Douglas Young

[Cn Commercialization Act, May 5th, 1995]

moved for leave to introduce Bill C-89, an act to provide for the continuance of the Canadian National Railway Company under the Canada Business Corporation Act and for the issuance and sale of shares of the Company to the public.

(Motions deemed adopted, bill read the first time and printed.)

[Quebec City Bridge, May 5th, 1995]

Yes, Mr. Speaker.

[Cn Rail, May 5th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I regret that the hon. member's rose coloured glasses are not working today.

Many of the initiatives which have been undertaken by the department for which I am responsible have been very well received. I am astounded that the hon. member does not recognize the tremendous support in his province, for example, for the policies on international air routes and the bilateral agreements with the United States.

When the merger talks went on with Canadian Pacific and the offer from Canadian Pacific to buy the assets of CN in the east, everyone in the west wanted to make sure we had a national, viable, transcontinental railroad. That is what the purpose of all of this legislation will be: to make sure we have a strong railroad network in this country. That certainly is Liberal policy.

[Canadian National Railways, May 5th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, if anybody should be embarrassed in here it is the hon. member who has betrayed a confidence of the House.

We were kind enough to provide for a lock-up to discuss legislation that would be brought before all my colleagues in the House at the same time. I thank the members of the Reform Party for their honour and integrity to respect those arrangements.

I deplore that a member who was given a privilege of this nature would abuse it in the way the member just has.

[Canadian National Railways, May 5th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I intend to present a bill at the end of question period. It would not be appropriate for me to comment on the hon. member's question before we table the bill.

[Hughes Aircraft, May 5th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, those who are following the Pearson saga will know the hon. member was quoted in a major article this week as having succumbed to the arguments of those who keep whispering in his ear about the propriety of the Pearson contract, and he now supports it. Who knows, given a couple of weeks he could even come around and support the Hughes contract.

[Hughes Aircraft, May 5th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I regret the implication in the hon. member's question that somehow we have been remiss in responding to the problems.

As I indicated in my response yesterday, immediately that I became aware there was a problem with the contract I not only advised the deputy minister of my concerns but I also advised the Auditor General of Canada and asked him to look into it.

Further, my reference to the comfort that we received from Hughes with respect to delivery on time and the cost provisions I said was made several months ago, quite some time ago in a meeting in my office with the principal officers of the company responsible for delivering on the contract. They had assured me at that time that the difficulties had been overcome and they were confident of being able to meet the terms of the contract.

I want to say in fairness to all the parties involved that these types of very complex and technological contracts often are subject to some change and modification as the technology evolves. However this particular situation is unacceptable to the Government of Canada and we intend to protect the interests of Canadian taxpayers to the extent we can.

I know the hon. member is very fond of contracts being honoured in view of his support for the Pearson airport contract.

[Hughes Aircraft, May 5th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, as I indicated in response to a question yesterday, the government is very concerned about the matter to which my hon. friend refers. We are in the process of negotiations now with Hughes.

The system should become a very important element in the air navigation system for Canada. We have serious reservations about the way the project has been managed and the problems to which my friend refers in terms of delivery and cost.

I do not want to prejudice the negotiations by doing it in public, but I want to assure my hon. friend that we are very sensitive to the potential for cost overruns. We want to make sure the system functions well. We will do everything in our power to try to protect the interests of Canadian taxpayers in the matter.

[Infrastructure, May 4th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, what I stated and what I will continue to maintain is that Transport Canada is not in the subsidies business.

What I want to explain to the hon. member is we have responsibilities for ports across the country. The Standing Committee on Transport has come forward with some recommendations which we will study very carefully.

We will continue to make sure ports like Saint John, Halifax, Vancouver and others have the facilities required to be able to conduct their business.

With respect to the situation at Belledune, it is a wonderful precedent that the Government of New Brunswick, the Government of Canada, Ports Canada and local municipalities are all contributing to the enhancement of the facilities at that port.

While we are making a loan of $20 million through Ports Canada to the port of Belledune, I want to reassure the hon. member that although the authorities at Belledune believe they can repay the loan I will take into account the request from Saint John to not have to repay the loan for $20 million we have already made to it.

[Quebec City Bridge, May 4th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, to answer the hon. member's question, we would not want to give the impression that the bridge is not safe. All these structures are checked regularly to ensure they are in proper shape to do the job for which they were built.

I know there is a problem with the bridge, especially the way it looks, and we intend to ensure that, as far as safety is concerned, there is no problem. However, I would not want to give the impression that for some reason, because of our concern about CN's finances or for some other reason, the bridge is not absolutely safe.