Carlos Leitão

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question, because the Alto high-speed rail project is a very important issue. I would like to know whether our Conservative friends agree. I do not believe they do. I think our Conservative friends are against the Alto project. After having supported it for many years, they have now suddenly decided that it is no longer worthwhile. For our part, we see it as a project for the future. It will help build a much stronger country by connecting Ontario and Quebec, creating thousands of jobs and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. That is why we support the Alto project.

Mr. Speaker, just for the record since our colleague made an allusion to that, Canada's economy is not the slowest-growing in the G7. In fact, right now we are the second-fastest and inflation in Canada is one of the lowest in the G7. However, I will go back to the issue in question here. Our colleague spent quite a bit of time on the one-year approval track record, but in fact this bill is one project, one assessment, one year. I would like our colleague to comment on this one assessment part of the bill, which is working collaboratively with the provinces to make sure that we avoid duplication of processes and that the projects can advance much faster than that.

Mr. Speaker, on October 1, Canada marked National Seniors Day. The day was centred around the idea of working together for the well-being of seniors. That theme is particularly appropriate in Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, where we have the Service bénévole d'entraide de Vimont‑Auteuil, the Comité d'animation du troisième âge de Laval in Sainte-Rose, and many other community organizations that help seniors feel less isolated, more independent as well as more active and engaged in our community. In Laval, I would also like to highlight the work of the Laval branch of the Fédération de l’âge d’or du Québec, known as FADOQ; the Table régionale de concertation des aînés de Laval; and the caregivers and the many volunteers who are helping to make a difference in the lives of our seniors. I want to thank all the seniors in Marc-Aurèle-Fortin and Laval for everything they have built and, above all, for everything they continue to give us.

Mr. Speaker, it is my turn to say a few words about Bill C-39, which, as some of my colleagues have already mentioned, is primarily an economic bill. It is a set of measures. I am fully aware that it is a rather complete piece of legislation, let me put it that way, that is absolutely necessary in order to accelerate our economy and our economic growth. We were elected, a year and a half or so ago, to build Canada strong and to rebuild the Canadian economy. To do that, we need to speed up the process of approvals. Basically, we need to get things done. In order to get things done, we do require several legislative changes to make sure the Canadian economy adapts to the new environment. I start with the context of why we are doing this now. We are doing this now, first of all, because it has to be done. We would have had to have done this in any case to modernize and update our regulatory framework. However, the context right now is particularly complex and requires a major structural reform, which is what this bill would contribute, to achieve. The context is one of a trade war that we did not start. The trade war was imposed on us totally arbitrarily and totally without regard for the fact that the Canadian economy and the U.S. economy, at least for the past 30 years, were increasingly integrated, particularly our industrial sectors, which are completely integrated. It is not the case that Canada is like a mini U.S. and that we produce everything here that is produced in the United States, only on a smaller scale. It is not that at all. The Canadian economy has specialized in a relatively small number of sectors and products that are completely integrated into the North American supply chain. Our neighbours to the south, particularly the administration, and we should not mix things up as it is the U.S. administration, has total disregard for that integration and has decided to disintegrate the North American economy, break it apart, saying it does not need anything we make here. Well, it does need it, but regardless of that, it believes it does not need what we have here. Therefore we have to pivot. We have to change our structure. We have to make products that are in demand in the local market, so there is some import substitution going on. At the same time, we have to look for other markets, other opportunities, elsewhere in the world. With this bill, we would try to accomplish that pivot. To do that, there are a number of things we need to do. First of all, we need to make sure we are actually able to approve projects, particularly in the infrastructure world. We have to improve our infrastructure. We have to improve our ability to move goods and people across this country. Massive improvements to our infrastructure are required, and the bill would accelerate the process. I can already hear our friends from the Bloc Québécois saying that this would be a massive intrusion into areas of provincial responsibility and provincial jurisdiction. Let us be clear: What we are proposing to do would apply to federal legislation and federal regulations. We would not in any way be changing or forcing any sort of change in provincial regulations. We clearly invite the provinces as well to participate in this process and to harmonize. In fact, seven provinces have already signed agreements with the federal government, so the objective we have, which is one project, one approval process and one year, that it gets done within one year, will speed things up if indeed the provinces are already onside. If they are not, well, then provincial legislation and provincial procedures will remain in place. The objective is to build a stronger, more resilient economy, a more productive economy and ultimately a more independent economy. By the way, we have also talked a lot in the House, since we came back, about affordability issues and the high cost of living, which is a fact and is top of mind for most Canadians. I will say two things about that. First of all, we do have the necessary social programs to help Canadians get over, or adjust and adapt to, this higher-cost environment. Social programs are important. In fact, a robust social safety net is one of the characteristics of Canada. Canada is Canada in no small measure because we care about each other and because we help people at the lower-income levels with targeted and somewhat generous social programs. We will continue to do that. In fact, we have added quite a bit to those social programs. However, more fundamentally, the only way to improve affordability on a long-term, sustainable basis is to improve productivity. Improved productivity will lead to a much more efficient economy, which will allow incomes to go up. If incomes go up, then life becomes more affordable. The government, the state, cannot and should not directly regulate prices. That does not work. It has been shown in many instances in many other countries that it does not work. However, if we put in place policies that promote investment and promote productivity growth, incomes will rise, and then Canadians will be able to afford life and lead a better life. There is also an issue with the supply side. There are certain areas where supply is an issue, namely in housing. In housing, one of the big contributors to the high cost of living, the high cost of rents and the high cost of houses is supply. There is not sufficient supply. Again, it is a complex, complicated issue. Bill C-39 would not necessarily address that directly, but indirectly in a way, yes, it would, because we would be improving infrastructure. One of the issues on the housing side, one of the factors that are holding construction back, is also the poor state of municipal infrastructure in many cases right across all provinces, including in my province and in my riding in particular. The basic municipal infrastructure, such as sewers, water treatment plants and things like that, is holding back construction as well. Therefore, if we are able to accelerate processes and accelerate building, then that would contribute. Again, let us not forget the demand side: the increase in incomes that can occur in a sustained way only if the economy becomes more productive. That requires massive investment, and the principal objective of Bill C-39 is to make sure that required investment will take place. It has been particularly complex, and it takes quite a bit of time for a major project to be approved in Canada, and clearly what we would do is to massively accelerate that project. There are three components to Bill C-39. We are going to build now, and we have to accelerate movement and be strong for all Canadians.