House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2004, with 35% of the vote.
Mirabel Airport April 14th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, we are quite happy to co-operate with any organization that wishes to improve the utilization of the two airports for Montreal, Dorval and Mirabel.
However, the hon. member who is critical of ADM should remember that it was the current Premier of Quebec who, when he was the minister responsible for Quebec, established ADM and created this independent body which apparently is no longer to his liking.
Pearson Airport April 10th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, I have no knowledge of the amount the hon. member appears to know about with respect to a settlement. I made it clear I believe the first day I became Minister of Transport that I think it is always better to have lawsuits settled out of court, and this has been the government's position. From time to time there have been discussions and that is well known to everyone. If in the future there are discussions which lead to a settlement which both sides think is in their mutual interest, so much the better.
Pearson Airport April 10th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, let me again explain to the hon. member and the House that the $185 million he talked about was for three projects. The rental deferral was conditional on three things, to complete the runway, to build two fire halls on the Pearson airport area, and to
put in a new de-icing facility which was a $40 million item. This was the agreement made.
It follows adjustments to the rental formulas of Vancouver, Calgary and Edmonton. It was in line with the general switch from the local airport authority approach of the previous government to the Canadian airport authority approach of this government. Subsequently there has been a sale of T-3, the terminal at Pearson. As I said yesterday, the chairman of the board of the local airport authority has made it perfectly clear that it was his decision to buy that facility and clearly in that case the price was determined by the willing buyer and the willing seller.
Pearson Airport April 9th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, the response I gave to the hon. member yesterday was entirely accurate. There is an agreement between the T-3 consortium and the Greater Toronto Airport Authority to purchase the T-3 building and ancillary services for a total of $719 million. That was a decision made by the parties.
If I could quote Mr. Turpen, the chief executive officer of the Greater Toronto Airport Authority: "Purely and simply, this was my deal and this was a deal I wanted badly. The government was not involved, didn't encourage, didn't cheer lead". That was a quote from the Globe and Mail , April 2, 1997.
The hon. member raised another matter, the forgone rent over the next nine years for the Toronto authority. We have put that in place, in keeping with the policy for all the other local airport authorities which was set up by the previous government. Therefore, we put it in to assist them in rebuilding the two firehalls and creating a new
$40 million de-icing facility, completing the second north-south runway, the cross wind runway-
Pearson Airport April 8th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, I repeat that the figures being used by the hon. member simply bear no relationship to any fact whatsoever.
The Pearson airport terminal purchase of $719 million is a deal between the Greater Toronto Airport Authority and the T-3 consortium. That is what they decided, a willing buyer and a willing seller, and they are working out the terms of that at the present time.
If the hon. member wishes to compare the rent relief provided to the Toronto airport authority of $185 million to construct a runway, to construct two fire halls, to construct a deicing facility, if he looks at that and compares it to the $100 million plus given to the ADM at the time of the transfer of the Montreal airport he will discover that in proportion to the amount of traffic, Montreal came out almost twice as well as Toronto.
Pearson Airport April 8th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, the figure used by the hon. member is simply wrong. The decisions made by the local authority in Toronto, the Greater Toronto Airport Authority, to purchase the T-3 terminal was its decision. It will be funding that through a bond issue. This is not a government decision but one of the authority itself.
I should point out that there are substantial savings by having the whole airport run by the same authority rather than two-thirds of it run by one authority and one-third by another authority. That is why for the Greater Toronto Airport Authority it is in its interest to purchase the T-3 terminal and why it is in the interests of the T-3 consortium to sell. The price was determined by buyer and seller and the government did not cheerlead or quarterback that decision of those two groups.
Pearson Airport April 7th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member and his party have consistently failed to understand the circumstances surrounding the Pearson situation.
When we entered government in 1993 we examined the Pearson agreement with the private consortium and determined that it was not in the public interest but it was, however, in the private interest.
We thereafter established a public not for profit corporation incorporating the various interests of the community and that is the authority to GTAA which is now engaged in developing Pearson airport.
Pearson airport will be developed by decisions made by the local authority on the ground in Toronto. It is not a question any more of the federal government second guessing or giving instructions to the GTAA.
If the member wishes to know how Mr. Turpen, the chief executive officer of GTAA, intends to develop Pearson airport he should address his questions to Mr. Turpen.
Police Services In Ports March 20th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, the ports police issue was examined in great detail by a Coopers & Lybrand study. It proposed a new model for the policing of our major ports.
To make sure the study done by Inspector Mann was confirmed we had another study done by the former chief constable of the city of Vancouver, Mr. Stewart, and the former head of the RCMP detachment for North Vancouver, Mr. Gill Yard. They came to the same essential conclusion that more effective policing could be done. More effective means more security for the Canadian public.
As the hon. member mentioned Vancouver, I have to mention that British Columbia did not take part in that study although every other affected province did. We therefore waited until a study was done by Superintendent William Neill, the former Saskatchewan RCMP head. He did a study for the province of British Columbia which came to the same conclusions.
There have been three studies by senior police officials which say we can get more security for the Canadian public by a new model that uses municipal policing, customs services, immigration and security services. That deals with criminal problems much more effectively than the existing model we are using now.
Ferry Service March 20th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, as I just said to the hon. member, we want to replace the Lucy Maud Montgomery with a boat that will cost less than the $30 million we set aside.
We are indeed looking at various options, but a decision has yet to be made. In the meantime, I can tell the hon. member that the Lucy Maud Montgomery is in good shape and that it has been properly maintained.
Ferry Service March 20th, 1997
Mr. Speaker, the government's position is very clear. It is the position which I explained to the hon. member a few weeks ago. We will replace the Lucy Maud Montgomery as soon as we find another ferry that will not cost the taxpayers anything over and above the $30 million mentioned by the hon. member.
The Lucy Maud Montgomery has undergone safety inspections, as well as maintenance and repair work. It will be ready to serve the people of the Magdalen Islands when service resumes, in April.