Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise on behalf of the good people of Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna, in the beautiful interior of British Columbia.
Bill C-15 is an omnibus piece of legislation, and the Liberals, in their various forms of government, like in the Trudeau era and now followed by the new Prime Minister, have staked out that the omnibus is a perfectly legitimate piece of legislation. They throw essentially everything, including the kitchen sink, in there. What happens when we throw in the kitchen sink? It means we cannot keep our hands clean anymore.
One of the problems that we have in this particular bill is around the high-speed rail network act. The government is making an effort to get in front of an announcement and say, “Look at us. Look at all the great things we are doing.” We will have a project with very scant details that was first announced by the previous prime minister and then re-announced by the government and cited as part of the building Canada legislation, Bill C-5. By the way, the Liberals still have not gotten around to designating it formally under the act, as is required by law.
This is a process whereby the Liberals simply say, “Look at us. Look at how great it is,” and then throw the implementation, not just to the bureaucracy, but in particular to Alto, a Crown corporation with a private component that goes with it. Essentially, when it comes to the designation of a line, the government has had a very short process for communities that would see this line, if it is ever finally created, divide their towns and their streets and, as we have heard from the previous member, affect their ability to access things like health care. These are important conversations that are not to be taken lightly.
In fact, property rights are something that Conservatives believe in and stand for. We believe there should be a firm rule of law when it comes to how property rights are standardized, and obviously it is not common law solely. There is the Expropriation Act, but that is a long-standing act that decides how government should best proceed to work with property owners to have certainty, to treat them with respect and to actually give them an independent process to use to contest when expropriation happens. However, the government, in its attempt to be the hero, would simply throw all of the messiness to Alto by essentially, with Bill C-15, abridging those property rights and the normal, usual process that would be followed through the Expropriation Act.
When the minister came to committee, I asked him specifically. I said that he would give this power to Alto and essentially freeze people's property. He said that no, it was not like that, but one can imagine being a farmer who is just about to sell. They are near the end of their long career and want to be able to sell at a firm price, and suddenly they are told they cannot make improvements and their land is essentially frozen. As such, if they were about to sell their farm lot to their neighbour, whom they have known for many years, and suddenly the neighbour says they have zero ability to predict whether they will be able to use the land in the fashion that they planned for their model, this would simply drive the value of that property down. Who would blame that neighbour, and who would blame someone else for wanting to come in?
It is so draconian, what the government is calling for, that they could actually say no to new improvements. While someone is going through this process, they would be given very short notice. They would be told that they could not make improvements to their property, and they would be trying to attempt a sale. I said to the minister and committee that this is not fair, but the minister simply said this would all be ironed out through that process.
I should even take a step back. We challenged the minister to look at an accelerated CTA review that would not just allow the project to proceed with timeliness but also provide a process whereby communities could formally submit their thoughts. Instead, Alto is running a consultation process, and it is not the same as an independent tribunal, such as the CTA, that can review all the evidence and make a determination as to where the line should go.
Speaking of where the line should go, there are going to be cases where properties will have a crossing, and there will be many properties that will not. As we heard from previous members, for a property owner to suddenly find that the most direct path they have taken for 20 years to get to the hospital will be closed, and that there will be no overpass that will allow them quick access, has a tremendous effect on people who need to make life decisions, such as being close to health care.
It also means routes are going to be slowed down, so an ambulance ride that would take 10 to 15 minutes might take over an hour now. These are things that are going to be decided by Alto, not by a tribunal that hears the evidence and that says what is reasonable given the stated goal of the project and given the community's very valid concerns.
Instead, Bill C-15 would just wipe all of that out. We offered the minister that, and the minister, just like with all these things, gave a tin ear. He would essentially be giving the keys to the castle to Alto and letting those communities fall into the moat. It is simply the worst way to run a procurement.
Are there some reasonable amendments that have been brought up at report stage? I am happy to say that there are. The idea is that if a property owner is frozen and maybe they have a barn or hen house that burns down or a water or flood event happens, they should be able to restore that property.
That is a simple courtesy to the people who are there, but I will also say that I have some tremendous concerns, because we always talk about the front end of expropriation and the frozen process, but there is also the back end. In every single procurement that the federal government goes through, and the Bloc Québécois member for Mirabel reminded us of this in the House, the federal government does not always do as it says it will.
In fact, it can happen that the government will expropriate or freeze someone's land but then never use it, and there is nothing in Bill C-15 that would protect people from these things. We have a process set up by the government that would essentially allow it to play the hero and Alto to play the villain. We have now a situation whereby Alto essentially has been given the run of the road and could literally run over communities, go over traditional roads and infrastructure, and divide communities without even having to say it will fix it and build an overpass. There would be no process for that. Alto would get to decide. There would be no independent tribunal that could be appealed to.
There is that, and again, freezing someone's assets on short notice is totally waiving many of the protections found in the Expropriation Act. When the government says it wants to be exempt from long-standing law so that it can give the insiders of Alto the ultimate authority, I think that the government has overreached. Conservatives will not support that type of process.
Therefore, we will be looking to support reasonable amendments that start to take into account and to pull some of that power back to the property owners, because these property owners are worried. They are concerned, and so far, these consultation processes are consultation in name only. They are not meaningful, and they are not assuring the communities. As the member for Northumberland—Clarke stated previously, information is what gives people certainty. Unfortunately, through this particular bill, Bill C-15, the government has put no onus on Alto to do that.
Again, Conservatives support those affected property owners. We feel that the government has not looked out for their interests, but if the Liberals do not, the Conservatives will.
