44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 8, 2023 10:00AM
- Jun/8/23 12:29:28 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. He seems very optimistic about what is happening in the United States. It could change completely, depending on who is elected next. I, for one, am not that optimistic.
Now, there was a word missing from his question. He talked about electrifying transportation, but we need to talk about public transportation. That is what is important. That is what is lacking in this country. There is almost no public transport. I once came here by train from Vancouver, and we had to keep stopping to let the oil through. That is not public transportation. Frankly, it is a bit ridiculous. We need public transportation for people who have to travel, and we need to stop always thinking about oil. Of course products and goods have to get through, but it should not always be to the detriment of those who take public transportation.
153 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 8:46:55 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, transporting oil by rail is very risky. The problem with pipelines is that they do not replace rail transportation to the pipeline. They actually increase transportation capacity. Pipelines are therefore risky too and do not do away with rail transport. The overall risk goes up. That is very concerning.
The government must make the safety of its citizens its top priority.
63 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak to Bill C-33, even if it is only in a question for the hon. parliamentary secretary. I have been waiting for this bill to come up for debate. It is a key and critical piece of legislation for people in my community, as I mentioned when I was asking a question of the hon. member for Timmins—James Bay.
We have an incredibly frustrating, dangerous, environmentally damaging and constant situation of freighters that cannot get loaded properly in the Port of Vancouver because of inefficiencies there. They are backing up into the Salish Sea, where they take advantage of essentially free parking; this damages our ecosystems and ignores indigenous rights in the area.
Therefore, I certainly will vote for this legislation to go to committee. I want to see amendments. It would, for the first time, say that the Minister of Transport could direct such vessels to move to other ports. However, as it is currently drafted, it is inadequate to really go where we need it to go to end the practice of anchorages being available to freighters, for free, to pollute our waters.
195 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I agree that my colleague from Hamilton Centre and I have a good working relationship and have had many conversations, in fact, recently at the Hamilton port on the transport committee's tour.
As I referred to in the answer to the previous question, the very first report that was done when I joined the transport committee was on rail safety, and fatigue management was an important part of that study. We heard from witnesses on that, yet none of those recommendations are reflected at all in Bill C-33, which has been pointed out by others in debate.
What is added in terms of red tape are more officers, more advisory committees, stuff that is not going to actually address any of those root problems.
128 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 10:16:25 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, as I have referenced, there are 13 immediate recommendations and eight more longer-term actions of the supply chain task force that have so far been ignored. We heard about the borrowing capacity of ports as the transport committee toured all of our major ports throughout the middle of March. There are those two things, as well as a host of other things, and we could learn from the examples of places like Rotterdam, Antwerp and Seattle that do much better jobs than we do here.
88 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I know a bit about that, as I was part of the executive team that transferred our last national airport system in Canada, the Prince George Airport. We went from a Transport Canada federally operated airport to a local airport authority, the Prince George Airport Authority.
The challenge with that is that once it stands alone, it is standing alone. There are very few opportunities for revenue generation. Who creates the safety and security policies for our ports and airports? It is the government, and it transfers very few dollars to these ports and airports to maintain them, whether it is regarding their safety or security.
That is, again, why I am frustrated with Bill C-33. We always want our goods and people to be transported via safe, secure and sound modes. However, what we have seen is that the government views our ports and airports as cash cows, not as the economic engine generators they truly are. There are so many things we could do.
We are the highest-cost jurisdiction in the world for aviation fees, which is why Canadians pay some of the highest costs for airline tickets. It is why cargo aircraft or passenger carriers that come in have to pay some of the highest costs just to land here and transport goods. If we made things a little easier for people to come to Canada to conduct business, imagine how great we could be. That is the Canada I want to live in.
251 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, one of the objectives that the Minister of Transport gave in his introductory speech on Bill C-33 was to combat inflation caused by supply chain disruptions, yet it seems to do very little of that.
I was at a round table discussion with marine operators and they said the new regulations are just going to make things more expensive for them and that this does not tackle inflation at all.
I wonder if my colleague would have a comment on that.
84 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
