment and it includes a $4 billion infrastructure stimulus fund, $2 billion to accelerate construction at colleges and universities, $1 billion to create a new green infrastructure fund, $500 million to support construction of new community recreation facilities and upgrades to existing facilities, and accelerating existing provincial, territorial-based funding, $25 million to all provinces.

We are committed to providing funding to the priority projects Canadian families can use most. We have shown this through these programs. Our prudent investments and responsible decisions made before this global crisis hit Canada seem even more critical with the benefit of hindsight.

While some in the benches opposite still refuse to vote to support our action plan and to help Canadian families now, we are proposing immediate action to better our economy, to improve the quality of life for Canadians, and to seek ways to build a better country for our children and our grandchildren.

Although we have taken many great strides, we cannot act alone. No single level of government can address this country's infrastructure needs. Our ability to fund projects is dependent on our partners and we will work closely with these partners, with provinces, territories and municipalities to ensure the greatest results.

My colleague, the transport and infrastructure minister, showed this commitment through the consultations he held with the leaders in provinces, territories and municipalities across Canada. This minister consulted community leaders, stakeholders and other respective groups.

My hon. colleague worked hand in hand to find ways that all levels of government can work together to highlight priority projects and discover areas where the acceleration of funding was possible, as well as determining additional steps necessary to ensure that this progress was possible. We will continue to work with all levels of government in order to get projects moving and provide a much-needed shot in the arm to our economy.

As a further result of these consultations, the minister was able to develop our government's five point action plan as touched on by my colleague earlier to further guide our efforts towards accelerating infrastructure investments.

The first point in this action plan is working with provinces and territories to put key major infrastructure projects on the fast track through the building Canada fund major infrastructure component. We are also accelerating funding for projects in smaller communities through the building Canada fund communities component.

This acceleration requires the collaborative input of all levels of government to see success. Partnerships are necessary from all levels of government for this process to succeed. Our government is committed to ensuring this is possible.

For Canada's future we are working together with our counterparts from across the country to improve the lives of all Canadians.

We are putting people to work. We are creating new jobs, putting shovels in the ground, helping construction sectors across the country, and spending money in key development projects which will help future generations.

While different funds under our overarching infrastructure plan operate differently, each one of them is based on partnership. These partnerships are the key elements in the successful delivery of our government's economic action plan.

We have worked and we are continuing to work with our partners to cut red tape, streamline approvals, and get shovels in the ground faster. We want to see Canadians at work in their communities and benefiting from our investments. We are looking forward to new cultural and sports facilities opening across the country, and being able to drive on safer and improved roads and bridges.

We have consulted with our provincial and territorial partners through this entire process. We have listened to municipal leaders and municipal associations, and we have responded. We established programs that will lead to targeted infrastructure investments and will lay the foundation for a stronger economy and a better Canada.

While others choose to sit back and do nothing, we are standing up for Canadians. We are forming partnerships to work in collaboration with our colleagues across this country to identify projects which will get shovels in the ground tomorrow, put people to work, and boost our economy to benefit the quality of life for all Canadians.

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Liberal

Jean-Claude D'Amours Liberal Madawaska—Restigouche, NB

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member opposite for her speech. However, I feel that I must clarify certain things.

She says that her government wants to speed things up, that it wants shovels in the ground so that projects can go ahead. That certainly sounds good. If that is all there is to it, then why has the City of Edmundston's sewer division project not yet been approved? Why can the city not get an answer, and why is it being told that it might be included in the next round of funding? The money is available right now. The member says that her government wants shovels in the ground, so why is the City of Edmunston being told, “We will see”?

The truth is that it is not yet in a position to deliver the goods to the various communities, towns and cities. If it were, then the City of Edmunston would certainly not be hearing that it will have to wait until later. Instead, it would be told, “Yes, we are going ahead with it now”. Why have these projects not been approved, and why is the work not getting underway right now? Why?

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Conservative

Candice Bergen Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB

Mr. Speaker, it is a priority for this government, and I believe for all members who support this economic plan, that we do get the funding to municipalities, to cities and to towns as soon as we can. We want to work together with our partners, but we cannot do it unless we listen to municipalities.

I know that as I travelled across my riding, municipalities were saying to me that they were pleased with this government, the progress that we have made, and the increases that we have made in the gas tax transfers to the municipalities. They are recognizing the work that we are doing. That is why they are very excited about our plan and we are moving forward on that.

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to my colleague. I guess there is a fundamental problem with credibility here because we know that the present finance minister is pretty much the Mr. Magoo of the economic meltdown. First there was no recession, then we missed the recession, and then there was a technical recession. Now we are in a synchronized recession. All the way along, everything was fine. Now we hear the member telling us that the government is going to get the money out immediately when it took the government a year--

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance on a point of order.

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Conservative

Ted Menzies Conservative Macleod, AB

Mr. Speaker, that is absolutely inappropriate and intolerant language to be used in this House. We have respected individuals, and especially the minister should be respected. The least he could do is show a little bit of respect.

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

I am not sure if that is a point of order. I would ask the hon. member for Timmins--James Bay to use respectful parliamentary language in his discourse in this House.

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Mr. Speaker, I certainly support that. I would think though, if you check the record, Mr. Speaker, that the question of Mr. Magoo has been raised and it has been deemed appropriate because it is actually a term of endearment. It is not an attack.

Nonetheless I was interrupted, so I hope that does not take away from my time.

The question I am asking my hon. colleague is whether she is asking this House to believe that this money is going to move immediately because we have seen that it took them over a year to get the building Canada fund out? She tells us that she has talked to municipalities. All the municipalities we have spoken to say that this will slow down projects. It will not help the smaller communities that cannot meet their one-third--

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

The hon. member for Portage—Lisgar.

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Conservative

Candice Bergen Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB

Mr. Speaker, first of all, Canadians spoke in the last election on which Minister of Finance they respect, which Minister of Finance they want to lead this country in a time of economic crisis, and that is the current Minister of Finance. I am very proud and pleased to be able to work together with him.

I would like to add, if I may, that if the member truly cares about Canadians and municipalities, he would support the budget and he would work together with us to get this money moving out. He would not be denigrating people in the House. He would be working in a positive manner.

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Conservative

Merv Tweed Conservative Brandon—Souris, MB

Mr. Speaker, I know members across the way keep asking: What about this project and what about that project? In my community there are many projects coming forward. Communities are excited about this kind of a plan and we have consulted with them. We have not gone out and said this is what they are going to do.

Would the member for Portage—Lisgar please comment on some of her priorities?

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:45 p.m.

Conservative

Candice Bergen Conservative Portage—Lisgar, MB

Mr. Speaker, indeed, we are receiving calls and input every day from mayors, like Mayor Martin Harder from Winkler, Mayor Ken Brennan from Portage la Prairie. They are excited about what we are doing. They are asking questions and we are providing answers. We are working together with our partners to get this money moving out quickly and to see communities built.

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:45 p.m.

Liberal

Rodger Cuzner Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS

Mr. Speaker, it is a great pleasure to stand and debate the motion today. What concerns us most about the budget is that many small municipalities throughout the country are unable to get involved in the infrastructure program because they do not have the entry level dollars with which to play.

As far as a stimulus package goes, we see infrastructure as a very important and worthwhile investment to help the economy get going, to help with our environment, to deal with water, sewage treatment problems and whatnot across the land. We know that construction jobs and projects that are shovel-ready will provide benefits to many communities and contractors within smaller communities. Therefore, we see it as a very worthwhile stimulus package.

However, what we have trouble with and what we have heard from various communities over the last number of months is that some communities are so stretched currently they cannot come up with those 30¢ dollars to play in this market. If the federal government is there, that is great. If the provincial governments are there, that is great.

I look at my own constituency. The regional municipality of Cape Breton, which has a population of about 116,000 people, is currently carrying a debt load of about $115 million, and that is of great concern. Unless we make this amendment and change the way the money is delivered, it is not certain it can seize those opportunities.

That is probably one of the greatest concerns and is probably the greatest rationale for advancing the opposition motion today.

I should also identify the fact, Mr. Speaker, that I will be splitting my time with the member for Madawaska—Restigouche.

Another municipal unit within my riding is the town of Canso. Many members in the House have heard a fair amount about Canso over the last number of years. The community has been very much challenged since the closure in the offshore fishery and the depletion of its cod stocks. We have not seen any kind of resurgence in the cod stocks. People have left the community and moved on and industries have left. When that happens, the tax base shrinks and with the shrinking tax base, we see fewer revenues. When we handcuff communities like that, each year it gets tougher, debt is accrued and it becomes more of a challenge for them to get by.

As well, these communities are further burdened by constraints and by regulations that are put forward by provincial governments. We want to move to greener, more sustainable communities. However, when these regulations are placed on these communities, we know there is a greater degree of burden.

We know that towns, villages and municipal units are really the children of the provinces. They are created by the provinces and serve the functions delegated by each province. We all understand that. The provincial governments have various programs from province to province to help out. I believe, as do most people who are involved in the administration of municipal affairs, that the federal government has a role. Through the development of the infrastructure program, there are some benefits, and we support those benefits and the opportunities for the municipalities that can take part in this program. However, there still remains a group of municipalities, towns and cities that are unable to seize these opportunities.

This is the essence and thrust of our motion today.

I am willing to take some questions on this. I am sure the members of the government would like to know more about this.

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:50 p.m.

Peterborough Ontario

Conservative

Dean Del Mastro ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage

Mr. Speaker, I suppose I am kind of concerned about today's opposition day motion. While I think it might be anchored in good sentiment, it is very poorly founded.

I had the pleasure of attending the National Governors Association meetings in Washington, DC this past weekend. Its whole theme was infrastructure. A number of the experts who came forward specifically praised the building Canada approach as it pertained to infrastructure. They talked about the importance of ensuring there was a state match and a municipal match to projects. This would ensure the projects were indeed in the best interests of the community as well as amplify the amount of investment that the federal government made.

We are talking about $12 billion in total infrastructure funding that will lead to $36 billion worth of projects being completed. This is great news for Canadians. It will employ a lot of Canadians. The member should support it.

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:50 p.m.

Liberal

Rodger Cuzner Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS

Mr. Speaker, our amendment to the budget made perfect sense to most Canadians. We wanted to ensure that the moneys was being spent, that the stimulus package was getting out the door and having some kind of impact. Through the distribution of the gas tax, we have seen a template that has been effective, that has worked, that has brought benefit to many communities. It was one that was brought forward by the previous Liberal government.

All we are saying is put more money into that template, into that program. That is where we will get the benefit, not just for those communities but for the economy. That is how to get this economy going again.

Opposition Motion--Municipal InfrastructureBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:50 p.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Mr. Speaker, I always love to hear my colleague from Cape Breton speak. Even though he is not always prepared, being a Cape Bretoner, he is ready to speak.

Being from Cape Breton, he has the smaller communities just like I have in northern Ontario. We know how these small communities have benefited from the gas tax. They are left out time and time again from the bigger infrastructure projects. They do not have a tax base to compete against bigger municipalities.

If this is an economic stimulus package, do we need to have, as the Conservatives are insinuating, proof of buy-ins so that the projects are worthy? Does he not think any small town in Cape Breton has enough infrastructure projects that if they were given the money immediately, just like any small community in northern Ontario, they would put it to good and immediate use rather than drag out—