David Collenette

[Grain Transportation, June 8th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, as I said when I announced Mr. Kroeger's appointment, a full costing review would delay the whole process by a year. There is no question that for Mr. Kroeger to do a thorough job, he has to get a real handle on the true costs of grain transportation by rail.

I am pleased to announce that Mr. Kroeger has requested the Canadian Transportation Agency to conduct an immediate analysis for him so that he can be assisted in his work and report to me by the end of September.

[Bill C-77, May 26th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, amendments to the Motor Vehicle Transport Act are being considered. This bill is the result of five years of consultations with the provinces. The hon. member may have amendments to propose, which is why legislation is debated here in the House of Commons.

I believe there is strong support for the proposed measures across the country, including in the province of Quebec.

[Bill C-77, May 25th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, this bill is the result of five years of discussions and consultations with the provinces. A consensus has been reached that now is the time that we should bring forward measures that would deregulate the industry further.

However, I realize that there are different points of view in different provinces. Therefore, the legislative process is all about hon. members bringing forward their concerns, having them debated in the House, having them debated in committee so that we get the best law possible for all Canadians.

[Bill C-77, May 13th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the aim of this government is to improve the passenger rail system, especially in Quebec. The hon. member is mistaken. Our aim is to improve the situation.

The report by the Standing Committee on Transport contained recommendations in this regard. We accepted most of them and they were supported by all members, including the member opposite.

[Grain Transportation, May 13th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member accuses us of sitting on the report. What we were waiting for was feedback from the various sectors that are affected, something the hon. member and others in the House have been urging us to do. If we had moved any faster we would have been accused of ramming this through.

The government accepts the basic framework of Justice Estey, but we realize that a lot of work has to be done to make those recommendations come into force and to implement them to the benefit of all, especially producers. The goal for the government is to ensure that the producers get a better stake and more money out of any reforms.

[Grain Transportation, May 13th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member had read the background documents that we released, he would know that Mr. Arthur Kroeger, a very eminent former public servant who will be our facilitator, will have a number of issues to look at in his mandate, including that of costs.

Mr. Kroeger can examine costs and the railway data, but we do not need a full costing review that will take nine months and delay the whole process.

Is the NDP more interested in delaying the process and lining the pockets of lawyers, or is it interested in getting a solution?

[Bill C-77, May 13th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague opposite is mistaken.

The intent of this government and the bill is to establish a national framework to permit standardization in the area of safety, the main criterion of trucking and bus transportation businesses, and to standardize it across Canada.

[Highways, May 11th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, up until now I thought the hon. member was motivated by a genuine desire to deal with this difficult issue, but to raise this in the course of the New Brunswick provincial election tells me that he really is using this as a partisan issue.

On the substance of the matter, I have answered these questions many times in the House. I will be meeting with my provincial counterparts on Friday and I am sure the issue of tolls will be a subject of discussion.

[Transport, May 11th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member says that the Bloc Quebecois supports the development of adequate service.

We, on this side, want superior service. This is why we are proposing amendments to the legislation. I hope we will have a major debate in the House on this issue, as we should under our parliamentary process.

[Transport, May 11th, 1999]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member raised a point of view, an opinion.

There are arguments against the hon. member's opinion. We agreed to discussions with the provinces. On Thursday evening, I will meet with my Quebec counterpart. A federal-provincial conference will take place this weekend, and this issue will be discussed.

There will also be a debate in the House of Commons on the bill. I hope the hon. member will put forth his arguments at that time.