Hoang Mai

[Champlain Bridge, May 7th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Infrastructure is digging in his heels and refusing to accept that without an integrated transportation plan, developed jointly with Quebec and Montreal area municipalities, his toll will create chaos on the roads.

Quebec has clearly shown that a toll on the Champlain Bridge will create major traffic jams on the other bridges. Quebec's economy is already losing $4 billion a year because of lost productivity caused by gridlock.

How many more billions is the minister willing to allow the city to lose?

[Champlain Bridge, May 6th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, while the minister seems to think the Champlain Bridge is nothing more than a slogan, the Government of Quebec has studied how a toll will affect the future bridge.

The study concluded that it will create chaos, since there could be anywhere from 15% to 25% more traffic on the other south shore bridges and wait times could double.

Why does the minister insist on imposing a toll without conducting any studies or consultations with Quebec and the municipalities to develop an integrated transportation plan?

[Petitions, April 30th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present a petition to the House today. The petitioners are asking that the sexual preference of people not be an instant refusal of the right to donate. They request that the government return the right of any healthy Canadian to give the gift of blood, bone marrow, and organs to fill the need. No matter race, religion, or sexual preference of a person, the right to give blood or donate organs is universal for any healthy man or woman.

[Petitions, April 9th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I am here to present a petition that seeks to stop violence against bus drivers. In light of the large number of assaults of bus drivers every year, the petitioners are calling on the House to amend the Criminal Code to create a separate offence for assaults committed against bus drivers while they are working and to set harsher penalties for the attackers.

[Rail Transportation, April 8th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, that is quite the statement.

Before the Lac-Mégantic disaster, few people realized how much dangerous cargo was being moved by train, but now municipalities and Canadians want to know about dangerous cargo being moved through their communities. Instead of being more transparent about disclosure rules, Conservatives are being less.

Why is the government being so secretive about rule changes for dangerous goods?

[Rail Transportation, April 8th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the minister wants to deliberately change the rules so that regulatory changes do not have to be published in advance. As a result, the public will be notified of changes to safety regulations only once they have taken effect.

The Conservatives allowed railway companies to regulate themselves, with disastrous results. Canadians no longer trust the Conservatives' policies.

Why does the minister want to changes the rules in a way that would reduce transparency?

[Rail Transportation, April 7th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the government is not doing anything. Old DOT-111 rail cars filled with oil continue to travel through towns and are derailing, but the public is not even made aware.

It is very troubling that the reports issued by rail companies are not reliable. It is also troubling to see that companies are never fined for failing to report all incidents.

When will the Conservatives make the safety of Canadians a priority over the profits of rail companies?

[Rail Transportation, April 7th, 2014]

There is still no concrete action, Mr. Speaker.

Canada's Transportation Safety Board discovered that rail companies hid 100 accidents, in addition to the 1,800 accidents not reported by CN between 2000 and 2007. MMA, which is responsible for the tragedy in Lac-Mégantic, neglected to report 24 accidents and derailments. That includes two incidents in Farnham where unsupervised trains full of oil accidentally moved.

Does the minister think it is acceptable that rail companies do not report all accidents?

[Air Transportation, April 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, there is simply no justification for this change, and the government knows it. Canada's major airlines are profitable. There is no excuse for allowing anyone to cut corners, especially when passenger safety is at stake. If something goes wrong on a flight, these rules would reduce by 25% the flight attendant ratio.

Will the minister commit to studying the safety impact of this change instead of just rubber-stamping it?

[Air Transportation, April 3rd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to complaints about airline services in Canada, nobody has ever complained about having too many flight attendants aboard. At least, that is what the Conservatives seem to think. Transport Canada wants to allow airlines to operate with one flight attendant per 50 passengers. To ensure passenger safety, there should always be one flight attendant per emergency exit.

Why does the Minister of Transport want to eliminate such an important regulation?