TRAN Committee Meeting

37th PARLIAMENT, 2nd SESSION

Standing Committee on Transport

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Thursday, February 27, 2003

Á

1115

The Acting Chair (Mr. Roger Gallaway (Sarnia—Lambton, Lib.))

Mr. Roger Gallaway

Mr. Yvan Berthelot ("conseiller municipal", Chair - Highway 35 Committee, City of Saint-Jean-sur-le-Richelieu)

Á

1120

Mr. Roger Gallaway

Lucie Dandenault (General Manager and International Trade Commissioner, Club Dexportation)

Á

1125

Mr. Roger Gallaway

Mr. Christian Perreault (Executive Director, "Conseil économique du Haut-Richelieu")

Á

1130

Á

1135

Mr. Roger Gallaway

Mr. Claude Bachand (Saint-Jean, BQ)

Á

1140

Mr. Yvan Berthelot

Mr. Claude Bachand

Lucie Dandenault

Mr. Claude Bachand

Mr. Christian Perreault

Á

1145

Mr. Roger Gallaway

Mr. Claude Bachand

Mr. Yvan Berthelot

Mr. Christian Perreault

Mr. Roger Gallaway

Mr. Marcel Proulx (Hull—Aylmer, Lib.)

Á

1150

Mr. Yvan Berthelot

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Yvan Berthelot

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Yvan Berthelot

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Yvan Berthelot

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Yvan Berthelot

Mr. Christian Perreault

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Á

1155

Mr. Yvan Berthelot

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Yvan Berthelot

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Yvan Berthelot

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Yvan Berthelot

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Roger Gallaway

Mr. Mario Laframboise (Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, BQ)

Â

1200

Mr. Yvan Berthelot

Mr. Mario Laframboise

Mr. Yvan Berthelot

Mr. Mario Laframboise

Mr. Yvan Berthelot

Mr. Mario Laframboise

Â

1205

Mr. Roger Gallaway

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Yvan Berthelot

Mr. Roger Gallaway

Mr. Roger Gallaway

Mr. Serge Fortin ("préfet", "Municipalité régionale du Comté de Témiscouata")

Â

1215

Â

1220

Â

1225

Mr. Roger Gallaway

Mr. Jacques Martin (Mayor, City of Edmundston)

Â

1230

Â

1235

Â

1240

Mr. Roger Gallaway

Mr. Étienne Charron (First Vice-President, Chair, Transport Committee, "Chambre de commerce de la Municipalité régionale du Comté de Rivière-du-Loup")

Mr. Roger Gallaway

Mr. Émilien Nadeau (Mayor, City of Dégelis)

Â

1245

Mr. Roger Gallaway

Mr. Paul Crête (Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, BQ)

Mr. Serge Fortin

Â

1250

Mr. Jacques Martin

Mr. Roger Gallaway

Mr. Paul Crête

Mr. Émilien Nadeau

Â

1255

Mr. Jacques Martin

Mr. Roger Gallaway

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Jacques Martin

·

1300

Mr. Roger Gallaway

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Émilien Nadeau

·

1305

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Serge Fortin

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Roger Gallaway

Mr. Mario Laframboise

·

1310

Mr. Marcel Proulx

Mr. Roger Gallaway

Mr. Jacques Martin

Mr. Roger Gallaway

---

CANADA

Standing Committee on Transport

---

NUMBER 014

l

2nd SESSION

l

37th PARLIAMENT

---

EVIDENCE

Thursday, February 27, 2003

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Á  (1115)  

[English]

    The Acting Chair (Mr. Roger Gallaway (Sarnia—Lambton, Lib.)): I call this meeting to order. We are today resuming our study of the highway infrastructure of Canada.

    We have as our witnesses this morning representatives from three groups. Mr. Christian Perreault is from the Conseil économique du Haut-Richelieu. Mr. Berthelot is from the City of Saint-Jean-sur-le-Richelieu. And I see another person from the City of Saint-Jean-sur-le Richelieu here this morning; Mr. Bergeron, welcome. And from the Chambre de commerce du Haut-Richelieu we have Marie-Claude Beauvais. Welcome to you.

[Translation]

    You'll have seven minutes to give your address, and I must emphasize seven minutes. Then the members here present this morning will have a number of questions to ask, I'm sure. So who's going to start? Mr. Perreault?

    An hon. member: Mr. Berthelot.

    Mr. Roger Gallaway: You may begin.

    Mr. Yvan Berthelot ("conseiller municipal", Chair - Highway 35 Committee, City of Saint-Jean-sur-le-Richelieu): Note to Publications on affiliation: Mr. Yvan Berthelot (Municipal Councillor, Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu; Member, Chambre de commerce du Haut-Richelieu; Chair, Regional Highway 35 Committee)

    Gentlemen members of the committee--there are not many women sitting here--thank you for receiving us today.

    First of all, I'll introduce myself. I am Yvan Berthelot, Chair of the Regional Highway 35 Committee, and member of the Chambre de commerce du Haut-Richelieu and municipal councillor of the City of Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu.

    Today, we want to talk to you about Highway 35. First, I would like to give you an idea of where Highway 35 and the Montérégie region are. For people who are less familiar with our region, I'm going to pass around a map which shows a Montérégie transport plan. Relative to Montreal, when you talk about Montérégie, you're talking about this entire region. The City of Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu is roughly in the centre, 30 kilometers from Montreal and 30 kilometers from the U.S. border. Our explanations today will be based on that.

    The population of the City of Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu is 82,000 inhabitants. The city is located in the federal riding of Saint-Jean. Our member, Mr. Bachand, is here today. It is the largest city of the regional county municipality of Haut-Richelieu. The city is divided by the Richelieu River, a navigable waterway which links Lake Champlain to the St. Lawrence River and which was the waterway that enabled the region to experience a major industrial boom in the nineteenth century.

    The neighbouring riding, which is represented in Parliament by the Honourable Denis Paradis, is Brome--Missisquoi. Highway 35 also passes through it.

    So, to give you a little background to the Highway 35 project linking Highway 10 to the U.S. border, I would say that it's a project that was conceived in the late 1960s. The highway has only been partially completed, between Highway 10 and the southwest portion of the City of Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu. From there, users have to take Route 133, a two-lane rural route, to travel the 35 kilometers to the U.S. border and pick up Interstate 89, which of course is the main link to Boston.

    As for the way things stand today, the expropriations necessary to finish the highway have been completed since the early 1980s and the alignment as well. In the documents we submitted to you, you can see the planned alignment of Highway 35 to the U.S. border. That's the part we're talking about, the 35 kilometers that remain to be done so that we can reach the Boston market, which is extremely big. There is a consensus on the alignment adopted. The idea is to extend the present Highway 35 southeast of the City of Saint-Jean to the border crossing and to hook up with Interstate 89.

    In January 2001, the Government of Quebec, through its Minister of Transport, Mr. Guy Chevrette, confirmed that $65 million from Quebec was available to continue the highway. He then sent his counterpart, the Honourable David Collenette, a federal-provincial draft agreement to allow the project to start. His successor, Transport Minister Serge Ménard, repeated that this was a Quebec government priority when he took up his position. In addition, the Quebec government granted $2 million to prepare plans and estimates and the environmental impact study essential to the extension of the highway. Thus, at the present time, work is under way on the highway's alignment; we are in the process of conducting impact studies.

    In 2002, in its Montérégie transport plan, which has also been submitted to you, the Quebec government reiterated the priority that it attached to completion of Highway 35. To date, the Highway 35 completion project is the most advanced project in Quebec. All that's lacking is the federal government's commitment to provide $65 million so that we can at last see bulldozers in the field, if you will. The cost to carry out this project is thus estimated at a total of $130 million.

    We're also going to submit numerous letters of support from the chambers of commerce in the region, from the riding of Brome--Missisquoi, and so on. There is a consensus, and everyone agrees this project should be carried out very soon, with regard to both the alignment and the economic impact.

    What the region is requesting is that it be given back this privileged link with its American neighbour in order to stimulate major economic growth for the region, for Quebec and, of course, for Canada.

    With regard to the City of Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu and the region, we are awaiting this project so that we can put forward an extensive industrial park project along the highway corridor. This is a major economic development project. So it's an essentially economic project, even though it can be said that there will be an impact on safety. Highway 35 currently runs into Route 133, a two-lane rural route that is very dangerous. It is said that it is a highway that virtually comes to a dead end 35 kilometers from the American market. So when we talk about promoting imports and exports, the market, economic development and so on, we still sometimes wonder why these 35 kilometers of highway have not been built.

    I apologize for the pointer, but I wanted to show you the plan. It's a chopstick, as you can see. We don't want a highway to China; we just want 35 kilometers at a cost of $65 million.

    That concludes my remarks. I especially wanted to present the region to you and to make you aware of the economic aspects. I'm going to leave it to my colleagues to talk to you about the impact on trucking, transport and import-export. So I thank you very much for your welcome and for listening to me.

Á  (1120)  

    Mr. Roger Gallaway: Note to Publications on affiliation: I have done a “search and replace” to change “M. Roger Gallaway” to “Le président suppléant (M. Roger Gallaway)”

    Thank you. Who's going to speak? Ms. Dandenault?

    Lucie Dandenault (General Manager and International Trade Commissioner, Club Dexportation): Note to Publications on affiliation: Ms. Lucie Dandenault (General Manager and Export Commissioner, Club Export@ction).

    Yes. I'm Lucie Dandenault, not Marie-Claude Beauvais, whom I'm replacing at the last minute. I'm the Export Commissioner for Club Export@ction, which represents the regions of Haut-Richelieu, les Jardins-de-Napierville and Roussillon. I'm going to talk to you about the economic development aspect.

    The Philipsburg border crossing is currently the second busiest in Quebec, but let's look at the figures. It's the second busiest, without a completed highway. That road, Route 133, links two major North American urban centres, Boston and Montreal, located approximately 500 kilometers from one another. The population of the Boston area was 5.6 million inhabitants in 2001 and that of Montreal 3.5 million.  All Canadian and American cities of that size are linked by completed highways, particularly for distances of that order.

    It is the second busiest via provincial roads travelled by school buses and farm equipment. The many agricultural businesses along Route 133 are conducive to the use of that route by heavy agricultural transport vehicles and agricultural machinery. I would point out that the accident and mortality rates are above the average for Quebec highways. Safety is a major factor for the economy.

    It's the second busiest, even though traffic must pass through villages and communities where speed limits are lowered to 50 and 70 kilometers an hour. Competitiveness and just-in-time delivery are key to our economy. Our economic role is to keep our businesses competitive, efficient and profitable. As a society, we must adopt the means to achieve our common objectives. Completing this highway means having a reliable, safe and fast highway.

    It is the second busiest crossing, even though a number of trucking companies ask their drivers to avoid that route. Those companies must calculate an average of 20 minutes more for the trip, in addition to the driver's kilometrage; that's an additional 32 kilometers to get to Boston. The average, and non-exhaustive, cost that trucking businesses calculate in addition is $100 for 20 extra minutes. I should also point out that, if Highway 35 were completed, 1,000 trucks a day would use the Philipsburg border crossing. The anticipated economies of scale would be $30 million a year. In an era of globalization, competitiveness and just-in-time delivery, it is imperative that our Canadian businesses remain competitive.

    According to statistics compiled by Transport Canada, Statistics Canada and the Quebec Ministère des Transports, a completed Highway 35 would reduce the volume of trucks at the Lacolle border crossing by 10 to 15 percent. Vermont and Massachusetts together represent 18.7 percent of exports shipped by truck from Quebec to the United States. That percentage is similar to that measured by Transport Canada at various border crossings. According to that source, 19.2 percent of the value of exports to the United States and Mexico via the border crossings transits through Philipsburg, amounting to a value of $4.7 billion, whereas Lacolle represents 29 percent. That's a difference of 10 percent for a rural route. Philipsburg thus ranks second among border crossings in Quebec.

    Since the United States is the largest consumer market in the world, proximity to that country is a major benefit for the Quebec economy, provided, of course, that we have infrastructures for exporting goods and products. A completed Highway 35 would make the Philipsburg and Lacolle border crossing equally busy and equal in terms of the value of transiting goods. The value of goods transiting through Philipsburg is currently $5.8 billion in Quebec exports. That value could increase to at least $8 billion if the highway were completed, according to the study by the Groupe conseil GENIVAR which I have here with me.

Á  (1125)  

    In the past 10 years, the growth rate of our exports to the United States, our main partner, has increased constantly. As of February 26 of this year, Quebec's 2002 exports represented 37.5 percent of our exports to the northeastern United States and represented a value of $26 billion.

    A completed Highway 35 would reduce the cost of exports to Canadian businesses doing business with American firms in New England. Highway 35 links the Montreal area, Montérégie and Boston. Completion of Highway 35 would mean lower transport costs, faster transportation and greater competitiveness.

    It should also be noted that, as Export Commissioner, I see that you receive requests from American trade delegates, order givers and manufacturing agents to meet with Canadian export businesses. We are in the middle of an emergency, and extending Highway 35 would undoubtedly be a factor favouring bilateral trade between Quebec and the United States.

    A completed Highway 35 would be beneficial for businesses in Montreal, Longueuil, Saint-Hyacinthe, Granby and Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, the heart of exporting manufacturing businesses in Quebec.

    Route 133, the road that serves a major corridor including the Montreal region and Montérégie, also serves New England, including Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Connecticut. Please note that, in Montérégie alone, we have 1,381 exporting businesses, in which 24,000 manufacturing jobs are directly related to exports. In addition, the average annual growth rate of exports was 11.7 percent from 1991 to 2000.

    In closing, this matter is a major economic focal point for our businesses exporting to the northeastern United States. Highway 35 is a hub for the economy and prosperity of Quebec and Canada. That shows just how important it is to improve the image of Quebec and Canada at one of their most important points of entry.

    Thank you for your attention.

    Mr. Roger Gallaway: Thank you.

    Mr. Perreault.

    Mr. Christian Perreault (Executive Director, "Conseil économique du Haut-Richelieu"): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Mr. Chairman and gentlemen members of the committee, a highway is a lifeline: it generates economic life, it generates tourist life, it ensures life, and it facilitates life. The governments of Canada and the United States share a number of highways which create prosperity in our regions and provinces, which facilitate trade and enhance the economic potential of our territory. Those highways, those lifelines as we say, between Canada and the United States are all linked to one another, with one single exception, Highway 35 and Interstate 89 in the United States.

    That highway and this highway project are at the heart of one of the largest economic markets in the world, the market of the American east coast. The coast is American; Quebec and Ontario were the driving force of this planet over the past 20 or 30 years. But this focal point is moving southward, westward, and we must react as a nation to maintain our momentum and not to lose the leadership that Mexico is trying to take away with the states of the American south, and to do so, a complete link, a second exit from Quebec to the northeastern American market is a necessity. The northeastern American market is a highly competitive market which our businesses are facing, and we need to provide an effective infrastructure that will meet the needs of businesses and promote the development of collective wealth.

Á  (1130)  

[English]

    The province of Quebec and the Philipsburg border crossing welcome close to one million visitors from New England every year. They represent 41% of all tourists visiting Quebec from the United States, and they come through the Philipsburg crossing. The Interstate 89 and Autoroute 35 corridors are the most used roads of access to Canada for people wanting to visit the province of Quebec.

[Translation]

    A major tourist corridor that will be developed is a project currently under way along the axis of Highway 35 and Interstate 89 in the United States. That project, the Champlain-Richelieu Heritage Corridor, will position this tourist destination globally as a vacation resort, historic and global heritage area. As Mr. Berthelot said, the Richelieu River, where we live, is the cradle of Canada. Upon his arrival, Samuel de Champlain visited the river and lake, Lake Champlain, which are in the axis and corridor of Highway 35 and Interstate 89. So we're talking about the foundation of Canada, since this highway is located in a region which witnessed Canada's birth.

    Our American partners, since we work with the Americans, have already obtained US$2 million in funding per year from the U.S. Congress to develop this tourist resort area on the Richelieu River and on Lake Champlain. We must be able to meet the needs of tourists who come to us by enabling them to enter Quebec and Canada via this border crossing and a decent highway.

    The extension of Highway 35 is also part of a structured development of the road system in southern Quebec. You are no doubt aware of the Highway 30 project--it's in the media every day--but Highway 35 and Highway 30 are joint projects. They aren't competing projects; they are complementary projects.

    In the global context of greenhouse gas emissions reduction and the Kyoto Protocol, reducing congestion on our roads and at our border crossings is becoming a necessity. Here's the picture. Montreal Island and Montérégie are the economic generators of Quebec. Those two regions generate 63 percent of Quebec's exports to the United States. With the planned extension of Highway 30, we will witness the relocation of a number of industries along the extension of Highway 30 and Highway 35. So a number of businesses will leave Montreal to locate on this new extension, where there will be less congestion, plus the congestion of Montreal. Montérégie will therefore increasingly see export businesses settling in its region.

    It is logical, and quite obvious, that the businesses that export even more from Montérégie... For the moment, there's only one exit: the Lacolle border crossing. As you know, the Canadian government has previously allocated funds to improve that border crossing, but the figures are there: that crossing is congested. As Ms. Dandenault mentioned, it's a crossing that a number of vehicles and trucking companies use as an exceptional route, since Highway 35 linking up with the New England states is not completed.

    So developing Highway 35 would not only help exports, it would not only reduce trucking, it would also help reduce the greenhouse effect and support the Kyoto Protocol. It would also assist in reducing waiting times for trucks at the border crossing--which can currently take up to five hours--and waiting times for tourists at a border crossing, since we can provide them with two sound, quick and effective destinations.

    The local impact of Highway 35.

    Ms. Dandenault painted you a certain picture. We're not just talking here about the Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu community, which is the second largest city in Montérégie or in the region south of Montreal. Saint-Jean is of course the central city that this highway passes through, but the highway will also serve the businesses of Granby. Think of IBM, CAE Inc., which have sister plants in Burlington, on the road to Boston. Think of the businesses at home, Pirelli, Thomas & Betts, Pratt & Whitney in Longueuil. So this highway will serve all of Montérégie as well as businesses in Montreal. So it's not a local project. In my opinion, it's a project that can either come out of the Canadian Strategic Infrastructure Fund or the Border Infrastructure Fund, since it's a project that will offer Quebec and Canada a new door to the American market. In addition, the competitiveness of the entire American northeast will be consolidated in a dynamic in which the trend is currently much more southward.

    In conclusion, allow me just to remind you that this is the only highway, to my knowledge, which is not linked highway to highway. We're talking here about North American positioning for a border crossing which is currently second in Quebec in terms of volume and value of transiting goods.

Á  (1135)  

But if there were a highway, as all the information you have in the document we've submitted to you attests, that crossing would be the equivalent of the Lacolle border crossing in terms of volume and tonnage; and then you would see the competitiveness of our Quebec and Canadian businesses.

    It currently costs a truck going through Lacolle an additional $100 to $200 to make the detour. That's considering that it recrosses through the United States to pick up Interstate 89 from an American state route. Multiply that by 725 trucks a day at the Philipsburg crossing at the end of the Highway 35 extension, add to that 800 trucks leaving from the Lacolle border crossing every day, crossing via Highway 178 to the United States to Interstate 89, and imagine that there are only 250 of those trucks taking Highway 35, and that yields 1,000 trucks a day. Calculating $100 per truck times 300 days a year, and we're talking about $30 million that our businesses are losing, that they are forced to pay out in export costs. I believe that, for a number of them, this would be the difference between getting a contract in the North American market and losing a contract in the North American market.

    The Province of Quebec is committed in this matter; Mr. Berthelot mentioned that. It has advanced half the money. A draft agreement was sent to Mr. Collenette, requesting a matching amount from the federal government of some $65 million. The environmental studies were started in the summer of 2002 and will be completed within three months. The plans and specifications are under way, the land has been expropriated along the alignment, and, lastly, we are awaiting the Canadian government's approval to put the bulldozers in the field in the summer of 2004. That's our objective.

    I won't talk to you again about tourism because I've amply referred to that.

    Gentlemen, thank you. In the document distributed to you, you have all the technical information and figures we presented to you this morning. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen members of the committee, thank you.

    Mr. Roger Gallaway: Thank you, Mr. Perreault. Like the delivery, you finished just in time.

    Who's going to start? Mr. Bachand, you have 10 minutes.

    Mr. Claude Bachand (Saint-Jean, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    I just want to welcome the people from Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu to the Standing Committee on Transport here in Ottawa and to tell them as well that the presentation they made was equal to their abilities. I have known these people for a number of years now and I think they made an excellent presentation.

    I would also like to take this opportunity to put it on the record that I think we are in an excellent position right now, in view of the federal budget--perhaps not the last one, but the one before it--because amounts in the budget of the Border Infrastructure Fund have been spent to date. A $600 million budget was set aside, and, as we speak, $300 million has been allocated for the Windsor region. So I think it's important that Quebec get its share of that, and I think Highway 35 absolutely qualifies for this type of budget.

    I must also admit that we have a lot of support in Vermont. I work a lot with our American friends, those in the state of Vermont and those in the state of New York, and I must tell you, Mr. Chairman, that Mr. Peter Clavelle, who is the Mayor of Burlington, the major city in Vermont, supports Highway 35. I should say that the Americans completed their Interstate 89 more than 20 years ago in the hope that our Highway 35 would also be completed.

    I think the time has come to see to it and I may have a question for our friends. I would like them to briefly describe for me the degree of support provided for Highway 35 by the economic class and, especially, the political class. I believe that all kinds of people have come out in favour of Highway 35 and that the economic class is virtually unanimous on the subject. Now I would also like to have an overview of the degree of support from the political class.

Á  (1140)  

    Mr. Yvan Berthelot: Sir, Mr. Chairman, as I told you a moment ago in my remarks, there is unanimous support for this project. Everyone agrees on it, on the alignment and on when it should be done. People are waiting for it. So there's support everywhere, in Montérégie, the riding of Saint-Jean and the neighbouring riding of Brome--Missisquoi, Mr. Paradis' riding, from all the chambers of commerce; we have the support of all of them. So there's unanimous support.

    In the government, at the ministerial level, all the ministers who have visited our region and the chamber of commerce also agree. The Honourable Pierre Pettigrew, for example, feels that the federal government must go ahead and develop the north-south axis in the context of globalization so that we can have access to the large American market.

    Some three weeks ago, the Honourable Stéphane Dion was also in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, where he visited us. He mentioned that it was logical for the Quebec government to give priority too Highway 35, to the same degree as it has to Highway 30.

    When he was Finance Minister, the Honourable Paul Martin also said that the Highway 35 project was a priority for economic development, job creation, economic impact, imports and exports and globalization.

    So it can be said that everyone agrees and that there is a consensus within the political class in both Quebec and the federal government in Ottawa. There is general agreement among the stakeholders, at the economic and social levels, and there is unanimous support. The synergy and energy are really there to develop the Montérégie and Haut-Richelieu region and to promote exports, all that with economic impact for Quebec and Canada, of course.

    So everyone agrees, and, as I mentioned a moment ago, we are still lacking the federal government's consent to grant the $65 million so that we can see the bulldozers in the field. Thank you.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: Now I would like to focus a bit on the safety aspect. How many trucks leave Philipsburg and have to take the 133 in a day? You mentioned it a moment ago, I believe.

    Lucie Dandenault: Note to Publications on affiliation: Ms. Lucie Dandenault

    Yes, 800.

    Mr. Claude Bachand: So can you describe to the committee the route and villages those people must pass through coming from Philipsburg or leaving Montreal to go to Philipsburg? They have to go through a certain number of villages. I'm a committee member, and I know that Sainte-Anne-de-Sabrevois, among others, had a close call last year or two years ago, when a truck ran into a house and woke up its occupants in the middle of the night. In the end, the truck could have exploded and done some real damage to the village.

    So perhaps you can explain to the committee how winding the road is and what villages are on the road between the two points of Philipsburg and Montreal.

    Mr. Christian Perreault: Sir, Mr. Chairman, I believe we have to consider that there are at least some 15 small communities, ranging from a few inhabitants to 2,000 or 3,000 residents currently along the alignment of Route 133, which is the extension of Highway 35. There are also a few 90-degree turns, and two or three deaths occur along the route every year.

    As Ms. Dandenault mentioned, it's a route used by school buses and agricultural equipment, with speed limits of 50 to 70 km/hour, and the economy combines those vehicles with passenger and tourist vehicles, trucks, road trains and passenger buses. So there are really very different types of vehicles and traffic volumes.

    Those communities live with constant noise and danger. So it would be a major improvement for the communities, of course, if this highway link were created, and, as Mr. Bachand mentioned, both in Mr. Bachand's riding and in that of Mr. Paradis, Brome--Missisquoi, the communities agree that this highway is urgently needed.

Á  (1145)  

[English]

    Mr. Roger Gallaway: You have four minutes.

[Translation]

    Mr. Claude Bachand: It seems that we multiplied the number of trucks by the additional costs they had to bear to travel from one side to the other, that is to say from the State of New York to Vermont, but it seems to me that the study you referred to earlier promised the City of Saint-Jean a veritable economic boom if Highway 35 were completed. Aren't there also people who, because of proximity to the American market, look at places like Saint-Jean and feel that it would be a clear advantage for them to have a direct road link with the United States, with, among others, New England, including Vermont, because that's the road that leads to Boston? I think I read a statistic indicating that there were 50 million inhabitants within a 500-kilometer radius. I don't believe I'm mistaken in saying that there is a study that shows a potential economic boom in the Saint-Jean and Brome--Missisquoi region if Highway 35 is completed.

    Mr. Yvan Berthelot: Absolutely, your figures are correct. And, throughout the Montérégie region, in both the ridings of Brome--Missisquoi and Saint-Jean, there are obviously great expectations of this highway. Why? Because the region doesn't want to be, and can't be, competing with the City of Montreal, the economic development potential of which we are of course familiar with, or with the new City of Longueuil. So what we want is to develop our strengths. What are those strengths? One, of course, is our proximity to the American market. In Montérégie, no other city than Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu has 80,000 inhabitants as close to the border, that is to say 30 kilometers away. We were talking about the City of Longueuil, which is very close to Montreal, but there's Highway 15 and Lacolle; so they're developing that corridor.

    Near the American border, there is the City of Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Montérégie, the ridings of Saint-Jean and Brome--Missisquoi, and, for us, the future of course depends on Highway 35. We're also thinking, of course, of an industrial park that could be developed along the highway corridor. For us, that's purely an economic, or mainly economic decision. There would be impact from a safety and environmental standpoint, but the obvious priority is the economy of an entire region and of a number of surrounding ridings.

    Mr. Christian Perreault: Mr. Chairman, allow me to add that, in Montérégie, there are nearly 1,400 exporting businesses, nearly 60 percent of which ship their products to the American market. We're talking, of course, about Saint-Jean and Granby, but also about Longueuil, Châteauguay and Saint-Hyacinthe. So that's where the pool of major businesses is located.

[English]

    Mr. Roger Gallaway: Thank you. And thank you, Mr. Bachand.

    Mr. Proulx.

    Mr. Marcel Proulx (Hull—Aylmer, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[Translation]

    Good afternoon, Madam, good afternoon, gentlemen. We thank you for taking a nice little trip on a beautiful summer's day like today to come and meet with us. You've made a number of trips to Ottawa. I've met a number of your colleagues, who came to make submissions. Mr. Paradis, as you mentioned, took the time to receive them and help them. At the time, I was Chairman of the Quebec federal Liberal caucus, and so I was pleased to meet them. You've been working on this matter for several years now and we've been trying to help you for several years as well.

    There is a Quebec-Canada agreement, which is called a list of priorities for the national highway system. I'm from the Outaouais region, and we also have a highway in mind that we would like to complete, but, unfortunately for us, the Government of Quebec thus far has not put that road on its list of priorities. That doesn't mean that all doors are closed or that it's the end of the world, but, in your case as well, your project is not on that list of priorities. Do you have an idea of the reasons why it is not on the Quebec government's list of priorities in the context of this agreement with the federal government?

Á  (1150)  

    Mr. Yvan Berthelot: Excuse me, but I believe I'm going to have to correct you there. According to the information I have, Highway 35 is, on the contrary, the Quebec government's number two priority, so much so that I want to mention here that a draft Canada-Quebec memorandum of understanding has been submitted, in which it is very clear that the Quebec government has written... I can send it to you.

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: That's something else.

    Mr. Yvan Berthelot: Wait until Canada and Quebec agree on the importance of extending Highway 35 to the United States. A segment of Highway 35 is already in place. As was mentioned a moment ago, a memorandum of understanding has already been sent to the Government of Canada, and impact studies are being conducted. The alignment is done, and the expropriation is done. So those are important points. When you look, for example, at the issue of Highway 30, which is...

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: Wait a moment. I have a few minutes to ask you questions and I don't want to spend our minutes on the wrong track.

    I recognize that the Quebec government has sent a draft memorandum of understanding. It has done so for various roads, including the 50. Except that that doesn't replace the list of priorities that was established by the Province of Quebec under an agreement with the federal government to prioritize certain roads within that Quebec-Canada agreement.

    When a highway is not on that list of priorities, we, as the federal government, have our hands tied: we can't include that highway in our allocation, if you will, because it's not part of the agreement, and that dates back to 1988. Now I assume that, as in the case of Highway 50, someone in Quebec City hasn't understood the importance of Highway 35, and it would facilitate certain matters if the Quebec government changed its position and included it in the list of priorities.

    Have you received any answers or have you approached the Quebec government strictly with regard to the list of priorities concerning the cost-sharing agreement for the national highway system?

    Mr. Yvan Berthelot: I don't have the letters here. As you'll understand, we don't take everything when we travel.

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: I understand.

    Mr. Yvan Berthelot: But I remember reading the confirmation by Minister Ménard, among others, who said that Highway 35 was in fact a priority. When the Honourable Stéphane Dion came to Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu three weeks ago, he mentioned that he in fact appeared to be waiting for a letter from the Quebec government, to which the Quebec government answered that it was surprised because it thought that everything was in place.

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: They're always surprised!

    Mr. Yvan Berthelot: I know, I know, and we're at the other end, so the surprise is still there. The government also sent a letter confirming that Highway 35 is part of the Montérégie transport plan as a major project for Quebec's economic development in view of the fact that it represents a strategic link between Montreal and Boston.

    Does it appear somewhere in the priorities list? I don't have the documents with me, but I think it does. Perhaps Mr. Perreault could tell you about it.

    Mr. Christian Perreault: I found the letter. It's a news release dated December 18, 2002, so roughly two months ago, in which Minister Ménard confirmed that Highway 35 is one of the three priority projects. But I would like perhaps to turn things around. If we were given incorrect information, I would appreciate the committee informing us that we may not have the right information. At that point, we will make other submissions to Quebec City as well. But what we hear from Quebec is that we are one of those three projects. Highway 30 is apparently the first, and we are second.

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: So the fashionable thing these days in talking about highways--and that's the case for Highway 30 as well--is to make them toll highways. Is your reaction to that positive or negative for Highway 35? We're thinking of all the trucking. Madam told us earlier about the case of the trucks that are required to take detours to avoid the small road. So if Highway 35 could be properly completed, that would afford much quicker access. The trucking companies would save not only time, but also fuel and so on. Perhaps the question should be put to them, but those trucking companies would no doubt agree to use a highway, even if there was a toll. Have you taken that into consideration in your efforts?

Á  (1155)  

    Mr. Yvan Berthelot: Yes, we've examined that. I should say that a survey was conducted at the preliminary stage by an engineering firm called BMST, which recommended that we initially not go with toll booths on Highway 35. So, for the moment, at the preliminary stage, that's the information we've had on that point: it was not recommended that Highway 35 be a toll road.

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: But if we talk about it, I realize you're not breaking out in fever and spots. It could be discussed and considered in order to secure short-term financing for the highway's construction.

    Mr. Yvan Berthelot: What we want--and I obviously think that all the governments should be takers--is an understanding that what is at stake is the improvement of the economic life of the country...

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: I understand all that.

    Mr. Yvan Berthelot: ...and the province. Let me finish.

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: You're right.

    Mr. Yvan Berthelot: I'm not breaking out in spots and fever over this because what we want, since we're in the field and in the region, is for this highway to be built. What we expect from the levels of government, of course, is that they take measures to do that. Whether there's a toll or not is not fundamentally important for us; it's not essential; that really doesn't make me break out in a fever. We want it to be built and we think that the levels of government clearly understand that, as a result of the economic impact, this highway, which is an investment--because it's an infrastructure that should not be forgotten, and not an expense--will have positive impact on jobs, labour, exports and so on, and that it will pay for itself, whether or not there's a toll.

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: The more you talk about it, the more it looks like our situation regarding Highway 50. Thank you.

[English]

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Mr. Roger Gallaway: Mr. Laframboise.

[Translation]

    Mr. Mario Laframboise (Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    You've come here to give us a cry from the heart, and that's very important, because Mr. Proulx is the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport. And when Mr. Proulx asks you questions, that shows you the complex workings of the federal government.

    The Canadian Strategic Infrastructure Fund and the Border Infrastructure Fund are managed by Mr. Rock at the Department of Industry, and the Department of Transport has its own interpretation of the way the funds should be spent. The talks we have today are important. It's important, first, that you maintain the fact that you want a highway and that it not be a toll road because it's an industrial development highway. You want to be competitive with other regions in Canada, and, if you have a toll road in your region, you will no longer be competitive with the other regions which don't have toll highways and are competing with you in transborder trade.

    A strategic infrastructure program has been put forward called the Border Infrastructure Fund. I have the Quebec government's priorities; they were given to me before I could start, because we asked that this committee be struck and that highway projects across Canada be discussed. For the Quebec government, Highway 35 is part of what should be included in the Canadian Border Infrastructure Fund, for which there is a budget of $600 million. When you read what's in that fund, it bears no relation to what's in the national highway system. It's not the same thing as the Canadian Strategic Infrastructure Fund, the other, $2 billion fund.

    But the Border Infrastructure Fund is unrelated to the national highway system classification which was done in 1988 by the government of Robert Bourassa's Liberal Party at the time, and which did not include certain roads in Quebec. Highway 35 was not in it, and the 50 was not in it. There's a whole history, and I'm not going to bring it back up today.

    But the federal government is not currently making any announcements under the Border Infrastructure Fund. Only one has been made, concerning an amount of $300 million in Windsor, and Quebec's request concerns Highway 35. That's the first application to the Border Infrastructure Fund. Highway 30 is not in that fund. It's one of the Quebec government's priorities, but in the other fund, the $2 billion Canadian Strategic Infrastructure Fund. But for the Border Infrastructure Fund, the first Quebec government application--I have the list here--is for Highway 35.

    You have the memorandum of understanding: the request is that the federal government contribute up to $65 million to it. That's not unthinkable because there is $600 million to spend, $300 million of which is going to Windsor. We hope there will be money in that fund for Highway 35.

    Why do I mention Highway 35? Because the matter of Lacolle was settled separately under another program before the Border Infrastructure Fund was established. So the investments at Lacolle don't come out of that fund. We of the Bloc Québécois think, like the Government of Quebec, that, since there is money in the $600 million fund and it hasn't yet spent any in Quebec, the federal government should soon announce a $65 million investment in Highway 35.

    So do you think Highway 35 should be one of the federal government investments under the Border Infrastructure Fund?

  (1200)  

    Mr. Yvan Berthelot: Must I answer? Mr. Proulx answered in my stead and said “yes”. So I'm going to adopt his answer as my own; I'm going to share it.

    Mr. Mario Laframboise: Which, of course, leads me to ask you a second question. The second trap that the federal government often sets--and this follows on somewhat from what Mr. Proulx told you about tolls--concerns the figures that come up when the final study reports come in. The costs inflate, and their money is of course tight. First, they make a lot of promises, and they lack the money to keep them. So they're definitely talking about $65 million, but the cost must not exceed $65 million.

    Can you confirm for us that, as a result of the final studies, the budgets that were submitted by the Government of Quebec will not be exceeded? Are there still any black points, any black holes that could inflate the bill, or are you comfortable giving us the costs and confirming that what has been advanced will be complied with?

    Mr. Yvan Berthelot: Yes. There are two parts to my answer to that question. First, the cost of $130 million we spoke about is consistent with an update of the studies that was conducted in the fall of 2001, which hadn't been done for perhaps some 10 years. So we're talking about fairly recent studies.

    There's a second part as well. When I look at the draft memorandum which the Quebec government submitted to the federal government, it states that Canada's total contribution under the agreement is one-half of the costs and that shall not exceed $65 million.

    So there are two parts to my answer: the study is recent, and the Government of Quebec has recognized that that study indeed represented the realistic costs of the project to complete Highway 35.

    Mr. Mario Laframboise: So ultimately you're confirming that, if the costs ever were to exceed the level provided for in the MOU submitted by the Government of Quebec, they would be borne by the Government of Quebec. That's more or less what the MOU states. In stating that the maximum will be $65 million, the MOU provides that, if there are overruns, Quebec will pay the difference.

    Mr. Yvan Berthelot: Looking at the draft agreement, I must say yes, but I'm going to have to tell you as well that it's the Government of Quebec that will answer that. As far as I'm concerned, I would say yes, and we'll see with the Government of Quebec about that small amount if ever... What we're asking you today is to give us your approval for $65 million, and we'll see about the other amount.

    Can the government release $65 million under its border infrastructure agreement to develop this vital, major corridor essential to the country's economic development and to reach the Boston market? Is the Government of Quebec aware of that? All the federal government ministers who have come here have told us yes.

    I don't want to liken it to other projects I'm less familiar with, but I can tell you that I know this one well and that I speak of it with emotion and passion, even though I'm talking about savings and economic impact for the country in terms of jobs, development, trade and so on. That's what I'm talking about. Thank you.

    Mr. Mario Laframboise: And I congratulate you for that, Mr. Berthelot, because you do it well. What I'm telling the federal government is that, when the Government of Quebec submitted the five Memoranda of Understanding, in my opinion, it should have signed the MOU on Highway 35 because those terms guaranteed them that the $65 million budget would not be exceeded. I hope that will be maintained, but there was nevertheless a very good memorandum of understanding was developed in December 2001. If I had been the Government of Canada, I would have seized the opportunity because it guaranteed that my costs would not exceed the $65 million amount. But I'm aware that the government, as a fair player, will understand that this is a very strong dossier and that it will find you right, Mr. Berthelot. Thank you.

  (1205)  

    Mr. Roger Gallaway: Mr. Proulx.

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    You've just heard the epistle according to Mr. Laframboise; I won't preach the gospel to you, don't worry. I just want to thank Mr. Laframboise for explaining to us more clearly, if you will, the reason why I asked you the question on the national highway system.

    As to the other federal government program or programs, there is surely a way to help you find a taker in all this. We're going to take a look at that, of course. You already have the support of a number of federal ministers. I want to thank you for coming, I want to congratulate you on the work you're doing, and I want us to wish each other good luck in bringing your matter to a positive conclusion. Thank you very much.

    Mr. Yvan Berthelot: If you'll allow me a brief conclusion, Mr. Proulx, I thank you for your welcome, for listening to us and for your openness, as you just mentioned and as your colleagues, the federal government ministers, have shown, to considering the Highway 35 project as an economic development priority.

    Thank you as well, of course, Mr. Chairman, the clerk and research officer.

[English]

    Mr. Roger Gallaway: Thank you very much for being here. We appreciate your assistance in the work of this committee.

    We'll suspend for a couple of minutes while the next group.... Thank you.

  (1207)  

---

  (1211)  

    Mr. Roger Gallaway: We are resuming our meeting this afternoon, and with us we have four witnesses.

    I think, gentlemen, you know that we ask that you limit your comments to seven minutes. We only have an hour, and I know that members have questions. I don't know who would like to begin or if you've discussed that amongst yourselves.

[Translation]

    Mr. Fortin, you may begin.

    Mr. Serge Fortin ("préfet", "Municipalité régionale du Comté de Témiscouata"): Good afternoon, Mr. Gallaway, good afternoon to each of you, and thank you for receiving us today.

    We are here today as members of what is called the Trans-Canada Committee, the Route 185 committee. This committee is not new. It was formed some 15 years ago as a result of the inevitable need to address public safety problems which, year in, year out, resulted in numerous accidents on that route resulting in death and serious injury.

    The Trans-Canada Committee grew out of an interprovincial coalition between Quebec and New Brunswick and brings together representatives of the chambers of commerce, provincial and federal elected members, the Association des transporteurs en vrac de la région 03 du Bas-Saint-Laurent and the Atlantic Provinces Trucking Association, which unreservedly support the committee's objectives.

    The committee is based on a unanimous consensus among all its partners, and its members have always followed the same guideline of raising the debate above party lines, ensuring cohesive action and promoting successful intervention.

    Over the past 15 years, as I said a moment ago, we have approached the federal and provincial governments on numerous occasions to have them implement the plan for a safe highway, the construction of a divided four-lane highway in the Trans-Canada highway corridor from Rivière-du-Loup across the Témiscouata RCM to the New Brunswick border, and the alignment from Rivière-du-Loup down to the Lower St. Lawrence. You have the exact alignment of Route 185 on the map on the last page.

    As to the main points of our remarks, as elected representatives and representatives of the region's socio-economic activity speaking on behalf of our fellow citizens, we will stick to the essential points and underscore the historical events we think are most significant, focusing our presentation on the following three themes: first, the efforts made by the Government of Quebec to bring about the implementation of this project, concrete actions that should be emphasized; second, the Canadian government's indifference toward our region and facts which unfortunately confirm that; and, third, repeated accidents causing death and serious injury, striking statistics and the urgent need to act.

    Before addressing the first theme, I will briefly point out, Mr. Chairman, that my colleague, the Mayor of Edmundston, will be speaking to you in a moment about the funnel effect caused by the development of the divided four-lane highway in the New Brunswick sector at the Quebec border. Mr. Charron of the Chambre de commerce de Rivière-du-Loup will emphasize the project's economic and trade impact. Mr. Nadeau will give you the conclusion.

    Since 1986, there have been a lot of studies which, frankly, have shown that the Government of Quebec has taken concrete action to bring about a divided four-lane highway in Témiscouata. Four studies have been submitted. Those of the Quebec Ministère des Transports have shown beyond a doubt that urgent action is required, and the Quebec government has understood.

    On October 6, 1998, the Minister of Transport of the time, Mr. Jacques Brassard, introduced a strategic action plan on the Route 185 corridor at a press conference in Cabano.

    After the strategic plan was filed, the Trans-Canada Committee, and more particularly the Témiscouata RCM, spared no effort to speed up the work set out in the strategic plan. From resolution to resolution, political contact to political contact and through close and sustained cooperation with regional branch authorities, work was begun to make that road a safe highway.

    On March 5, 2002, at a meeting with Quebec Minister of Transport, Mr. Serge Ménard, to which a delegation from the Trans-Canada Committee had been invited, Minister Ménard confirmed that the project to construct a divided four-lane highway in the Route 185 corridor had become a priority for the Quebec government. As of that date, there was no longer any talk of taking action to improve public safety, but rather to develop a Trans-Canada system of divided four-lane highways.

  (1215)  

    Once again, we must emphasize here the coherent attitude of the Government of Quebec, which links speech to action. On October 10, 2002, the Quebec Minister for Transport, Mr. Jacques Baril, provided an update on progress made on the Route 185 issue at a press conference in Notre-Dame-du-Lac. Minister Baril mentioned that talks with the federal government were going well and that they would soon produce results. The negotiations were over an amount of $600 million, including all the work on Route 185, excluding certain parts of the work and certain studies.

    At his October 10 press conference, Mr. Baril also confirmed that there would be a public call to tender to award a contract for an environmental impact study on the full alignment of Route 185 and construction of a divided four-lane highway. Minister Jacques Baril kept his word.

    With regard to the Canadian government's indifference, it should be borne in mind that, more than a year ago, on May 30, 2001, Quebec's Minister of Transport at the time, Mr. Guy Chevrette, wrote to the Canadian Minister of Transport, Mr. David Collenette, so that there would be a fair sharing between the two governments which would entail respective 50 percent investments. He urged Minister Collenette to make his government's intentions known as soon as possible. We're still awaiting them.

    On February 7, 2002, the Trans-Canada Committee was granted a meeting and travelled to Ottawa to meet Canada's Minister of Transport, Mr. David Collenette. Without justifying the discussions the Témiscouata delegation had with him, we note essentially that Minister Collenette, speaking on behalf of his government, agreed to invest financially in the project to the extent the Quebec government made it a priority.

    Since the March 5, 2002 meeting with Quebec's Minister of Transport, Mr. Serge Ménard, we have known that Route 185 is a priority for the Government of Quebec. How is it that the federal government has not yet officially confirmed its financial involvement?

    Our federal sponsors have been sensitized to the situation. Mr. Gilbert Normand, at the time sponsor of the Témiscouata RCM, was made aware and agreed that the highway should be built. Then, in summer 2002, we met Senator Raymond Setlakwe, sponsor of the Témiscouata RCM, who is cooperating closely with Témiscouata in promoting the project. Our sponsors have changed a number of times and our new sponsor is now Mr. Martin Cauchon. We have requested a meeting as soon as possible.

    What does the Prime Minister of Canada think of it? In an editorial in La Presse in May 2002, that question was at the heart of talks with Mr. Chrétien and the Maritime premiers. The Prime Minister of Canada, the Right Honourable Jean Chrétien, outlined the thinking of Canada's Transport Minister, Mr. David Collenette, who said it was necessary to establish a national rebuilding program for the Trans-Canada Highway system.

    A few years later, in a February 2002 issue of Le Soleil, under the headline, “Alterations to the 185, Chrétien says yes”, journalist Marc Larouche reported one of Mr. Chrétien's comments during question period in the House of Commons on his position on the Trans-Canada Highway. He went further in his remarks, saying:

“If the Quebec government finds that the highway between Rivière-du-Loup and the New Brunswick border is a priority, I'll be very much in agreement,” Mr. Chrétien said. “When I was a member from New Brunswick, I complained that there wasn't a good road between Quebec and that province.”

    Since the spring of 2002, we have constantly communicated with Prime Minister Chrétien to make him aware of our cause. On May 2, 2002, we presented him a brief history of the issue and requested a meeting to sensitize him to the need to officially announce the federal government's involvement in construction of a divided four-lane highway in Témiscouata.

    On August 14, 2002, the Prime Minister of Canada travelled to St-Léonard, in northern New Brunswick, and announced that several millions of dollars would be provided so that the Trans-Canada Highway could be completed in that area at the Quebec border. A delegation travelled to St-Léonard at the last minute, and we met Mr. Chrétien. He stated, in roughly these terms, that it is more costly to build roads in Quebec than in New Brunswick and that Route 185 did not appear to be a priority for the Quebec government.

    What about the health costs related to all the accidents causing death and serious injury, at a time when the last federal budget has confirmed a massive investment of funds to offset the numerous health problems experienced in Canada? The Quebec government has publicly confirmed the orders of priority, but the Prime Minister of Canada still seems to deny it.

    On December 2, 2002, the Trans-Canada Committee questioned Prime Minister Chrétien once again, reminding him that his upcoming retirement from political life would be an ideal opportunity to make Canadian history by officially announcing the completion of a divided four-lane highway across Canada. We have received no reply to date.

  (1220)  

    On January 8, 2003, tragic events required us once again to put pressure on Prime Minister Jean Chrétien. Between December 2, 2002 and January 6, 2003, six persons died accidentally on Route 185. Once again, the Prime Minister was asked to officially announce completion of a divided four-lane highway.

    On January 17, 2003, the correspondence officer in the Office of the Prime Minister of Canada answered our letter, informing us that he was forwarding a copy of our correspondence to the Honourable David Collenette and Allan Rock. On February 14, 2003, at the last minute, we learned the following in a letter sent by Ms. Marie-Hélène Lévesque, special assistant-Quebec, on behalf of Minister David Collenette, and we quote:

The federal government is prepared to sign the agreement to finance work on Route 185 with the Government of Quebec, once the latter has stated its priorities regarding that Route.

    In view of the waste of human lives during the Christmas and New Year's holiday period and the government's inertia, the Trans-Canada Committee, the Témiscouata RCM and the Town of Cabano declared a state of emergency.

    The municipal council of the Town of Cabano and the Témiscouata RCM begged the governments of Quebec and Canada to act. Repeated accidents causing death and serious injury, statistics and studies indisputably confirm the urgent need for action, and we quote:

Fatal accident rates are declining everywhere except on Route 185, where, for a number of years, they have remained at a level higher than those of all other classes of roads.

    Between 1991 and 1995, 957 accidents; in the past 10 years, 90 persons have died in fatal accidents; eight persons died near Dégelis during the 2002-2001 holiday period. This is a toll that gives pause and, in the view of a number of observers, is unprecedented in Quebec. In the space of one year, from June 2000 to June 2001, 11 persons died in the Témiscouata RCM, 10 of whom were from Edmundston, New Brunswick. That's sad and it calls us to action.

    Since 2002, more tragic incidents have occurred on Route 185. In the space of 13 months from December 2001 to January 3, 2003, 19 persons died accidentally on Route 185, while 64 were seriously injured or even disabled for life as a result of an unreliable, dangerous and potentially deadly highway system. In the past 10 years, 100 persons have died accidentally.

    Mr. Chairman, I'm going to hand over to my colleague, the Mayor of Edmundston, New Brunswick, Mr. Jacques Martin.

  (1225)  

[English]

    Mr. Roger Gallaway: Mr. Martin.

    Mr. Jacques Martin (Mayor, City of Edmundston): Mr. Chair, it's a pleasure to meet you here this morning. It's a privilege for us to be here today.

    There's one thing that really bothers me here this morning. When I left Edmundston yesterday afternoon, I had the opportunity just before that to read the Telegraph Journal, and there was a citation of a member of your committee here saying that the committee was a useless committee on transport in Canada.

    It's unfortunate that the person is not here this morning. He's a member of Parliament and he's part of the Conservative Party. I see Mr. Crête and Mr. Laframboise are here, but as a New Brunswicker, I'm not too proud here today to see that this person is absent from this committee. I would have liked to speak to him personally as well.

[Translation]

    I'm going to continue, Mr. Chairman.

    When I arrived here, I noticed one thing. When you've travelled 800 kilometers to come to Ottawa, and the road is long and dangerous, especially between Edmundston and Rivière-du-Loup, and you see all the beautiful parts of our country and everything that goes on here, on Parliament Hill, you wonder, when you come from a small municipality of 18,000 inhabitants, what you can do to influence this great government, these great bodies, and to make them understand the reality we unfortunately experience at home, in New Brunswick.

    Mr. Chairman, gentlemen members of the committee, why does a city from New Brunswick involve itself very deeply in a matter that, admittedly, is a Quebec matter? The reason is straightforward, Mr. Chairman. In large part, it is our citizens who are dying there, as our regions are closely linked together, as much economically as socially and culturally. As you've just heard, Route 185—a stretch of the Trans-Canada Highway, let's not forget—has made some 100 victims in the last 10 years. Proportionally speaking, Mr. Chairman--and I want all your attention when I say this--those 100 deaths on a stretch of road in a small community such as ours and over such a brief period of time have, all things being equal, had greater impact on the community than the events of September 11 had on the City of New York. I repeat, proportionally speaking, the impact on a small community such as ours of the loss of 100 persons on a highway over a 10-year period has been greater than the loss of 3,000 persons in a single day.

    In December 2001, Mr. Chairman, eight persons were killed in a horrible highway accident, five of whom were young men from my city and three other residents of Quebec. A few minutes before that--I mean a few months--three other young people also perished on that road. People in my community are still reeling from the shock. We can no longer bear losing our young people this way. What does a human life mean? It's incalculable. One of those young people might have become the next Prime Minister of Canada; we don't know.

    We can't blame them for driving their cars recklessly; those are unfortunate accidents. The driver in the oncoming vehicle fell asleep at the wheel. Those people were going home to Montreal from Dalhousie University. Unfortunately, the poor person fell asleep and hit the others, who were going to church in Rivière-du-Loup. Their parents were following them and, as a result of unacceptable winter road conditions, they lost control and collided with a heavy truck coming in the opposite direction in plain view of the parents who were following. The impact was so great that the engine was ejected from the car and found under the car of the parents who were following.

    Here we're talking about serious things. When I arrived earlier, Mr. Proulx was seated there and he occasionally laughed. But this morning, Mr. Chairman, I don't feel like laughing.

    Obviously, it is first and foremost an issue of safety. And we are not alone in saying this. The efforts by the Trans-Canada Highway Committee, some members of which are here today, have received the support of the Atlantic Truckers Association, representing 400 members, as well as that of the “Association des transporteurs en vrac de la région 3 de l'Est du Québec”, representing 850 truckers. These truckers, who transit 10 billion dollars a year between Central Canada and the Atlantic region through Route 185, know better than perhaps anyone else the dangers of this highway. According to them, Route 185 is rated as one of the most dangerous stretches of highway in Eastern Canada. I think they, the truckers, are the experts.

  (1230)  

    You and I, we spend days doing this kind of work here, often far away from the road systems. For those people, it's their life.

    Indeed, this highway, as it is configured, is quite simply unforgiving. Whether by mere hesitations at the wheel or because of bad weather conditions, for example, Route 185 is always dangerous. For over 30 years now, declarations of intent, even of priorities, both from the governments in Québec and in Ottawa to improve Route 185, have been made repeatedly. Nonetheless, an agreement has yet to be concluded. Very little progress has been made in this matter, while our young people keep dying, our residents are still getting injured and our economy continues to suffer. In spite of the most severe measures imposed in Quebec by the “Sûreté du Québec”, the number of victims keeps growing.

    When the safety of the general public who use our roads every day is repeatedly put in doubt, it is just as urgent to act by mobilizing all, as is done against terrorism or against any other threat. Although the issue of safety must prevail, there are also other reasons why we are so actively involved in this matter, Mr. Chairman.

    Located in New Brunswick at the border of Maine in the United States and that of Quebec, Edmundston is the gateway to the Maritimes. How to explain the fact that the Trans-Canada Highway ends in a funnel at the Quebec border to then again revert to a four-lane highway once back into New Brunswick? To give you an idea of the traffic on that route, there are over 600,000 automobiles that cross the border at Edmundston on their way mostly towards Central Canada. Moreover, not less than 25,000 commercial vehicles enter Canada through this same border crossing, and their destination is again Central Canada. This represents over a million travellers. The customs office in Edmundston is the 13th largest in the country.

    I cannot even begin to speculate on the impact of a highway system between Edmundston and Central Canada. An improved highway system, that is to say a four-lane Trans-Canada Highway between my city and Rivière-du-Loup in Quebec, becomes paramount when one further considers that our region has just lost its air service and has not had passenger railway service for some ten years now. For these reasons, the Trans-Canada Highway does indeed become even more important, and is evidently being used more and more.

    Not to be forgotten also is the fact that both federal and provincial governments invest millions of dollars to promote the Atlantic region as a desirable tourist destination. And I'm going to give you the one and only example, Mr. Chairman, the Confederation Bridge--I had forgotten that one--of which my friend spoke this morning. How much money was invested in the Confederation Bridge to lead tourists to Prince Edward Island? Billions of dollars were spent.

    For a few years now, Acadie has become a favourite destination for vacationers from Central Canada. We invite millions of people to come and visit our part of the country...on killer highways. Obviously, this is unacceptable.

    The final decision on building new stretches of the Trans-Canada Highway must be based on principles of fairness. The decision must not be taken to satisfy lobby groups. It is for these reasons, as well as in the memory of hundreds of residents of our region, that we appear before you today.

    It's not a matter, Mr. Chairman, of taking anything away from other regions. We are only asking all the governments concerned to take the appropriate measures and, in so doing, save lives. It is obvious that Edmundston will get great economic benefits associated with the widening of the Trans-Canada Highway to four lanes up to Rivière-du-Loup. However, the matter greatly surpasses the economic issue, and I repeat “greatly surpasses the economic issue”. Losing residents from Edmundston and from Témiscouata at an alarming rate because of killer highways is simply nonsensical.

  (1235)  

    Earlier, I heard the familiar arguments in favour of the east-west route. Imagine if, at one point, the traffic of the seaports of St. John and Halifax, in the Atlantic provinces, which are not in that great shape, which accept everything that comes from the outside of our beautiful country, Canada, were diverted to the port that is being developed in New York, then on to routes that do not go via the Atlantic. The economy of the Atlantic provinces would be destabilized in favour of the United States. That's something.

    Mr. Chairman, I thank you on behalf of my fellow citizens for the consideration you will give to our request. We have been patient. The time for action is now. I have two or three brief remarks to make as well.

[English]

    Mr. Chairman, I would like to paraphrase President Dwight D. Eisenhower, who stated in 1955 that without the uniting force of communication and transportation systems, we are but a mere alliance of many separate parts.

[Translation]

That was in 1955.

    Mr. Chairman, this morning the National Post reported that Canadian military personnel are building bridges. Thanks to their expertise, our military engineers are going to build bridges that will enable people to travel by foot or by bicycle on the Trans-Canadian Trail. People, our Dutch allies, transported a Bailey bridge from Holland to St-Léonard, in New Brunswick, where the Prime Minister was a few months ago to announce the construction of a four-lane road in New Brunswick. They came to build a bridge, a Bailey bridge, in New Brunswick to enable bicycles to travel from one end of Canada to the other. Our military personnel want to bequeath to Canada something they consider more important than a statue in front of a building: a hiking trail made by the military, or in cooperation with our Canadian military personnel.

    I don't think the federal government intends to move the Trans-Canadian Trail from one place to another. There is an alignment for the Trans-Canadian Trail. The Prime Minister has said that we need a four-lane highway between Toronto and Halifax. A lot of work has been done by the little province of New Brunswick, a great deal of effort has been made for that to happen, and we are doing it. There is no reason for that 114-kilometer segment of the Trans-Canada not to be built to an acceptable standard for today's traffic and to promote tourism. That's the kind of cooperation we want to see in order to develop the Atlantic economy. Thank you.

  (1240)  

[English]

    Mr. Roger Gallaway: Thank you, Mr. Martin.

    We have a small problem here. We've allowed about half an hour for your thoughts and we only have about two minutes left. So Mr. Charron and Mr. Nadeau, if you could, please make very brief comments. We only have an hour for this portion, and we'd like you to be very brief, because members have questions.

    Mr. Étienne Charron (First Vice-President, Chair, Transport Committee, "Chambre de commerce de la Municipalité régionale du Comté de Rivière-du-Loup"): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll make my comments brief.

[Translation]

    Thirteen years ago now, the Chamber of Commerce of the Regional County Municipality of Rivière-du-Loup took an interest in the Route 185 issue. Route 185 is an important commercial road for the development of the region, the Rivière-du-Loup RCM, which is currently a rapid, even explosive economic development region, where demographic development is also very positive, which is rare in the regions of Canada. But Route 185 also serves a much broader purpose, because it involves all the Maritime provinces. It is a commercial route for all those provinces, for all their exports to Central Canada. It is also the route whereby all goods from Central Canada, be they grain products or manufactured products, enter the Maritimes.

    Route 185 was never built to carry the heavy traffic levels it currently receives. It was never anticipated that it would become such an important route. We have Route 2 in New Brunswick, which is a major four-lane road; we have Highway 20 in Quebec, which is the main east-west route; and, between the two, we have 80 winding, dangerous kilometers of asphalt carrying absolutely unacceptable levels of heavy traffic. For the economic development of all of eastern Quebec and also to foster the economic vitality that is developing in the Maritime provinces, I think it is important to continue developing the Trans-Canada Highway, to make it a true Trans-Canada Highway, by solving the Route 185 problem and making it a divided four-lane highway. That's why I've appeared here today before the committee.

    Mr. Roger Gallaway: I now give Mr. Nadeau the floor. Mr. Mayor, it's your turn.

    Mr. Émilien Nadeau (Mayor, City of Dégelis): Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, I would say to you very briefly, purely and simply that, when you talk about the Trans-Canada Highway, you're talking about Route 185; it's an essential economic and tourist link between the Canadian provinces. At present, however, that link does not at all--and you were told this earlier--provide for the safety not only of our own fellow citizens, because we live in the region, but also of all Canadians, because, when I drive on the Trans-Canada, I often see licence plates from British Columbia, Ontario, Manitoba, Newfoundland and Prince Edward Island. So it's a question of safety, not only for our fellow citizens, but for all Canadians.

    It would also be logical, if you travel from Toronto to Halifax on this important roadway for Canada and for all Canadians, that it be safe along its full length. It is illogical for it to be extremely dangerous for about 80 to 100 kilometers.

    That also slows down economic and tourist development, not only in eastern Quebec or Quebec, but also in the Maritime provinces around us.

    The constant, annual increase in traffic, as proven by the statistics, is 2.5 percent per year. As you will understand, as Canadian National and the railway trunk lines close down one after the other, everything comes by truck and all passenger traffic as well comes by car.

    A moment ago, I was listening to Mr. Laframboise explain that, when you talk about border roads... Without offering an opinion on budgets, I would say that, when you talk about the Trans-Canada, not only do you think about what the Mayor of Edmundston says about the U.S. border crossing at Edmundston, but also at Woodstock, which is directly on the 185.

    If you consider the distance between Eastern Quebec and Boston, it is the same via Route 185, which goes through New Brunswick, as if you left Eastern Quebec and went to Montreal. So it's an extremely important link.

    Our objective is to promote the safety of Canadians and the economic development of all Canadian provinces. We know that the Maritime provinces need that too. Ultimately, what we need from both levels of government together, regardless of where the budget comes from, is approximately $125 million a year over five years. That's what it will take to build this road as soon as possible. It's a question of safety, and it's simply a question of economics.

    One journalist asked me earlier whether I thought it was our turn. I won't say that it's our turn; I'll say instead that it's time for Canada to do something for its own development and for all the Canadian provinces, when we talk about Route 185.

    I will say that we also have the support of all the Maritime premiers, that we have the support of all the politicians in our area, including Mr. Crête and the provincial members. I'm thinking of Mr. Claude Béchard, I'm thinking of Mr. Castonguay in New Brunswick, I'm thinking of Mr. Pettigrew, and I'm even thinking of Mr. Chrétien, who told us that it made no sense to leave a segment such as this on the Trans-Canada between Toronto and Halifax.

    Thank you very much for your attention.

  (1245)  

    Mr. Roger Gallaway: Thank you.

    Mr. Crête, you may begin asking questions.

    Mr. Paul Crête (Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup—Témiscouata—Les Basques, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    I would like to thank the delegation, whose members are all very eloquent. I've obviously been convinced of their point of view for a long time, but, as we have a resolution here that Mr. Laframboise had passed by the committee and which will be used to try to influence the Canadian Minister of Industry to include the amounts necessary to build Route 185 in the Strategic Highway Infrastructure Program, I would like you to elaborate a little on both the safety aspects justifying the investment and the economic development tool aspects.

    You've already mentioned them, but particularly with regard to safety, perhaps you could elaborate on the kind of current co-mingling of very local transportation, people who are travelling from one parish to another, and interprovincial transport, involving truck drivers and immense trailers, which obviously creates conditions in which accidents are much more deadly.

    The other aspect is the economic development tool aspect.

    I don't know whether anyone in particular wishes to address those situations.

    Mr. Serge Fortin: What I could add to what you say, Mr. Crête, is that it is a stressful road. Many fellow citizens now avoid it. In the area of tourism, even though they are in the Maritimes, people already make the decision not to take the 185 because of the transportation problems involving people who have caravans, trailers and RVs and the heavy trucks that come either via Highway 20, at a constant speed of 120 km/hr, or from the highway in New Brunswick at a constant speed of 100 km/hr. They find themselves in a slightly more mountainous region with hills and curves, and people find themselves sandwiched between these heavy vehicles and the stress of driving.

    There are on average 200 accidents a year. That means there's an accident every day and a half. Of those 200 accidents, 50 percent are serious, that is to say there are deaths or incredible injuries. Everyone from Témiscouata, everyone from northern New Brunswick and everyone from Rivière-du-Loup has friends or relatives who have lost their lives or will be in wheelchairs for the rest of their lives. That's the situation, the context of Route 185.

    We say it, we're begging; local elected representatives are on bended knee asking for something to happen. The police presence has doubled, tripled, quadrupled. Everything else that happens, whether it was a stop sign that was run or something else, results in arrest, precisely to avoid accidents. The Department of Transport has added sign after sign to show the speed at which people are travelling and to ask them to lower it, because the limit is 90 km/hr. That's all part of the context of the 185.

    The Government of Quebec has taken a position: it's going to invest. It has announced an investment of $225 million. The federal government must support it with money to build this divided four-lane highway in the very near future, Mr. Crête.

  (1250)  

    Mr. Jacques Martin: I would also like to add, and this is important, that there are more than 350 direct exits over a 100-kilometer segment. That's a total absurdity. Whether it's a private residence whose driveway gives directly onto the Trans-Canada or businesses that have been established over the years along the Trans-Canada and that necessarily result in many vehicles exiting, all that causes accidents.

    I believe that, if you look at it from the health care standpoint, we know what the situation is in Canada if you take the thousands of persons who have been injured on that road segment, the costs to provide health care for those persons is phenomenal.

    So as I said earlier in my presentation, we haven't come here, Mr. Chairman, to take away anything from a region in order to have it in ours, not at all. People who live in certain regions have their own justifications. We are aware of the problem in the greater urban area of Montreal, but we're going to give you another argument.

    Between Edmundston and Rivière-du-Loup, there are two pulp and paper plants. So necessarily, the amount of trucking of pulp wood from the lands and forests is increasing at an extraordinary rate. With all the sawmills maintained by Irving, Bowater and everyone else, it's increasing even more. We also live in a diversified economy. Even if we are a little removed from Central Canada, we're nevertheless doing quite well economically, even though we could do twice as well.

    So I believe that all levels of government have a responsibility to ensure that these roads are built to meet current needs, without taking anything away from anyone.

    I also have a great deal of difficulty in my presentations on Route 185 because of my emotions and feelings for people. I'm going to tell you one thing, Mr. Chairman: the day you have to go and sit in a church, in a funeral parlour, and there are five coffins in front of you, and there are 2,500 persons in the church crying, even those signing in the choir, and even the dog of a little blind woman is there crying too... What do you do in a situation such as that, particularly when you've already lost young people, wonderful people, three months earlier?

    That's only a very small number of the people who have been killed and maimed on a road that is in utterly unacceptable condition today. Canada is beautiful. Why can't we promote it through our highway system and ensure that people can travel in the beautiful Atlantic provinces? People from the Atlantic also travel in Ontario. The situation is true in both directions. So in view of the present economic situation, the value of the American dollar which works against us, we can't go to the United States, or if we do we go as little as possible, because we can't afford to go. So we want to travel at home. We want to come to Ottawa. We want to go to Montreal or Toronto, but these are our citizens who are caught in this.

    I don't want to come back to what Émilien, my friend and neighbour, said earlier, but these are not just people from home, these are people from Canada passing through our region.

[English]

    Mr. Roger Gallaway: Mr. Crête.

[Translation]

    Mr. Paul Crête: We obviously must not choose among regions, but let's suppose that the Minister of Industry is seated opposite you and that he has to decide on the amount of money he's going to allocate to this project out of the Canadian Strategic Infrastructure Fund. Are there additional factors you would like to make him aware of?

    Mr. Émilien Nadeau: In terms of factors, when you talk about industrial development, the development of the ports of St. John and Halifax, among others, which are Canadian ports, just like the port of Gros-Cacouna in the Lower St. Lawrence, when you think of economic and tourist development needs in both Eastern Canada and the Maritimes, I believe those are important factors which we spoke about earlier. The country will ultimately be what its regions are, what its remote regions are. It isn't just the central part of the country that's important. The more prosperous the Maritimes are, the more prosperous Eastern Quebec is, the more prosperous Eastern Canada is, the more prosperous, ultimately, Canada will be as well. I think you have to take a very close look at that aspect in terms of development. You also have to take distances into consideration.

    When we made submissions concerning the port of Gros-Cacouna a few years ago, I remember, among other things, that all of northern Maine supported us at that point, as well as the Maritime provinces.

    With regard to the environment, when you arrive in the ports of the St. Lawrence, it seems to me less dangerous to stop at the port of Gros-Cacouna than to go to Montreal. I have nothing against the people of Montreal, but when you look at the situation in a comprehensive manner, it seems to me there are ways of having transportation corridors in eastern Canada that are both safe and quick.

    We also hear about a road that would run through Vermont directly to the ports of Halifax and St. John, via the United States. There's currently a strong lobbying effort in the United States on this. A road like that would isolate the Maritimes from the moment people stopped going that way. That would have the effect of isolating the Maritimes and isolating eastern Quebec. So if we ensure, and if the Canadian Minister of Industry ensures, that the transportation corridors between the various provinces are safe, with a Trans-Canada Highway that is safe over its entire length, there will probably be less interest, for example, for lobbies such as the transport lobbies in the Maritimes, for Quebec truck owners and so on, in saying that they are going to pass through there because it's faster. I think that's an aspect we have to take into account and take a close look at.

  (1255)  

    Mr. Jacques Martin: Mr. Chairman, to continue along the same line of thinking, is the present situation acceptable? Let's think hard about it. Natural gas is piped to Fredericton, New Brunswick, from Sable Island, and it goes to Boston; the highway system is interrupted between Rivière-du-Loup and Edmundston; the regional airports are currently closed, and we no longer have air transport. The director of the Edmundston and region corporation 4 hospital told me last week that we are losing three medical specialists in our region. They no longer come to Edmundston because we no longer have air service.

    We are being left in a kind of economic vacuum, lacking a highway system, lacking air service and passenger train service, which we have not had for 10 or 15 years. So what are we trying to do with north and northeastern New Brunswick and eastern Quebec? Why are we in this situation? What have we done to Canada to deserve something like this? We've done nothing. All we want is to be an integral part of this beautiful country and to try to facilitate matters, to remove ourselves from this economic vacuum and to break out of this economic slump.

    Canada's Industry Minister has to take everything into consideration. What's happening now is absurd, Mr. Chairman. Billions of dollars are being invested in the Atlantic region, in all possible forms, and no one has yet understood how we're going to develop the highway system.

    I went back to the situation of 1955, referring to the American president of the time, Mr. Eisenhower, who clearly recognized that means of transportation and communication were essential to a country's development. And today, just imagine, we're seated in front of your and we're still wondering about that.

[English]

    Mr. Roger Gallaway: Thank you.

    Mr. Proulx.

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[Translation]

    Mr. Martin, I was told you questioned my objectivity, when I wasn't here. I don't understand. What's your comment, Mr. Martin?

    Mr. Jacques Martin: I'm going to answer you, and it will also be a pleasure, because I'm here because of a question related to citizen safety. When I arrived earlier, I witnessed the discussion between you and the people who want a road to go through elsewhere. I said in my presentation that we don't want to take anything away from others, but there were also some smiles.

    I'm very serious in my approach this morning, and have a great deal of difficulty, because in coming here, I have learned that a member of your committee--as I told the Chairman, it's not you; it's someone else--said that he thought the committee was a phoney government committee that was going nowhere. That appeared in our newspapers in New Brunswick, the Telegraph Journal and L'Acadie Nouvelle.

    So it hurts, Mr. Proulx, to come here in those circumstances and to wonder how seriously this committee will pay attention to the presentation I'm making this morning? So I simply wanted to draw your attention so that what we had to say here is taken into consideration.

    When we leave New Brunswick, our remote regions, or a corner of Quebec, to come here, are our demands really listened to? Are we really listened to? I travelled 800 kilometers to come here, and, for 100 of those kilometers, I constantly had to think: am I going to make it to the other end? Am I going to make it to the other end?

    So when I come here, I want to make the committee aware of my comments because it's a long business spending days around a table when there are people who may consider this simply a matter of economic development, a border crossing or toll booths. You can laugh about those things, Mr. Proulx, Mr. Chairman, but I really don't feel like laughing this morning.

    We are serious in our request. We're at the end of our rope; we can't take it anymore. How can we make ourselves heard by people sitting on Parliament Hill in Ottawa? I won't come here with 3,000 residents to file a petition. And yet I receive petitions on my municipal council, and, in my book, that's very often the same thing. Nor will I pitch a tent in front of Parliament and go on a three-day hunger strike, absolutely not. But I come here seeking your attention, gentlemen. In this matter, you have a major responsibility within your committee, a responsibility to make recommendations to the government.

·  (1300)  

[English]

    Mr. Roger Gallaway: Mr. Proulx.

[Translation]

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: Thank you, Mr. Martin. Let me just say that I don't think, in view of your state of mind and your approach, that you can attack us personally because we take this seriously too. If we didn't take it seriously, sir, we wouldn't take the time to come and listen to you and we wouldn't take the time to work with you. Thank you.

    Mr. Nadeau, you are entirely correct. This past summer, I had the opportunity to travel along your stretch of road, as you call it. I find it aberrant. I find it unacceptable that that stretch of road along the Trans-Canada system should be in that state.

    Can you tell me about the Quebec government's attitude in this matter? Are you saying that it's only the federal government that's delaying development of the Trans-Canada Highway at that location, or is there instead some hesitation on the part of the Quebec government to finally identify that section as the one that must be given priority?

    Mr. Émilien Nadeau: I believe the Quebec government has genuinely given this route priority. I can't confirm that it has written or said exactly that this is the route it wants and not another. I believe the Quebec government, in its wisdom, cannot fail to consider as well the 30, the 35, the 50, the 175 and so on. It must also take those into account.

    However, what I can tell you is that the Quebec government has made a formal commitment to provide, on its own, at least $225 million to complete certain sections of that route segment, including the complete alignment of the route between Rivière-du-Loup or Saint-Antonin and the New Brunswick border. Everything should be ready in the fall. Segments that are going to be completed are already on the table, including one which is currently complete in Notre-Dame-du-Lac. The Quebec government completed it on its own. Work on the Dégelis segment should normally begin, if all goes well, in August or the fall of this year. As for the segment between Cabano and Saint-Louis-du-Ha! Ha! behind the main municipalities, the plans are ready to be filed with the Department of the Environment; it's a question of hearings, and a stretch from Saint-Antonin should also start some time this fall.

    So I would say that the Quebec government has already made very formal commitments on financing. We're going to have $225 million. So from what I understand, it's really a priority for the Quebec government.

    What's going on now in all the talks between the federal and Quebec governments? I'm not in the know, except that Mr. Chrétien announced in St-Léonard last summer that it was illogical for there to be this funnel, as I said earlier, between Toronto and Halifax. There was nearly 80 kilometers. So logically, it seems to me that the federal government should, in any case, invest in this project.

    Now I don't want to venture into the constitutional disputes and discussions between Quebec City and Ottawa. I think that this route is so important that we should not only rise above party lines, as Mr. Fortin said, but beyond that as well, think of people's safety. Our constitutional problems we will solve over time.

·  (1305)  

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: But we have to agree on the fact that these are initiatives that originally come from the provincial government. The federal government doesn't build roads, even if the Trans-Canada exists. The spark plug, the spark, if you will, has to be the provincial government.

    In my opinion, the federal government isn't blocking this project, but I may be mistaken. I'm going to go to the sources and I'll be pleased to give you the news, Mr. Nadeau, and to work with you any time. We are open to that.

    I believe you understand the serious nature of the committees, this one just like the others. I can tell you that the members around the table, whether there are two, three or 10 of us, take this seriously. I thank you very much for coming here today. I appreciate the submissions you've made. I believe this is very constructive, and we're going to continue pushing matters for you. Thank you.

    Yes, sir.

    Mr. Serge Fortin: If you will, Mr. Proulx, we have no doubt about what you say; that's not a problem.

    I would like to add to what you've said. In all the efforts we have made over the past many years, as I explained in the introduction, what we've been told when we're with the federal government is that the provincial government has work to do. When we're before the provincial government, we're told that the federal government should see to certain matters. At some point, we are here, we are begging for the situation to change.

    All the Quebec transport ministers have made enough statements for us to say that, yes, this is a Quebec priority. They have advanced $225 million; they are doing work as we speak. Staged roads are being built. The case of Notre-Dame-du-Lac is settled; it cost $30 million all the same. As we speak, the studies are done, contracts have been awarded, the plans are made for the other staged roads in the other municipalities as well. Things are moving ahead. But at the present rate of construction, it will take us 15 or 20 years more. And traffic is constantly increasing.

    The other aspect, on which I will close, Mr. Proulx, with your permission, Mr. Chairman, is that, in my personal political career, I wouldn't want to witness a slaughter in a case in which a school bus was struck by a heavy transport. And situations such as that are possible on that route every day. There have been excessively dangerous situations that have not resulted in accidents, but involved heavy vehicles and put young people in danger, because that route is also an ordinary road, if I can express it that way. In any case, as an elected representative, I wouldn't want to experience that kind of situation because we had not taken the time to build a safe road. That's why we're begging that it be done today.

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: I agree with you that this shouldn't take 15 years; that makes no sense. It's already too much. But I know that you're making other presentations and that you're going to meet Minister Cauchon this afternoon. So I think you're on the right track. Good luck, and if there's anything I can do to help you, I would be pleased. Have a safe trip home.

    Mr. Roger Gallaway: Are there any other questions? One final question, Mr. Laframboise.

    Mr. Mario Laframboise: It's just so that you understand how important this is. The committee was struck in January, January 30. That's a recommendation that I had made, and I'm going to tell you that I'm quite confident that the government, the Liberal Party, supported us in that. Some members might think that that changed nothing, but I can tell you it added billions of dollars to the Canadian Strategic Infrastructure Fund. It had that result.

    The problem is how those billions of dollars are spent. Today, you issued a cry from the heart to the government saying that it's the 185's turn. I seriously think that it is its turn.

    However, with respect to the problem of highways--and I will close on that, just so that Mr. Proulx is well aware of how that works--it's not true that the Quebec government always establishes the priorities. In a memo the Quebec government sent me concerning priorities, among other things, it stated that there was not really any formal agreement on priorities and that the federal government had only informed Quebec a few hours before announcing that it would make a financial contribution to the 175 project last August.

    In other words, things often go as political affairs do. They announced the 175, and they informed Quebec a few days before in order to tell them that they should be there. Otherwise, there was a threat of a unilateral federal announcement, that is to say that the federal government would have announced its decision alone.

    So, in my view, with the new budget, with pressure from this committee, a report will be produced. There's money for the 185 and today you are in a very good position. As for the members who might not yet have understood that, I know that if they are from your region, you will solve their problem for them in the fullness of time.

    Otherwise, I thank you for coming and I believe that Mr. Proulx has demonstrated a high degree of openness. If he knows that you're meeting Mr. Cauchon, that means they're talking and thinking at the Department of Transport. It's time things moved forward like this. I believe you're going to come to an end and please be convinced that this is on the Quebec government's list of priorities. I'm convinced that, if the federal government said yes this afternoon, Mr. Ménard would be pleased to announce it this afternoon as well, Mr. Proulx.

·  (1310)  

    Mr. Marcel Proulx: You're lucky, you have a federal spokesman and a provincial spokesman. You've killed two birds with one stone. That's good.

[English]

    Mr. Roger Gallaway: Thank you all for coming here today.

    I want to say how impressed I am with the depth of conviction of those here before us. You will understand, particularly Mayor Martin, that there are politicians out there who would take shots at other politicians. On behalf of the committee, I want to assure you that we take all our witnesses seriously and that members take their work seriously.

    So thank you for coming.

[Translation]

    Mr. Jacques Martin: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and don't take anything personally: we are politicians. I've been doing this for 15 years as well. Mr. Proulx, don't take anything personally. Put yourself in the context of feelings toward citizens. So I invite you to come to our region for coffee. You're more than welcome. If you pass through the Maritimes, I'll also buy you lunch.

[English]

    Mr. Roger Gallaway: Thank you.

    This meeting is adjourned.