House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2006, with 53% of the vote.
Infrastructure June 14th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, sadly, last night, the Conservatives and Bloc combined forces to remove all the relevant clauses from budget Bill C-48 at committee.
The Leader of the Opposition claims that his party is just as committed to the new deal as we are. How can he say that, and then turn around and instruct his party, as the Bloc has also done, to take the $800 million earmarked for public transit out of the budget bill? This is funding that cities need now.
Infrastructure June 9th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, David Suzuki, one of Canada's leading environmentalists, had this to say about our investments in Canada's communities:
Over the last few months, the federal government has produced a budget that includes some truly innovative measures and released its long-awaited climate change plan.
That is what our public transit investments are doing. That is why our gas tax funding is crucial to environmentally sustainable municipal infrastructure, but all this funding is at risk if we do not pass the budget. I would say, as Canada's big city mayors have said in a unanimous resolution, Parliament needs to put people before politics and get the budget passed.
Infrastructure June 7th, 2005
That is not the case at all. We are working closely with the Government of Quebec. We are consulting the cities, but are waiting for the Government of Quebec to find a distribution formula for its cities. Then we will be able to proceed, as partners.
Infrastructure June 7th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I have often said that the matter of the distribution of funds remains in the hands of the Government of Quebec, in cooperation with the municipalities and the Government of Canada. We have already established close cooperation in the case of infrastructures, and will continue this way.
Infrastructure June 6th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, the member is entirely right. The new deal is about working with cities and communities as partners while of course respecting the jurisdictions of provinces. This spirit of collaboration has led to the signing of three excellent gas tax deals with British Columbia, Alberta and Yukon.
Unfortunately, the Leader of the Opposition does not share our position. In his speech to the conference over the weekend, he referred to municipalities as “stakeholders”. That is not good enough. Let me quote the mayor of Vancouver who said, “We've been fighting to be recognized as a partner at the table, and stakeholder is not going to cut it”.
Infrastructure June 1st, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I was delighted to announce the allocation of $800 million for public transit systems across Canada this morning. This is new funding, over and above the $5 billion we have already committed to municipalities through the gas tax.
Seventy per cent of Canadians have access to public transit services, so this announcement is good news for communities of all sizes.
Infrastructure May 31st, 2005
Mr. Speaker, we continue to work together with the utmost respect for the provinces in order to find common solutions. As part of the infrastructure programs, we have already held a consultation on objectives to meet environmental needs, for example. We are continuing to do this with Quebec and its municipalities.
Budget Implementation Act, 2005 May 30th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, this is by way of a somewhat rhetorical question to the member for Yukon. Is the member for Yukon aware that the municipal and rural infrastructure funds are available to every province and territory upon the signature being arrived at with that province or territory and the federal government, and that this is for the smaller communities, including smaller communities in the region the previous member alluded to?
I just want to make sure that the hon. member for Yukon was aware that there was total fairness in the municipal and rural infrastructure funds.
Budget Implementation Act, 2005 May 30th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the hon. member for Halifax, which arises from the arrangement which we have made with the New Democratic Party to bring together a package of Bill C-43 and Bill C-48. All of us on this side of the House think that is pretty good business given some of the measures that are in there, including the $800 million for public transit.
My concern is with the position of the member for Halifax on the pulling out of the Atlantic accord from Bill C-43. It seems to me that if on the one hand she and her party would argue, as I would, that we ought to see Bill C-43 and Bill C-48 as one but on the other hand we start pulling out different elements to vote on from Bill C-43, indirectly and I am sure without intention she will weaken the case for our presenting of Bill C-43 and Bill C-48 as a unified package. Perhaps she might want to comment on what seems to be a contradiction.
Infrastructure May 30th, 2005
Mr. Speaker, the purpose of the gas tax money is to find, with municipalities and provinces, shared national objectives. Some of those national objectives have to do with clean water, clean air and the reduction of greenhouse gases.
The cities themselves agree with that strategy. The Federation of Canadian Municipalities agrees with that strategy. British Columbia and Alberta signed agreements which agree with that strategy. What is not to like about that?