Denis Lebel

[The Environment, November 6th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, if anyone is naive here, it is not on this side of the House. When we talk about navigation, we are talking about the ships that are on the water, not the fish that are floating and swimming in the water. The members opposite want to cause confusion. On our side, we are going to do what needs to be done. Navigable waters are for navigation in Canada.

Once again, the members opposite were given all the answers to their questions today in committee. It is never enough for them. They are experts at confusing Canadians.

[The Environment, November 5th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member certainly knows how to complicate things.

Public servants at Transport Canada consulted the provinces and territories in order to create the list of waterways. None of the provinces or territories expressed any problems or concerns. I understand that the opposition wants to create problems. No studies were needed in 98% of the projects. We have saved money for all Canadian taxpayers. All departments apply the regulations that fall within their portfolios.

[Infrastructure, November 1st, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, they seem to be experts at misleading Canadians.

The provinces and cities fund projects because roads and highways have always been a provincial area of jurisdiction. The NDP has it all wrong.

The bills are being paid for as they come in. The provinces and organizations look after this. The bills are paid when the work is complete. Projects have been well managed over the years. That is a fact. There have been no cutbacks to infrastructure programs.

[Infrastructure, November 1st, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the member should know, just as the FCM does, that this is a case of responsible accounting and only that. It does not indicate a cut to any infrastructure program. The federal government does not grant funds to proponents until projects are completed.

[The Environment, November 1st, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, let me be clear. Ninety-eight per cent of applications received never pose a threat to navigation. This is not a responsible use of taxpayer dollars and shows just how much change is needed. This is why we have reformed the act. Now resources can focus on where navigation is and not waste valuable tax dollars by delaying projects that have no impact on navigation.

[The Environment, November 1st, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, it is unbelievable that the New Democrats are misleading people in this way by conflating navigation with fish habitats and fish.

Navigation has to do with boats floating on water and not fish in water. It is ridiculous. It is completely nonsensical. It is an attempt to mislead Canadians.

We are going to continue to manage navigation. The officials at Fisheries and Oceans Canada will continue to manage fish stocks and officials at Environment Canada will manage the environment.

[Questions on the Order Paper, October 31st, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, on January 22, 2012, the minister announced the launch of the environmental assessment, which is expected to be completed by December 2013.

The federal government announced on April 23, 2012, that the consortium Dessau/Cima+ of Montreal has been retained to complete the federal environmental assessment for the new bridge for the St. Lawrence. The assessment will include the environmental and technical components required to formulate recommendations to minimize repercussions of the project on the environment and on communities. The public, the local consultative groups, the private sector and the community groups will have an opportunity to participate in the environmental assessment process.

[The Environment, October 31st, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the premise of that question is false.

As far as I know, the minister's riding is in the St. Lawrence River area, and that is on the list. That is completely false. This list is based on scientific data and statistics collected for years. It includes waterways that are navigable, and not a small creek or stream, as the NDP would like. When we think of water, we do not automatically think of navigation.

Yes, we will protect the environment. We will be focusing on navigation, as we are currently doing.

[The Environment, October 31st, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, it is wrong of the hon. member to cherry-pick data in order to confirm his conspiracy theory. He has ignored bodies of water that are inconsistent with his conspiracy theory, including oceans, the St. Lawrence Seaway and many others.

The reality is that provinces and municipalities have asked us to cut the red tape. We will continue to protect navigation, not conspiracy.

[Transport, October 31st, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, Transport Canada, our department, is pleased to make changes that will save Canada even more money and allow our economy to flourish.

Of course, the committees are managed by parliamentary committees people. What is important is that we are not going to implement a carbon tax that will place an additional $21 billion burden on the shoulders of Canadian taxpayers.