{"time": "2007-02-28 15:35:00", "attribution": {"en": "Mr. Mario Laframboise (Argenteuil\u2014Papineau\u2014Mirabel, BQ)", "fr": ""}, "content": {"en": "

Mr. Speaker, I would like to make a comment before putting my question.

\n

The parliamentary secretary is well aware of the reason why the previous bill, under the Liberal Party, was not passed. In his reply, he said he split former Bill C-44 into three parts. However, he should have split it into four parts, because there is a whole part that the Conservative Party decided not to include, and which provided for the establishment of a new corporation. It would have allowed VIA Rail to become a corporation to ensure its own development. Among other things, it would have allowed VIAFast, a rapid rail service between Quebec City, Montreal and Windsor, to become reality. Everyone knows that the Conservative Party is squarely opposed to VIA Rail's development. That is the reality.

\n

However, this is not about what should have happened, or what we would have liked to see, but about passing Bill C-11.

\n

We talked about noise and complaints. As soon as the bill is passed, many complaints will likely be lodged, because citizens, communities and citizens' groups have been waiting for a long time to see the Canadian Transportation Agency have these powers.

\n

Can the parliamentary secretary guarantee that the transportation agency will have all the necessary staff to deal with the complaints filed by citizens or citizens' groups against noise and vibrations?

", "fr": "

Monsieur le Pr\u00e9sident, j'\u00e9mettrai un commentaire avant de poser ma question.

\n

Le secr\u00e9taire parlementaire sait tr\u00e8s bien pourquoi l'ancien projet de loi, sous le Parti lib\u00e9ral, n'a pas vu le jour. Dans sa r\u00e9ponse, il dit avoir scind\u00e9 l'ancien projet de loi C-44 en trois parties. Toutefois, il aurait d\u00fb \u00eatre scind\u00e9 en quatre parties, parce qu'il y avait toute une partie que le Parti conservateur a d\u00e9cid\u00e9 de ne pas mettre de l'avant, dans laquelle on cr\u00e9ait une nouvelle corporation. On permettait \u00e0 VIA Rail de devenir une corporation par actions pour permettre son propre d\u00e9veloppement. Entre autres, cela aurait permis de faire voir le jour \u00e0 tout le dossier VIAFast, un train rapide entre Qu\u00e9bec et Montr\u00e9al et entre Montr\u00e9al et Windsor. Tout le monde sait que le Parti conservateur est carr\u00e9ment contre le d\u00e9veloppement de VIA Rail. C'est la r\u00e9alit\u00e9.

\n

Le but du projet de loi n'est pas de parler de ce qui aurait d\u00fb se passer ou de ce qu'on aurait souhait\u00e9 voir faire, c'est bel et bien de permettre au projet de loi C-11 de voir le jour.

\n

On a parl\u00e9 du bruit et des plaintes. D\u00e8s l'adoption du projet du loi, beaucoup de plaintes seront probablement d\u00e9pos\u00e9es, parce que des citoyens, des communaut\u00e9s ou des regroupements de citoyens attendent depuis longtemps que l'Office des transports ait ces pouvoirs.

\n

Le secr\u00e9taire parlementaire peut-il garantir que l'Office des transports aura tout le personnel n\u00e9cessaire pour traiter les plaintes des citoyens ou des regroupements de citoyens contre le bruit et les vibrations?

"}, "url": "/debates/2007/2/28/mario-laframboise-1/", "politician_url": "/politicians/mario-laframboise/", "politician_membership_url": "/politicians/memberships/465/", "procedural": false, "source_id": "1945440", "h1": {"en": "Government Orders", "fr": ""}, "h2": {"en": "Canada Transportation Act", "fr": ""}, "document_url": "/debates/2007/2/28/", "related": {"document_speeches_url": "/speeches/?document=%2Fdebates%2F2007%2F2%2F28%2F"}}