“The government has been in power for 10 years and has not gotten things done. They promise to help everyday Canadians, but they do not finish projects. They also fail to work well with the provinces to approve projects quickly.”

“Mr. Speaker, this is simple. The current government has been in power for 10 years. Canadians have been suffering for 10 years. If it were time to get stuff done, it would have been done already. That is what the mis-allusion is. The government keeps alluding to the fact that it is going to be helping everyday Canadians, but it is only cutting them short and shortchanging them. We do not see any projects being pushed to completion. The Liberals are not working with our provinces the way they should be, and streamlining projects the way they should be: efficiently and effectively.”

“This bill will not speed up project reviews. It gives officials too much power to stop the clock and keep asking for more studies. The government will not deliver on its promise to finish reviews in one year.”

“Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Abbotsford—South Langley for his great presentation today. In his speech, he talked about the discretion given to the government and how once the clock starts, the authority or regulator can stop that clock if it is told to by the minister. However, proposed subsection 19(4) of the bill allows the authority to say that we need another study and another study, until it deems it as complete. This gives unfettered discretion to the bureaucracy, which could simply keep asking for more information and not deliver the “one year, one review” promise that the government purports to support.”

“I agree with my colleague. Government delays turn one-year projects into five or ten-year projects. The government is not making the approval process faster or simpler.”

“Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague is completely right. We see again and again that delays are being pushed back. It can be years and years. A one-year project can turn into a five-year project, or a 10-year project, for that matter. This is the problem we see. We do not see the necessities we need to bring forward so that projects can be completed in a streamlined process. That is what we are missing from the government.”

“The government claims it created more jobs, but they are only government jobs. These do not help regular Canadians or private businesses. For ten years, this government has only made projects harder to build and caused delays.”

“Mr. Speaker, the government also claims that it has brought more jobs forward, but the fact of the matter is that they are only government jobs. We do not see this benefiting everyday Canadians. We do not see this benefiting the private sector. We see more complications, and projects being held up and delayed. That is the reality. That is what we have seen after 10 years of the Liberal government. That is what Canadians are dealing with right now.”

“I want my colleague to talk about what happens when the government hand-picks projects to speed up, instead of making clear rules that work for everyone.”

“Mr. Speaker, I wonder if my colleague would like to comment on the implications of the government hand-picking projects for fast-tracking as opposed to opening up and providing certainty with a clear regulatory system for everyone.”

“Businesses and entrepreneurs are leaving Canada for the United States. We need to build more infrastructure and bring more projects here instead.”

“Mr. Speaker, that is the reality we see with the government. We do not see the private sector booming, and we do not see private businesses and private entrepreneurs getting involved in Canada. We see our businesses and entrepreneurs going south of the border. We want to make sure that we bring more infrastructure and more projects to Canada.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 47 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →