Guilbeault clarifies controversial road funding comments: “I should have specified”

When I first uh saw reporting on the comments I wanted to uh look into where it had come from subsequently Minister gabo provided clarification and indicated he was referring to a specific project uh it’s important to me when people including in my own Community not

Just as the minister but as a member of parliament for rural community um that we can demonstrate in fact uh when people have concerns about whether we build roads that we do build roads uh so there hasn’t been a policy shift I I expect it was because there was a a

Misunderstanding that was playing out in in public that was clarified subsequent uh that required us to demonstrate publicly in fact there hasn’t been a policy change and I I can reassure you it’s the case that we maintain support for for road building and that there hasn’t been a policy change you said you

Didn’t mean it so what is it that you meant by our government has made the decision to stop investing in New Roads if it if you didn’t mean that our government has made the decision to stop investing in New Roads thank you for the question in fact

What I’ve said several times and I will repeat it here for the committee I should have specified that these comments were made in the context of the third link in Quebec City a project that the government of project of government of Quebec sometimes proved promoted sometimes didn’t and this link would connect

Quebec City and the South Shore of Quebec the bus on that so I’ll read I’ll read the second thing that you said our an the analysis that we have done is that the network is perfectly adequate to respond to the needs we have now I

Don’t have to tell you that uh it takes 29 minutes to drive 10 km in uh in Toronto it takes 19 minutes in your city of Montreal and of course not everybody lives next to uh text to a Subway so what’s the analysis that we have done can you state a specific

Analysis as I was saying I was specifically referring to the third link did you share that with the minister of Transport because he earlier threw you under the bus and said that he hadn’t seen analysis so is that something that you’re willing to share with him or maybe table at this

Committee I think things got lost in the translation I was saying that there are analyses that have shown countless analyses in Quebec that the third link is not needed the link between the Quebec City sore and Quebec City we have done you’re talking about an analysis that was done which analysis I’d Beed

To communicate the studies the studies have been made public at all see as I’ve said these are public studies concerning the fact that a third link is not necessary in the Quebec City area

Canada’s Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault faced a House of Commons transport committee on Thursday over his controversial remarks on federal road funding.

According to quotes published in the Montreal Gazette, Guilbeault told a crowd in the city on Feb. 12 that Ottawa won’t be funding any projects that “enlarge the road network.”

“The analysis we have done is that the network is perfectly adequate to respond to the needs we have,” he said at the time. Two days later in the nation’s capital, Guilbeault said “of course we’re funding roads.”

“I should have specified that these comments [were] made in the context of the third link in Quebec City — a link between the South Shore and Quebec,” Guilbeault said at Thursday’s hearing.

For more info, please go to

Subscribe to Global News Channel HERE:
Like Global News on Facebook HERE:
Follow Global News on Twitter HERE:
Follow Global News on Instagram HERE:
#GlobalNews #roads #canada #environment

Reference