House of Commons Hansard #193 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was railways.
Denis Lebel ConservativeMinister of Infrastructure
Mr. Speaker, I am sure the member's former colleague, the mayor of Montreal, is very proud to hear his colleague saying that the mayor is not doing his job when it comes to Montreal's water pipes. I am sure he must be proud of that.
As hon. members know, we are working in partnership with the municipalities and the provinces. Make no mistake: under the Prime Minister's leadership, our government has invested three times more in infrastructure than the previous Liberal government.
Adam Vaughan Liberal Trinity—Spadina, ON
Mr. Speaker, I would ask the Minister of Finance to present a budget, but if it is like the last one, maybe I do not want to hear the budget.
Only two years ago, bridges and transit had a $2.4 billion annual investment by the federal government, which has now shrunk to just over $200 million. The mayor of Vancouver has confirmed that his city received zero dollars from the new building Canada fund. It is unbelievable. The impact of this is absolutely obvious. Vancouver now has the worst gridlock in Canada, a direct result of the current government's indifference. It is costing $1 billion a year.
When will the Conservative government fund infrastructure? Where is the budget?
Denis Lebel ConservativeMinister of Infrastructure
Mr. Speaker, that is wrong. The hon. member knows that is only for the gas tax fund, which is twice a year. The transfer of monies to the provinces and territories was $2 billion last year, in 2014. It will be more than that in 2015, and he knows that.
Our Conservative government has invested a record amount into public transit across Canada. In Toronto that is the extension of the Toronto-York Spadina subway and the Union Station project; 100% of the gas tax fund of Toronto has been invested in transit, and that is its choice.
Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, members of the National Assembly of Quebec unanimously adopted a motion calling on the Conservative Prime Minister to immediately transfer the firearms registry data pertaining to Quebec to the Government of Quebec. Let us not forget that Quebec taxpayers helped pay for that data.
Will the Conservative government finally show some common sense, respect the unanimous decision of the National Assembly and give Quebec the registry data?
Steven Blaney ConservativeMinister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Mr. Speaker, I would like to reassure my colleague and tell her that we are going to abide by the Supreme Court's decision. We believe that enough of Quebec taxpayers' money has been wasted on this ineffective and costly firearms registry, which is a bottomless money pit.
We share the point of view of the Fédération québécoise des chasseurs et pêcheurs, which believes that a Quebec registry, like the defunct Canadian registry, would be useless and would not help keep Quebeckers or police officers safe.
Françoise Boivin NDP Gatineau, QC
Mr. Speaker, where there is a will, there is a way. That is what the Supreme Court was saying. If the Conservatives wanted to, then they could, but they would rather focus on their ideology. Yesterday, 106 elected representatives from across Quebec all spoke out against the Conservatives' determination to destroy the Quebec data in the registry. That goes against the will of Quebec, which has been clear: these data are important to public safety.
Will the Conservatives set aside their ideological stubbornness, listen to Quebec's elected representatives and give them the data that Quebec taxpayers helped pay for? Where is the Prime Minister's open federalism?
Steven Blaney ConservativeMinister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Mr. Speaker, if my colleague and her party would set ideology aside, they would support the measures that our government brought in eight years ago. We implemented minimum sentences of three to five years for people who are found in illegal possession of a firearm. We also implemented measures to ensure that harsher sentences are imposed on people who commit violent crimes using a firearm. In the House, we passed measures regarding mandatory training and against domestic violence. The member should stand up here in Ottawa and defend the safety of our country.
David Yurdiga Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Mr. Speaker, under the leadership of our Prime Minister, I have been proud to support the significant infrastructure investments that are delivering real results for Alberta and communities across Canada.
Late last week I was very pleased to host the Minister of Health in Fort McMurray for an event that further demonstrates this government's commitment to jobs and the economy.
Can the minister please update the House on this important announcement?
Cathy McLeod ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health and for Western Economic Diversification
Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Fort McMurray—Athabasca has certainly been a very strong advocate for Albertans.
The minister was very pleased last week to announce that Fort McMurray International Airport is being considered for an expansion project of up to $25 million under the building Canada fund. I understand there is a critical need for the terminal buildings to expand and also the main runway.
This is incredibly important. It creates jobs. Our government has supported the new building Canada plan, which is the longest long-term infrastructure plan in Canadian history.
Together, we are building a stronger Alberta for a stronger Canada.
Marc Garneau Liberal Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, last year the government had difficulty sponsoring 1,300 refugees.
The situation is catastrophic: three and a half million Syrians displaced to places like Lebanon, Turkey, and Jordan; six and half million displaced internally; two and half million Iraqis displaced in their country.
Why, in the face of this catastrophic situation, is the government so miserly? Why is it incapable of stepping up to the plate for refugees?
Chris Alexander ConservativeMinister of Citizenship and Immigration
Mr. Speaker, this government has had no trouble fulfilling its commitments. On the contrary, we have done more than our part in resettling refugees from Iraq and Syria. We continue to do so. We are one of the leading humanitarian contributors in both regions.
However, we also recognize, unlike the parties opposite, that the source of this problem is Islamic terrorism. The source of this problem is the Islamic State. It is that terrorist threat that has caused millions of people to be internally displaced, to have to leave the borders of their countries. They want to go home, and we, by our action with allies, want—
Dany Morin NDP Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC
Mr. Speaker, another business in my region has fallen victim to the sluggish economy. The Niobec mine expansion project in Saint-Honoré has been dropped. Some 70 people are losing their well-paying jobs as a result.
Niobium is a rare and highly strategic metal, but Canada is once again missing its chance to develop a niche specific to this resource. The economy is tanking and we need the federal government more than ever.
Will the minister finally take action to stimulate our mining sector and create good jobs for the people of Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean?
Kelly Block ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, mining is a global industry, and our government is committed to attracting investment, opening new markets, supporting innovation, improving regulatory effectiveness, and promoting corporate social responsibility. That is why we are continuing to take action to ensure the success of the extractive sector through the extension of the mineral exploration tax credit and the Canadian exploration expenses.
Our government is proud that Canada has the lowest overall tax rate on new business investments in the G7.
Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON
Mr. Speaker, today the Parliamentary Budget Officer released a report looking into the impact of our government's family tax cut and enhanced universal child care benefit. Can the Minister of State for Social Development please update this House on the PBO' s findings for our proposed changes and what our government has done to help parents meet their child care needs?
Candice Bergen ConservativeMinister of State (Social Development)
Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Mississauga South for that question and for the great work she does on behalf of Canadian families.
Today, the PBO confirmed that 100% of families with children will benefit from our family tax cut and benefit package, regardless of their choice of child care. The PBO said, “The introduction of the [universal child care benefit] greatly increased the level of benefits” to families. In fact, thanks to our Conservative government, he said that the “total federal spending on child care nearly quadrupled”.
While the opposition votes against the UCCB, we will keep putting money in the pockets of families.
Jean-François Fortin Forces et Démocratie Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Mr. Speaker, in the 1980s and 1990s, 72 million trees were planted on privately held forest land through a federal forest development program in eastern Quebec.
Today these trees are between 20 and 30 years old and in need of maintenance work in order to preserve their value, but the federal government has not announced any follow-up program.
On the eve of the budget, private forest owners have expectations. They need support in order to proceed with the required maintenance work and develop the wood.
Will the government support them, or will it allow a $100 million investment to rot away?
Kelly Block ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, our government has provided unprecedented support for the forest sector. Our focus on innovation, energy efficiency, and expanding markets has demonstrated remarkable results. Wood exports to China have increased by 1400% since 2007, and world-first products are being developed from coast to coast to coast.
Unlike that member who voted against supporting the forest sector at every opportunity, we will continue to take action to create jobs and support forest-dependent communities.
Jean-François Fortin Forces et Démocratie Haute-Gaspésie—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC
Mr. Speaker, although it may not seem like it yet, summer is coming, along with the construction season.
Municipalities need to get going now on planning the infrastructure work they can get done before next winter. Unfortunately, they do not know how much money they will have because Ottawa has still not reached an agreement with Quebec on the building Canada plan.
Will the minister stop telling us that it is the largest infrastructure program in history and realize that if municipalities do not have access to the money in time, there will be no credible plan in the short term?
Denis Lebel ConservativeMinister of Infrastructure
Mr. Speaker, the member should perhaps follow what is happening with this file.
Last June 25, the Prime Minister was in my riding together with Premier Couillard to announce the renewal of the historic agreement with the Quebec government on the gas excise tax.
Every municipality knows how much it will be getting for the next 10 years. The amounts for the next five years were announced previously. The money was transferred to the Quebec government last July and November. The municipalities are well aware of that.
As a former mayor, he should perhaps ask the current mayor.
Tony Clement ConservativePresident of the Treasury Board
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, on behalf of the 84 departments and agencies, the 2015-16 reports on plans and priorities.
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I hope that I have not chosen the wrong moment, but on Thursday in the debate around ISIS, I discovered in reviewing the Hansard that I made an error of fact, and I wish to withdraw it. U.S. Republicans were never featured in a photograph with ISIS fighters. I regret the error.
The Speaker Conservative Andrew Scheer
I am sure the House appreciates the clarification from the hon. member.
The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C-52, An Act to amend the Canada Transportation Act and the Railway Safety Act, be read the second time and referred to a committee.
Andrew Cash NDP Davenport, ON
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise in this place on behalf of the good people of Davenport in the great city of Toronto to debate a very important bill for the constituents in my riding of Davenport, and that is the bill to amend the Canada Transportation Act and the Railway Safety Act.
What we are talking about here is rail safety. I would like to let people who are watching know that in communities in Toronto, including the community I represent, and in fact, I myself live very close to a major rail artery, every day dangerous goods are carried through. The rail line sort of bisects the city of Toronto, the biggest city in the country. The train that ultimately exploded and led to the tragic events in Lac-Mégantic actually traversed right through the city of Toronto.
For many people that is a staggering realization, because there are thousands upon thousands of people who live literally metres away from the rail line. For them, the debate we are having is not just a theoretical conversation. It is not just about what happens somewhere else. It is about the very communities in which they live.
It is also important to note while we are debating this that in cities like Toronto which have rail lines criss-crossing and intersecting large areas of residential neighbourhoods, when the rail lines were first put in, many of those communities were not there. They were industrial areas, but development has changed the face of cities like Toronto and what we are seeing now are residential communities very close to rail lines.
For the people I represent what is in those tankers is very important. How we ensure the safe transport of what is in those tankers is very important to my community and therefore this debate is important.
As many of my esteemed colleagues in the NDP have said today, we are in favour of the bill, but support for the bill underlines some very serious concerns that we have around rail safety in the country. It is not just the NDP that has concerns about rail safety. It is not just members of my community in Davenport that have concerns about rail safety. The Auditor General also has concerns about rail safety.
I know the government always welcomes the views and opinions of the NDP here in the House, but every once in a while it is nice to quote third parties. In this case, I will read a bit of the Auditor General's 2014 report on Transport Canada's oversight of rail safety, because it is the oversight of rail safety, the implementing of a system of safety that the people in my community are looking to the government to achieve. While we support the measures that are in the bill, it does not go any distance toward ameliorating the concerns in my community around rail safety.
The report from the Auditor General really underlines and gives credence to the concerns of the people in Davenport. The report states:
Despite the fact that federal railways were required 12 years ago to implement safety management systems for managing their safety risks and complying with safety requirements, Transport Canada has yet to establish an audit approach that provides a minimum level of assurance that federal railways have done so. While it has done a few audits of those systems most of the audits it did were too narrowly focused and provided assurance on only a few aspects of SMSs [safety management systems]. At the rate at which the Department is conducting focused audits, it will take many years to audit all the key components of SMS regulations, including key safety systems of each of the 31 federal railways.
That is just not enough for the people of Toronto. That is not enough for people of my community of Davenport. This does not cut it. It is going to take years for Transport Canada to conduct the audits. By the time it has finished conducting those audits, hopefully the Conservative government will be long gone and we will have new regulations and new standards for rail safety in this country.
The guidance and tools provided to inspectors for assessing federal railway safety management systems are missing many key elements. That is not us saying this. That is the Auditor General saying this. For example, they contain few requirements to help inspectors plan, conduct and conclude on audits and inspections, and for following up on findings. This makes it difficult for Transport Canada to ensure that its inspections and audits are effective in determining whether railways are taking corrective actions where necessary.
Lastly, Transport Canada does not have a quality assurance plan to continuously improve its oversight of rail safety. Is it any wonder that Canadians from coast to coast to coast are concerned about rail safety? They may be, as we are, happy that there are steps being taken around insurance and compensation, but we need to talk about preventing accidents as well as who pays for them when they happen.
This is not just a case of red tape versus yellow tape. This is not a question of onerous regulations versus caution tape that we use to cordon off accident sites. This should be a matter of course.
We are transporting dangerous goods in record quantities and record frequencies today. Not only are our regulations not keeping pace with the changes, the government has diminished and stripped away oversight and allowed companies to do the oversight themselves. The Auditor General's report shows that Transport Canada does not have the tools to even oversee the oversight that the companies are charged with implementing.
Most fair-minded people would accept that when rail companies are transporting dangerous goods through municipalities, the municipalities have a right know what is being brought through their cities, not three months later, but before it happens. That is a fair expectation that most people would have, yet we have not had any of that conversation happen among Conservatives.
I know that in the Province of Ontario, the Ontario NDP has pushed for “right to know” legislation that would enable municipalities to know what was coming through their cities and towns before it came through. This would allow emergency response units and fire crews to at least be properly on guard. It would also allow residents to know what the risks are of what is passing right through their backyards. That is, in fact, literally what happens in Toronto and in my community. It is fair for Canadians to want to know that stuff.
When we look at the Auditor General's report, we understand the enormity of the deficit in rail safety in this country. It also underscores a massive policy failure with regard to the Conservative government and its unwillingness to nurture the clean energy economy in Canada. The Conservatives are leaving $5 trillion of economic activity in clean energy technology on the table while they continually pump out and transport oil products that clearly do not come with the oversight and safety requirements that they need.
Things like “right to know” legislation are vital for cities like Toronto, where we have neighbourhoods upon neighbourhoods growing and developing right along the rail line. This is not 1920. This is 2015, and we need to pull these regulations and safety requirements up to modern standards.