Marcel Proulx

[Family Supplement, April 30th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Saint-Jean for his very relevant question and some of his comments. There are others I will have to correct.

I am answering the question of the hon. member for Saint-Jean on the funding of highway 35, in Quebec.

In Canada, except for national park highways, highways are under provincial and territorial jurisdiction, including the Trans-Canada Highway and highways that are part of the national highway system. However, let me assure you that the Government of Canada is concerned with the state and safety of the national highway system, as well as with its ability to deal with the increased traffic volume.

It is for these very reasons that, for the last 80 years, the Canadian government has funded several shared cost projects for the provincial-territorial highway system. Since 1993, Transport Canada a contributed over $1.6 billion to highway projects in Canada and $220 million in Quebec.

In the February 2000 budget, the federal government announced an investment of $2.65 billion in the infrastructure program, including $600 million into the strategic highway infrastructure program.

Transport Canada is responsible for this program, which allocated $500 million for highways, $70 million for border crossings and $30 million to set up smart transportation systems. Quebec's share of the highway funding is $108.5 million.

There are ongoing discussions with Quebec to reach an agreement on the road projects that will be funded with Quebec's $108.5 million. Highway 35 is part of the national highway system and is therefore eligible for funding under this program. Unfortunately, Quebec has yet to sign the highway program agreement.

I also want to say that on July 2, 2002, the Minister of Transport signed a $29.5 million agreement with Quebec to repair highway 15 and the Lacolle border crossing with border infrastructure funds from the strategic highway infrastructure program.

Furthermore, on August 9, 2002, the Minister of Industry and minister responsible for infrastructure made public the parameters of the Canadian strategic infrastructure fund for $2 billion and $600 million for the border infrastructure fund announced in the 2001 budget. These moneys will help fund the major infrastructure projects with the provinces, territories, municipalities and the private sector.

In closing, I want to say that, on August 22, 2002, the Prime Minister of Canada and the Premier of Quebec announced funding of $525 million to widen higway 175 between Quebec City and the Saguenay to four lanes. As I said previously, highway 35 is part of the national highway system and is therefore eligible for funding under these two new programs.

The Minister of Transport is closely collaborating with his colleague, the Minister of Infrastructure, and with Quebec to identify other transportation projects eligible for funding under these two infrastructure programs.

[Canada Airports Act, April 28th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak today to Bill C-27, the Canada airports act, introduced in the House on March 20. It is part of the vision for our transportation system policy framework embodied in “Straight Ahead - A Vision for Transportation in Canada” that was released in February by the Minister of Transport.

The Canada airports act would be part of moving this vision forward and would guide the continued development of a sustainable airport system. This is a piece of legislation that has been developed for the longer term. Its purpose is not to address the short term challenges facing the entire air industry sector at this time.

These more immediate concerns have the full attention of the government. Let me assure the House that the government is actively monitoring the current situation in the airline industry. As we all know, the air industry is facing challenges, such as the SARS health issue, the war in Iraq, and fluctuating fuel costs.

The government remains fully committed in reviewing its policy on rents collected at the airports that it leases. The minister hopes to be able to announce shortly the direction the government intends to take on this matter.

The Canada airports act would provide a legislated economic policy framework for the only part of our transportation infrastructure that is lacking one, namely airports. Canada's transportation policy has evolved over the years in response to changing times and conditions. Today, we need to modernize and reform Canada's airports policy by enshrining some key obligations and governance principles in legislation. In doing so, we are contributing to the governance agenda as set out in the most recent Speech from the Throne.

The act responds in a positive manner to the recommendations in the government mandated local airport authority review report of 1999 and the Auditor General's report of October 2000. It conveys the governance response to the recommendations on airport governance in the Canada Transportation Act review panel report and in the final report of the independent observer on airline restructuring.

It reflects comprehensive consultations with the affected airport operators, air carriers and provincial and territorial governments.

The Canada airports act is intended to build on the successes of the 1994 airport commercialization policy, while addressing new and emerging issues that have arisen, with 10 years experience since that policy was announced.

The bill contains a new declaration for a national airports policy that replaces the 1994 policy which was primarily divestiture oriented. This declaration is very much in line with the new transportation policy statement set out in Bill C-26, the transportation amendment act, introduced in the House on February 25.

The declaration recognizes that it is in the public interest to have a national system of airports that is operated in a manner that is safe, secure, efficient, economically sustainable, transparent and environmentally responsible. The new policy also articulates the requirement to provide facilities and services to air carriers in an effective, pro-competitive manner and to provide opportunities for air carriers and passengers to express their views on key airport development issues and fees.

The policy recognizes local and regional interests through the activities and governance structures of airport authorities, as well as the role airports play in linking the air transportation system to other modes of transportation and linking the communities they serve to the rest of the world.

The new national airports policy declaration will guide airports in how they must implement the requirements of the act.

Upon passage, the Canada airports act will apply to 29 airports that account for 95% of the traffic of all scheduled passenger and cargo traffic in Canada. This includes the 26 airports identified in 1994 as comprising the national airports system and other airports of national significance due to their strategic geographic location, continued federal residual ownership or because they serve more than 200,000 passengers annually.

The bill contains the key elements that constitute an economic policy framework to strengthen the governance, transparency and accountability of these airports.

I will say a few words on each of these.

Let me start with the government's role and powers. The government's key role is to protect the public interest as it relates to airports, namely, monitoring the airport system and making policies to promote the integrity and long term sustainability, protecting federal property and promoting good corporate governance.

The Government of Canada will be granted the power to give directions and create regulations, for example, in the provision of equitable access for air carriers to airport facilities such as gates, bridges and counters, slot coordination, federal visibility and environmental requirements. The Government of Canada will also be given emergency powers to remedy extraordinary disruptions similar to what is provided in the Canada Transportation Act.

As for the roles and obligations of all affected airport operators, there will be a requirement for them to provide information to the Minister of Transport in support of carrying out his role of overseer, policy-maker, landlord and regulator.

Operators will also have to develop a pro-competitive, equitable access policy for airlines wanting to use essential airport facilities and services, and to post information on fees.

Airports will also have to give access to state and military aircraft, and airports with international traffic will have to ensure visibility of symbols of Canada.

All will have to help Canada meet its international obligations including trade commitments, for example, obligations under bilateral agreements with other countries.

Turning to disclosure and accountability, the focus of the act is on higher transparency through public reporting. There is a more limited application to the airports in the territorial capitals and airports not operated by authorities. However all affected airport operators will have to produce annual reports with audited financial statements and hold annual meetings that are open to the public.

In the case of airport authorities, the requirements are spelled out in greater detail and include those respecting financial information on investments in subsidiary and minority interest corporations. They include the requirement for an independent, comprehensive performance review to be conducted every five years from the date of transfer. To increase transparency, authorities will have to have all their key documents available for public review including their leases and performance review reports.

Perhaps one of the most important subjects covered in Bill C-27 relates to airport fees. Although notice requirements are covered in our leases, this bill would establish a more formal fee setting process respecting aeronautical fees and passenger fees of general application.

The bill sets out the charging principles and requires that a methodology for determining fees be developed that will make it clearer how they meet financial needs. It establishes a procedure for notices of fee adjustments and obligatory consultations with concerned parties.

The bill makes provision for appeals to the Canadian Transportation Agency in cases of alleged non-compliance with these procedures or with charging principles.

The proposed bill includes rules on the use of airport improvement fees, AIFs, collected from passengers. AIFs can only be charged in support of capital projects and those projects must be identified. Smaller airports, with traffic of less than 400,000 passengers, are permitted to use passenger fees to cover operating costs and they must also be disclosed.

I would like to explain some of the elements specific only to airport authorities, those related to their corporate structure and governance regime.

Unlike the port authorities that were continued under the Canada Marine Act of 1997, airports were divested without the benefit of a specific legislative framework. All but three airport authorities were incorporated under the Canada Corporations Act, part II, as for not for profit entities.

We have now determined that it is more appropriate for the airport authorities operating leased airports of national significance to be incorporated under their own legislation. Consequently, all the airport authorities will be continued under the act. This means that instead of 21 different statements of purpose, the airport authorities will have a single, simplified statement that applies equally to all of them. Initially this will affect 18 airport authorities. This will be accomplished without any requirements other than to amend their bylaws to comply with the act.

The rights of the airport authorities will be preserved and they will continue as not for profit entities without share capital that are not agents of the Crown. The airport authorities will have the power to engage in activities defined as essential and complimentary activities of the airport and to create subsidiaries within investment limits.

Bill C-27 would also establish the framework for a more uniform corporate governance regime for authorities that updates and strengthens what we have now.

Nothing can replace a solid regime of governance and transparency for airports of national significance that provide an essential public service. The regime will be based on elements such as the structure of boards of directors, the necessary skills, the rules of eligibility for directors and rules regarding conflicts of interest.

All airport authorities will be subject to the same requirements regarding the make-up of boards of directors, with the possibility of choosing directors based on local factors in the region where the airport is located.

The bill spells out the types of organizations that can become selecting bodies that appoint or nominate directors as well as the processes for nominations and appointments of directors. These bodies include the federal government, the provinces, the regional authorities and municipalities and five categories of non-governmental entities, including the Air Carrier Industry Association. This uniform yet flexible regime is designed to ensure that no single entity controls the board and that persons with all the necessary skills are identified.

The proposed bill sets out in detail the duties of the boards of directors and will require them to have a governance committee and an audit committee. In addition, there are rules on auditor selection and rotation, on public bid solicitation and mandated consultation with air carriers and the community. As well the airport authority obligations respecting compliance with the Official Languages Act have been transferred without change.

We believe that with this bill we have struck a balance between the freedoms that airport authorities have and the need for increased accountability. We also believe that we have struck a balance between the wish of air carriers to have their say in the decisions of the authorities, and the independence of said authorities.

There are pro-competitive provisions to assist the airlines and the airports in their decisions on access to essential airport facilities such as slots, gates, bridges and the like. We believe these are measures that will contribute to ensuring the viability of air carriers. How communities can relate to their airports is made much clearer.

Many of these obligations are already in some form in our leases with the authorities, but we have done more. We have offered to provide advice on how to be compliant with the act to any airport that asks. Members should know that some airport authorities have already begun to put in place transitional measures to bring themselves into compliance more quickly.

The bill is a significant piece of legislation which I know has been anticipated by members. The Minister of Transport looks forward to the debate on its contents and to discussing it in detail in standing committees.

[Quebec General Election, April 28th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, voters in the Outaouais region gave a majority to the Quebec Liberal Party candidates in the provincial election held this past April 14.

I would like to extend my congratulations to the Liberal candidates in the Outaouais region, all of whom recorded impressive wins: the MNA for Chapleau, Benoît Pelletier; the MNA for Gatineau, Réjean Lafrenière; the MNA for Hull, Roch Cholette; the MNA for Papineau, Norman MacMillan and the MNA for Pontiac, Charlotte L'Écuyer

All of them have what it takes in the way of talent and knowledge to ably represent the interests of their constituents and their region in the National Assembly. They understand the problems and are prepared to work to resolve them.

The voters of the Outaouais region have given these five a clear mandate and I am certain that they are equal to the task.

My heartiest congratulations to them all.

[Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act, April 8th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour for me to take part in this debate on Bill C-419, An Act to amend the Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act. I will speak primarily to the provision in the bill that covers the coming into force of parts II and III of the legislation.

This provision, clause 4, changes the provision of the act concerning the coming into force. The Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act was passed by Parliament and received royal assent on June 27, 1986. Nevertheless, parts II and III of that act, the ones dealing with employment standards and health and safety standards, have never come into force.

Part II, establishing the obligations related to normal working hours, salaries and holidays, incorporated part III of the Canada Labour Code.

Part III of the act, setting health and safety standards, incorporated part II of the Canada Labour Code.

Both parts of the legislation were intended to apply to staff in the House of Commons, the Senate and the Library of Parliament as well as the staff of senators and members of parliament.

It may seem odd that they have never come into effect, since the bill has been law for 17 years. The government acknowledged that the unions, as well as a number of employees and members, have called for these provisions to be applied.

The government has acted upon their requests by addressing this matter and consulting parliamentarians and other stakeholders. It did not move on the matter after that consultation because of a lack of consensus. As well, the government feels that the requirements of the law are properly respected, albeit informally.

The standards imposed by part II are already in collective agreements. As well, parliamentary employers respect the spirit of the law as far as health and safety is concerned. In many cases, they go beyond what the law requires.

For instance, the House of Commons has struck a joint health and safety committee made up of representatives of management and labour.

The hiring of MPs' staff is governed by the regulations of the Board of Internal Economy, and employee benefits are set out in the directives of the Manual of Allowances and Services , which apply to parliamentarians in their capacity as employers.

Two main concerns were raised by members of Parliament concerning the coming into effect of parts II and III.

First, part II requirements might have financial and operational implications for MPs and senators.

Each parliamentarian is aware that we must carry out our activities within the framework of the limited funds made available for staff.

Second, the coming into effect of part III might impact upon the independence of members of Parliament and breach their privileges.

For example, employees might refuse to work if they deemed their working conditions to be dangerous, and this might be considered a matter of privilege it if prevented the House or its members from sitting.

Part III would give government inspectors access to the parliamentary precinct, in particular the MPs' and senators' offices, without the authorization of the person concerned or of the Speaker of the House.

As parliamentarians, we need to act with caution when laws are proposed which might conflict with parliamentary privileges.

As I have already noted, parts II and III apply the provisions of the Canada Labour Code to parliamentary staff. Yet that code was never designed to apply to the legislative branch.

It does not in any way take into consideration the distinct nature of the House of Commons or the Senate, rights and parliamentary immunity of MPs, or the constitutional independence of the House from the executive branch.

I would point out that the Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act has not undergone a comprehensive parliamentary review since 1986.

It is now proposed in Bill C-419 that parts II and III come into force without our first ascertaining that they remain as relevant as they were 17 years ago.

As I just said, perhaps we should consider further amendments to the act before enacting parts II and III, to ensure that they do not conflict with parliamentary privileges.

We should make sure that all the amendments made to the Canada Labour Code since 1986 actually do apply to parliamentary staff.

That having been said, this bill only changes the coming into force of the act and does not make any substantive changes to parts II and III.

To conclude, it was in response to concerns expressed by parliamentarians that the government held off enacting parts II and III.

The working conditions of our staff matter greatly to us, but I believe that the House was able to settle the matter informally, without breaching our privileges in the process.

[Right Hon. Prime Minister, April 8th, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, today we celebrate the 40th anniversary of the Prime Minister's election as the member for Shawinigan. On April 8, 1963, the voters in that riding made an excellent choice. With his determination and dedication, this young man was destined for great things.

In fact, the “little guy from Shawinigan” has done great things for Canada. Quietly, he made his mark on the Liberal Party, worked his way up the government ladder, and has held the office of Prime Minister for 10 years.

Right from his first election, the Prime Minister has demonstrated that for Quebeckers, the opportunities within Canada are unlimited.

Today, I want to congratulate the Prime Minister on the path he has chosen and the work he has accomplished.

Congratulations, long life, and thank you.

[Le Salon du livre de l'Outaouais, April 3rd, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the 24th Salon du livre de Outaouais was held this past March 26 through 30. This major cultural event enjoys an enviable reputation within the publishing industry.

Close to 31,000 faithful readers attended this year's event. Nearly 600 publishing houses and over 300 authors were showcased to celebrate books of all kinds.

I would like to focus particular attention on the excellent work by the book fair's chairwoman, Estelle Desfossés. The salon is such a popular cultural event because of her energy and enthusiasm. Thanks to the devoted efforts of Mrs. Desfossés and her team of volunteers, the salon is a wonderful celebration of books and of reading.

Congratulations to everyone on the organizing committee and long life to the Salon du livre de l'Outaouais.

[Grands Prix du Tourisme de l'Outaouais, March 31st, 2003]

Mr. Speaker, the18th gala for the Grands prix du tourisme de l'Outaouais was held Saturday evening, under the theme “Outaouais, Live it!”.

Today, I would like to congratulate the winners of this award. They are: Keskinada Loppet; Aux Berges des Outaouais; Camping Cantley; Auberge Viceroy; Chateau Logue Hotel-Golf-Resort; Ramada Plaza Manoir du Casino; Réservations Outaouais; Cartographie informatisée de l'Outaouais; Les Fougères Restaurant; Laurier sur Montcalm Restaurant; the Hull-Chelsea-Wakefield Train; the Canadian Museum of Civilization; the Gatineau Hot Air Balloon Festival; Expéditions Eau Vive; Gatineau Park; Mawadoseg Kitigan Zibi; Michel Sancartier, of the Western Festival in Saint-André-Avelin. In addition, the Keskinada Loppet won the Canada Economic Development's international marketing award.

These winners are testimony to the energy and vitality of the tourism industry in our beautiful region. I want to congratulate Gilles Picard and Jean Tiffeault, respectively director general and president of Outaouais Tourism.

Congratulations to the winners and good luck at the next Quebec tourism industry gala.

[Canada Transportation Act, March 28th, 2003]

Madam Speaker, discussions have taken place between all parties with respect to today's debate on the motion for second reading of Bill C-314 in the name of the hon. member for Lethbridge and I believe you would find consent that in the event today's debate on second reading of Bill C-314 collapses and if a recorded division is requested thereon, the said vote be deferred until Tuesday, April 1 at 3 p.m.

[Question No. 118, March 18th, 2003]

Transport Canada is currently managing a highway construction program, the Strategic Highway Infrastructure Program, or SHIP. Under the SHIP, $500 million is available for strategic improvements to the national highway system, or NHS, which includes the Trans-Canada Highway. Under the agreement, the total federal allocation for Manitoba is $20.2 million for capital highway improvement projects on the NHS, to be cost shared on a fifty-fifty basis with the Province of Manitoba. It is the responsibility of the Province of Manitoba to submit projects for funding under the SHIP. The eligibility criteria require that projects be major capital improvements on east-west or north-south trade routes of Canada’s NHS, meet engineering standards and environmental assessment requirements, and be supported with detailed justification.

To date, two projects have been announced for funding under the Canada-Manitoba SHIP agreement: twinning of Highway 1, the Trans-Canada Highway near Virden, $3.15 million federal/$3.15 million provincial, and rehabilitation/safety improvements along Highway 16, the Yellowhead Trans-Canada Highway between Neepawa and Minnedosa, $8.15 million federal/$8.15 million provincial. Construction along Highway 1 involves completing the twinning of 12 kilometres of the Trans-Canada Highway, starting near Virden and finishing 1.2 kilometres west of the Highway 1/Highway 83 junction. The project also includes intersection work at the same junction and installing a new culvert under the Trans-Canada Highway at Scallion Creek, just west of Virden. The project has an estimated total cost of $7 million, $6.3 million eligible, and is expected to be completed in 2003, with 57% of the project scheduled to be completed this fiscal year.

The Highway 16 project involves safety-related improvements and rehabilitating 28.1 kilometres of Highway 16 between Highway 10, near Minnedosa, and Highway 5, near Neepawa. This includes adding four 1.8 kilometre long passing lanes, two eastbound and two westbound, improving the intersections at Highway 466 and Highway 464, constructing fully paved shoulders, and improving the load-bearing capacity of the road to accommodate growing truck traffic. The project has an estimated cost of $18 million, $16.3 million eligible, and is expected to be completed in 2004, with 18% of the project scheduled to be completed this fiscal year.

There remains $17.8 million in unnallocated funds in the Canada-Manitoba SHIP agreement. No formal proposals have been received to date for this funding.

[Question No. 127, March 17th, 2003]

The setting and collection of aviation enroute terminal and overflight fees is the sole responsibility of NavCanada, the not-for-profit provider of air navigation services in Canada. The federal government is not a party to these fees, and as such, receives none of the fee revenue for use of airspace over the province of Newfoundland and Labrador.