Mr. Speaker, I want first of all to thank my hon. colleague on the other side for bringing Motion 242 before the House of Commons. I would also like to thank the opposition leader for having appointed me the official critic for the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, ACOA. It is a great pleasure for me to deliver my first speech.
As we know and as the hon. member said, what we need to do is look at all the measures that are possible and relate them to land, marine and other kinds of transportation. That being said, I clearly understood the hon. member's message.
As was very well explained and as all Canadians and people from Newfoundland and Labrador certainly know, the Canadian government has a constitutional obligation to provide ferry service. This ship link runs between North Sidney and Port aux Basques, Marine Atlantic, a crown corporation of the Government of Canada, fulfills this obligation of the Canadian government to provide a ferry service between Newfoundland and Labrador and the mainland.
Let us look at the situation with respect to this obligation. It is truly important for Newfoundland and Labrador to have a link with the mainland, especially for the transportation of goods and people. In order for a region to be properly developed, an adequate infrastructure must be provided.
That being said, with regard to the obligation to provide transportation and the importance of it, the entire question of economic development is dependent on a number of things—as I said earlier—such as transportation of goods. This makes it possible to supply the factories of Newfoundland and Labrador with the equipment they need to develop and provide good jobs for their workers. It also enables the province to continue to progress.
There is also the whole issue of tourist diversification. If we want to identify the problems and provide assistance, we also have to be able to offer different options and solutions. One of these solutions is to ensure that tourists can get to Newfoundland and Labrador, because they are necessary for the province's development.
We need to understand each other here this evening. I respect the hon. member’s motion, because I believe that it is very important to look at the different options in order to ensure that we are able to provide the people of Newfoundland and Labrador with the tools they need.
Mr. Speaker, I have some questions about the motion. A report was commissioned by the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in 2004. The purpose of that study, requested by the province and carried out by a university in that province, was to evaluate the situation in this regard. What is somewhat ironic, as far as the motion is concerned, is that this study cost the citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador— the taxpayers of that province—over $281,000 of money from the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, ACOA.
This study was designed to evaluate the possibility of a fixed link between the island and the mainland. If this study was requested in 2004 and just completed in 2005—that is not so long ago—then why would the process have to start over? This question is very important and I think that during the next hour of debate the member for St. John's-East, who presented this motion, will have the opportunity to answer us.
What is even more worrying is that the member who is presenting the motion is also talking to us about ferries and says we should make sure that the Marine Atlantic ferries are providing the necessary tools to the people of his province.
In 2004, Marine Atlantic carried out an evaluation and did a study of the condition of the various ferries, the current situation and what it should do to secure the future.
I am going to mention what the study said. It is a special study from 2004, which included a recommendation that “The Corporation should develop a comprehensive vessel replacement plan based on operating needs and full life-cycle costs”. This is exactly what has been done. It is a part of the motion by my colleague opposite.
When we look at the situation, we realize that Marine Atlantic went even further by saying, in the management response to this recommendation, “The plan has been developed and the first stage is in place”.
So right now we are have with two reports: one commissioned and carried out in 2004 and another commissioned in 2004 and completed in early 2005, which cover the situation which the hon. member included in Motion M-242.
One certainly has to wonder what is the reason for carrying out another study. The idea is superb and really should be considered. The only thing that I wonder about is this: Do we have to re-do what has already been done? Do we have to start over with what has just been presented? Must we take public funds from the people who have contributed their tax dollars in order to pay for such studies? Do we again have to take money from our citizens and do these studies one more time?
A politician told me the best way to do nothing is to carry out repeated studies. I believe that is the reality. By conducting studies and more studies, we end up not moving forward. Meanwhile, the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador require the necessary tools.
The concern that I have in dealing with the motion is that if we again undertake the same process that has already been completed, we will not advance. If there is no progress, what will happen to the people who now need renewal of their ferry service? Marine Atlantic must meet certain obligations. We know that it has to fulfill its responsibilities. The question must be asked: where is this headed?
The bottom line is does the member want to stand still or does he really want to be proactive and continue to help his constituents? I believe we can always examine Motion 242 in that light. We might also ask if the member would be ready to take the two studies that have already been paid for out of the public purse and implement them.
In my view, the member should certainly consider that. Once again, I wonder why my Conservative colleague wants to spend more public money. There certainly must be a reason. However, I am not convinced that we will get answers tonight.
The priority is to provide the tools to the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador. That is a priority for the Liberal party and for the Liberal members from this province. They want to make sure that their constituents have the tools they need to make progress. For that reason, can we not go forward immediately? Can we take the studies that we now have, which were requested and largely paid for by ACOA and the province of Newfoundland and Labrador, in order to move forward and do more for the residents of that province? If we really want to help them, we must give them the tools to develop economically and improve their quality of life.
I am certain that before very long we will able to get these answers. I hope that the member for Saint John Eastcan give us some explanations about this motion that he has tabled in the House.