Mr. Speaker, what is progress? In my opinion, that means moving forward as a society toward the common good.
Was Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau's Mirabel Airport project a step in the right direction at the end of the 1960s? No, because the plan for an airport of the future fell through, but also and especially because it was rushed. With the massive expropriations carried out by the federal government in Mirabel, leaving 10,000 people displaced, 3,000 families uprooted, and 97,000 acres of land expropriated when less than 15,000 acres were needed, the project did not lead to progress. It created human tragedies. Hastiness is not conducive to progress.
I have another example, which goes back even further. It is for my western colleagues. The Canadian Pacific Railway was also built quite quickly. Thousands of immigrants came from all over the world, and they did the work in abusive conditions, in mediocre living conditions. Fifteen thousand Chinese workers laboured on a project that ultimately injured and killed them. Six hundred people died during the construction of the Canadian Pacific Railway. Hastiness is not conducive to progress.
When I was a journalist, I did a few news stories on the people in Mirabel whose land was expropriated to mark the 60th anniversary. I remember the testimonies I gathered, and I saw first-hand that the scars were still there. I saw that these human tragedies—when someone is uprooted from their home, when their land is taken from them, even if they are compensated afterward—leave lasting marks. It was the 1960s, a time when, in the name of progress, everything had to move so fast that no one bothered with the human beings who were in the way.
Then along comes Bill C‑5, adopted under a closure motion in June, and now Bill C‑15, which is still being debated in the House, and once again we find ourselves in a climate of haste. The high‑speed rail project has been on the table since the 1980s. This government has been in power since 2015 without making much progress on it. Now, suddenly, it has to be done, and done quickly and forcefully. Rushing as a strategy is dangerous and counterproductive.
Let us look at how this Liberal government intends to proceed with Bill C‑15. Among other things, this bill “enacts the high-speed rail network act”. To help people watching understand, it would have been possible to build high-speed rail network earlier, in the old world, before Mr. Trump and the current rush. However, certain rules had to be followed, rules that surely exist for good reason, such as ensuring that people's individual rights are protected.
What is the purpose of the high-speed rail network act? Its purpose is to speed up projects. That is the government's direction. However, when people move faster, they take more risks, and when they take more risks, the risk of injustices increases. In our constituency offices, we all receive calls from citizens who are victims of injustices, who call us because their employment insurance cheque has not arrived, because their old age pension cheque did not come in, because their passport was lost. These things happen. The public service makes mistakes; the government makes mistakes. If we decide to move even faster, we increase the chances of error. I spent 10 years in legal aid trying to correct injustices committed against citizens.
Bill C-15 allows things to move even faster, thereby increasing the risk of error. What we are essentially saying is let us take the time to do things right. Let us make sure that real progress is made, because we are in favour of the high-speed rail project. However, let us make sure that real progress is being made and that we do not create a host of human tragedies.
So what does this legislation say? It says, among other things, that Alto will not be required to get approval from the Canadian Transportation Agency. The Canadian Transportation Agency was probably useless anyway. That is probably why it was created. It was meant to be useless and slow down business. That is why, today, we no longer need the approval of the Canadian Transportation Agency. I am sure that all the people who have worked at the Canadian Transportation Agency and who were appointed to it by this government feel that they have served no purpose all these years.
When Alto submits proposals for the high-speed train route, they will be deemed approved by the agency, which raises the risk of errors and injustice.
Furthermore, Bill C-15 grants Alto significant powers in terms of expropriation and the right of first refusal to speed up construction of the high-speed rail line. How it will basically work is that land is going to be expropriated now and assessed later. Alto will be able to expropriate land within a corridor 10 kilometres wide. That seems like a lot to us. It is not playing political games to say that the people of Mirabel are concerned. It brings back memories of Mirabel in the 1960s, when 97,000 acres were expropriated when only 15 were needed.
Alto will be allowed to expropriate land now and do the environmental assessment later. Will that speed things up? Of course it will. However, what will end up happening is that after expropriation and assessment, the conclusion may be that the route should not pass through there because the impacts are too great. People will have already been expropriated, and Alto will end up with land that it does not need. This brings back memories, and that is what members on the other side do not seem to understand.
Another Liberal innovation is public hearings. Sections 9 and 10 of the Expropriation Act require the responsible minister to hold public hearings on a proposed expropriation in the event of opposition. However, Bill C‑15 will exempt Alto from holding this public hearing and will also exempt it from having to obtain the consent of cabinet in order to decide to expropriate. Will this speed things up? Of course it will. Does it increase the risk of error and injustice? Yes.
Next, there are work prohibitions. That is worth noting. Once Alto has expropriated land, it will be able to request a prohibition on work. We are concerned about this, and some citizens are concerned as well. Suppose I live in the 10‑kilometre‑wide corridor—10 kilometres is wide—and I have work to do on my property, or I need to invest in my farm business or something else. With a work prohibition, I cannot. It prevents a lot of activities from being undertaken. That is the problem with this initiative. We are told that things will be imposed and sped up, but there are people who will suffer injustices and who will be unable to take steps to develop their property.
Furthermore, apparently, all that can obviously be done by email, which it is also faster. We could use a bailiff, because when we need a serious thing done, we send in a bailiff. Once again, however, it is more complicated and more expensive, but it provides assurance that people were served their documents by hand. Here, however, people are going to receive notice of their eviction by email. That just shows how seriously we take the process.
We are very sorry to dampen the Liberals' enthusiasm for high-speed rail. We like the idea of high-speed rail too, but we cannot bring ourselves to applaud along with them and dismiss the very legitimate concerns of people on the ground, who were told the news.
We are told that consultations are in progress. What we are seeing are happy hours and immersive experiences. They tell us that they want to make it festive. It may appear that way, but the lack of sensitivity is glaring. Finally, our motion today is simply to say that things need to be done the right way to prevent human tragedies. That is how progress is achieved, and that is how we move forward as a society toward the common good.