Brian Jean

[Transportation between the Island of Newfoundland and Mainland Canada, February 1st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, it is my absolute pleasure to speak to Motion No. M-242, a motion to examine measures that would improve transportation between the island of Newfoundland and mainland Canada. I thank the hon. member for St. John's East for his hard work on this particular file and for his hard work on behalf of the people of Newfoundland.

I thank the Minister of Transport as well, because I am happy to report to this House that this government will be voting yes on this motion. I am proud of this government because this will help many of my constituents. As members know, I am from the third largest Newfoundland city in the world, and I am very proud of that fact, the northern Alberta city of Fort McMurray.

This government believes in, is working toward and is helping to build a world-class transportation system that serves all Canadians, along with the required infrastructure to support it. In fact, this Conservative government has made substantial investments in Canada's infrastructure that will benefit all Canadians, not just a select few. It will benefit all regions of Canada.

I have heard some comments by other members on this particular subject and I can assure all members in this House that this new Conservative government of Canada is improving transportation. We have looked at the studies that were done and the minister will act decisively. He is a decisive minister and this is a government of action that will get results for Canadians.

Look no further than budget 2006 where we committed $16.5 billion in unprecedented federal support for infrastructure over the next four years. That unprecedented amount includes $900 million in new funding for public transit. It also maintains the current funding under existing infrastructure agreements, such as the gas tax funding worth $5 billion over the next five years. It also includes $591 million in new funding for the all important Asia-Pacific gateway and corridor initiative that will help our trade and transportation routes all the way through Canada. It also includes funding for new infrastructure programs for provincial, territorial and municipal infrastructure.

Members in this House, especially the members opposite, should hold their breath until budget 2007 because they are in for even more surprises.

Since the last budget, we have consulted with the provinces and territories, the municipal sector and key stakeholders involved in the transportation initiatives across this great country. We have looked at more effective ways to use our infrastructure investments to promote a more competitive, productive economy, to improve the quality of life of Canadians from coast to coast to coast, to achieve tangible improvements in the environment, and most important, to ensure accountability and transparency for all Canadians, for all taxpayers.

We are acting on what we heard. In fact, advantage Canada, released at the same time as the economic and fiscal update, is an economic plan that is designed to make Canada a world leader for today and for future generations of Canadians.

A key element of this plan is the Conservative government's commitment to work toward a comprehensive plan to make up for the 13 years of bad management of our infrastructure that took place before this Conservative government was in office.

It includes long term, sustainable, predictable funding and a fair and transparent provincial allocation for program envelopes to support improvements to the core national highway system which is so important to every Canadian family; to move toward large scale provincial, territorial and municipal projects, such as public transit and waste water management, which has been falling apart for some period of time, especially in my constituency in northern Alberta and across Quebec; and also for small scale municipal projects.

Over the next while and within the context of our commitment to restore Canada's fiscal balance, we will set out how we intend to work with all our partners, after listening to stakeholders, to put our infrastructure money to work for Canadians.

The federal government has a constitutional responsibility, and we heard that from the member, to maintain transportation services between the island of Newfoundland and the mainland. We will continue to fulfill that responsibility, but in order to do so and as this motion clearly states, we must examine specific areas to determine the best way forward.

Currently the south coast of Labrador is isolated from the rest of the North American road network. This cannot continue. This is pending, of course, the completion of the Trans-Labrador Highway. Therefore, completing this highway is a top priority for the province.

Prime Minister Harper indicated that the government would support this cost shared agreement, and we will.

[Business of Supply, February 1st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I think you would find unanimous consent to see the clock at 5:30 p.m..

[The Environment, February 1st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, let us talk about the Liberal so-called leader. He was minister of the environment, minister of intergovernmental affairs, president of the Queen's Privy Council and he had the ear of two former Liberal prime ministers.

Today, he cannot even manage his own Liberal senators. His deputy leader and his environment critic have criticized him more than the Conservatives do. He cannot make up his mind on who to have as a shadow cabinet, on where he stands on same sex marriage, on whether to let ad scammers back into the Liberal family and on whether or not Canada can even meet its Kyoto commitments.

My question is, what is Kyoto to the Liberal leader? Is it his dog or an international agreement on greenhouse gas emissions? He had 10 years to make Canada's environment a priority, yet greenhouse gas emissions went 35% beyond even his own targets.

This Conservative government will get the job done. This Conservative government is a government of action.

[International Bridges and Tunnels Act, January 29th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I know the member for Windsor West has some very strong opinions in relation to this piece of legislation and for some period of time has lobbied to be heard on it and make sure it gets done. That is exactly what this government is doing, making sure that it gets done and that it gets done right.

Regulations are in the works now. They are being done by the department. We are looking for more consultation with stakeholders to get it done right. The member is aware that this government is a government of action, but at the same the government makes sure it gets the job done right the first time.

I have an open door policy, as the member knows. I have suggested in the past that he come to see me in relation to all issues that deal with his constituents. This government is prepared to listen to stakeholders and all members of the House. I invite him to see me regarding his particular concerns on this issue.

[International Bridges and Tunnels Act, January 29th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I note with interest that the Senate dealt with the bill in its entirety and there were discussions. As I mentioned previously, there were five particular amendments put forward to make sure that the English and French translations were perfect and worked together toward the initiative that we wanted to put through the House.

I agree with the member that a lot of work was done on this bill prior to this. There were three years of consultations. It pretty much follows through with everything the previous government did for 13 years, and that was talk with no action. This is about action. This government, after looking at the results, got action. I am proud to be part of a government that actually gets results.

After only nine months of working on this particular bill, it went through the House, the standing committee and the Senate and here it is today, 12 months later, ready to be passed. I am hoping members of the Liberal Party, and all members of the opposition parties, will support us in that initiative.

[International Bridges and Tunnels Act, January 29th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I will begin my speech today with a brief outline of the legislative history of Bill C-3, a very important bill to Canadians regarding the safety and security of this nation and the transportation of goods across our borders. This includes the developments while the bill was considered in the Senate.

The Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities introduced the bill to the House of Commons on April 24, 2006. Members may remember that at that time the bill borrowed heavily from two predecessor bills, Bill C-26 and Bill C-44, both of which were put forward by the previous Liberal government but both of which actually died on the order paper. Those previous bills dealt with amendments to the Canadian Transportation Act and included the addition of new provisions for international bridges and tunnels, which are very important to our nation.

The House Standing Committee on Transportation, Infrastructure and Communities discussed Bill C-3 at five of its meetings. An amendment to the bill was made by the committee concerning the minister's powers with respect to the setting of toll rates. During the third reading stage, further amendments were made to the bill adding clauses dealing with consultations with other levels of government, especially municipalities.

All members of the House are aware that the government is concerned about stakeholders and listens to stakeholders, especially those stakeholders, such as municipalities, and those levels of government. The bill was then passed in the House on June 22, 2006. Bill C-3 was read for the first time in the Senate on that very same day. Again in the Senate, the second reading debate was completed on October 24 2006, and the bill was referred to the Senate standing committee on transport and communications for considerations.

The Senate committee met a total of seven times to study the bill and it heard a lot of testimony. It heard testimony from the Minister of Transport and Transport Canada officials. As well, it heard testimony from four stakeholders in particular: the Bridge and Tunnels Operators Association; the City of Windsor, to which this bill is very important as it is important to its citizens; the Canadian Transit Company, the owner and operator of the Ambassador Bridge; and the teamsters union. These are the same stakeholders who appeared before the House Standing Committee on Transportation, Infrastructure and Communities when we were studying the bill. They were very informative and provided us with a lot of very valuable information.

The Minister of Transport told the Senate how supportive the majority of the stakeholders were with this initiative and how important this bill was to Canadians regarding safety, security and transportation of goods. He indicated that the government had demonstrated its willingness to consider stakeholder input at all times and that it was very important for the government to listen to stakeholders and implement their needs if they meet the needs and priorities of Canadians.

The House of Commons did amend the bill in response to concerns raised by a municipal government.

During its clause by clause review of the bill, the Senate standing committee on transport and communications made five technical amendments. The amendments were to ensure consistency between the English and French versions of certain sections that had been previously amended by the House at third reading. Another important thing that the government does is it listens to the communication issues that we have in our great country.

The bill was passed in the Senate on December 12, 2006. In Canada there are 24 vehicle and 9 railway bridges and tunnels that link our country to the United States. No one needs to hear how important our trade with the United States is to Canadians and how important it is to have a border that our citizens can cross back and forth to encourage trade between our nations and the relationship of our nation.

Of the bridges that carry vehicle traffic, 14 of them are located in Ontario, 9 in New Brunswick and 1 in Quebec. The rail bridges and tunnels are all located in Ontario except for one which is located in New Brunswick.

The bill, when enacted, will be the very first law to apply to all of Canada's international bridges and tunnels. It took the Conservative government to take this initiative and follow it through.

Bill C-3 contains several themes. First, the bill declares that these bridges and tunnels “to be works for the general advantage of Canada”. Therefore, it reinforces the federal government's exclusive jurisdiction with respect to these structures as stipulated in the Constitution and reinforces the government's priority on the safety and security of Canadians.

Second, the proposed act would also require governmental approval for construction or alteration of new and existing bridges and tunnels, which is because it is so important. It would also require governmental approval for all sales or transfers affecting the ownership and control of these international bridges and tunnels, another important first by the government.

Finally, the bill would authorize the government to make regulations regarding bridge maintenance and repair, safety and security, and operation and use. These regulations are very important to those people using the bridges and tunnels.

Passage of this bill would not be the end but simply the beginning of more work in this area. It marks the first step that a Conservative government had to take the initiative on to actually implement.

Government officials would also need to develop guidelines for the approval or alteration of international bridges and tunnels. They would need to begin the regulatory process and consultations with stakeholders would again take place so that these regulations reflect the intention of the bill and the intention of we in the House of Commons and the Senate.

During the debate on this bill we often heard that the development of regulations was a lengthy process. I and Canadians would urge departmental officials to begin work immediately so that we do not leave these bridges and tunnel structures vulnerable to the safety and security matters that are so important in this post-9/11 world.

I would like to thank all members of the House and of the Senate for their great work on this bill. I would also like to thank the members of the transport committee, with which I was personally involved, for all their work in getting it through so quickly.

I would like to especially thank Madam Bacon, chair of the Senate Standing Committee on Transport and Communications, for her leadership during the Senate standing committee meetings. The discussions in this committee were very candid and thought provoking and helped us push this agenda through. I appreciate the committee's diligence in making several technical amendments so that the French and English text better reflect each other and the consistency of what we in the House of Commons intended.

I would also like to thank the stakeholders who appeared before both the House and the Senate committees: the Bridge and Tunnel Operators Association, the City of Windsor, the Canadian Transit Company and the teamsters, all members of which are very important. The contribution of stakeholders who are directly on the ground, who would be tremendously impacted by this legislation, is very important for all bills that we pass through the House. The significance of their contribution highlights how this bill would affect them and their membership.

I believe the passage of this bill will serve Canadians and our international visitors well by ensuring that our international bridges and tunnels remain safe and secure.

I would encourage my colleagues to pass this bill, as amended by the Senate, so that the government can proceed with drafting the guidelines and regulations authorized by it.

As everyone in the House and most people who are listening today know, sections 92.10 and 91 of the Constitution give exclusive jurisdiction to the federal government for international bridges and tunnels. Despite this exclusive legislative authority, no law up to now in the history of Canada has ever been adopted that applies to international bridges and tunnels. It took this Conservative government, this Prime Minister and this minister to get it to the point that it is at today. I am proud to be a part of a government that gets so much work done for Canadians.

[Christmas Wish Letter, December 13th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, with 12 days until Christmas, the little elves from northern Alberta have compiled a wish letter for their oh so nice, brand new Santa. It goes as follows:

“Dear Saint Stelmach:

“We have worked ever so hard over the past year, so please be jolly and not kingly and send us the following soon:

“On the first day of Christmas of this year, more land for houses; on the second day, two new recreation centres; on the third day, three new water treatment plants; on the fourth day, four new senior residences; on the fifth day, five new public schools; on the sixth day, 20 new doctors; on the seventh day, 25 new police officers; on the eighth day, 3,000 new homes; on the ninth day, new roads and bridges; and, on the tenth day of this year, a bigger airport.

“By the 11th day of 2010, we will need 18,000 new homes, and by the 12th day of 2010, we will need 100,000 new workers.

“Santa, if we are brought all these things, then northern Alberta will be equal and as happy as the rest of Canada.

“Thank you and Merry Christmas”.

[Publications Assistance Program, December 11th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I can assure the House and all Canadians that the Prime Minister and the minister will take steps that will solve this problem. If anybody is standing up for rural Canadians, it this party.

After 13 years of dithering and nothing being done, this party is going to do it. This government is a government of action.

[December 7th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I think the conclusion that was reached by the member is exactly that. This is a balance between taxpayers and travellers at airports.

The Thunder Bay airport has the least amount of costs. It has no traveller costs and no airport fee. Most airports do have an airport fee and other expenses but it is a balance between taxpayers. They have funded what was required under the agreement.

CATSA does not pay for airport renovations to meet traffic demands, which is the situation in this case. It is being fair, but it is a balance for fairness for all Canadian airports and all Canadians. That is the mandate of this government.

[December 7th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak to this issue, especially in regard to the role of CATSA within the Canadian aviation security environment and how it relates to airport operations.

CATSA fulfills its obligations and conducts its operations within a fixed budget that is allocated by the Government of Canada. This budget is about fairness to all Canadians and all Canadian airports. CATSA manages these funds in accordance with the government's Financial Administration Act.

At the time of its creation in 2002, CATSA was allocated $1.9 billion for a five year period ending March 31, 2007.

As a result of the increased passenger volumes and expenses, as the member has mentioned, and related screening operating costs, this Conservative government actually granted CATSA in budget 2006 an additional $133 million over two years. That speaks to this government's commitment to the safety and security of Canadians. This represents $45 million for 2006 and $88 million for 2007.

With regard to the responsibility of hold baggage screening, CATSA will be required by regulation to screen 100% of hold baggage on domestic and international flights. Safety and security is our paramount concern. This initiative is part of the government's commitment to enhancing security as a result of, obviously, 2001 events. This has translated into the deployment of 100 projects and 2,500 pieces of screening equipment to the 89 designated Canadian airports over the past four years. What an achievement that is.

CATSA is required by Transport Canada regulation to install security screening equipment in all designated airports. To achieve this, CATSA works in cooperation with airport authorities to design and install the appropriate screening system.

It is no different for Thunder Bay. CATSA signs agreements with airport authorities which clearly define the financial responsibilities for the installation of security screening equipment.

Canadian airports receive from CATSA the funding required to cover construction costs for hold baggage screening equipment and an annual contribution toward the maintenance of the conveyor belt system associated with CATSA's equipment.

The Thunder Bay International Airport collaborated with CATSA on seven different designs for the hold baggage screening area. After an engineering review, CATSA and the airport chose the design they liked and agreed upon a fixed sum for which CATSA would reimburse the airport to cover construction costs.

CATSA's total commitment to the Thunder Bay International Airport is over $3 million. That is for the construction and installation of new equipment, plus the maintenance costs for the conveyor belt system associated with CATSA's equipment.

Consistent with CATSA's policy, other maintenance costs outside CATSA's security screening system are the responsibility of the airport authority, including any expansionary initiatives put forward by the Canadian airport in order to meet traffic demands, which is the case in this particular situation.

CATSA continually conducts reviews with airports to ensure screening processes meet present and future needs.

CATSA fulfills its mission to protect the public by screening critical elements of the air transportation system as assigned by the government. It is no different for all airports across Canada.

This government and this Prime Minister consider safety and security as the highest priority, which is why $133 million was allocated in budget 2006 for CATSA, $26 million over two years for air cargo security and $95 million for rail and transit security.

This government will be fair to all Canadians and all Canadian airports, no matter what province, what territory or what political persuasion of that area.