Conservatives wanted three cabinet ministers called to testify before parliamentarians about the Gordie Howe International Bridge deal with the U.S.Carlos Osorio/Reuters
Liberal MPs stymied a Conservative effort to force detailed hearings on the deal Prime Minister Mark Carney reached with the United States on the operations of the Gordie Howe International Bridge.
Canada agreed to send the United States half of the bridge’s net toll revenues for 15 years, which led to the Trump administration dropping its objections to the $6.4-billion bridge’s opening.
Conservative MPs called a meeting of the House of Commons government operations and estimates committee Wednesday to urge a study of the revenue-sharing agreement, which was released in full last week.
Its release contradicted Mr. Carney’s earlier description of the deal: The Prime Minister had previously said tolls would not be split with the U.S. until after Canada’s debt to build the bridge was paid back. He subsequently conceded he was not as clear as he might have been in explaining the nature of the deal.
The Conservatives have accused the Liberals of capitulating to the Americans, and failing to be transparent with Canadian taxpayers and businesses.
Splitting Gordie Howe bridge profits with U.S. ‘good deal’ for both countries, minister says
Under a Conservative motion discussed at the committee, three cabinet ministers would have been called to testify before parliamentarians about the bridge deal: Canada-U.S. Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc, Infrastructure Minister Gregor Robertson and Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne. The motion also demanded the release of all drafts of the agreement with the U.S., and an economic analysis of the bridge by the Parliamentary Budget Officer.
Conservative committee member Dan Albas said he welcomed the new bridge, and acknowledged challenges dealing with the Trump administration.
However, he said Canadian taxpayers are owed explanations for why the agreement was ratified and why Mr. Carney gave contradictory statements. He also called for financial modelling on the agreement to be released.
“I do hope that this committee will treat this issue with as much seriousness as it deserves and not simply be dismissed,” said Mr. Albas.
Ultimately, the Liberal members of the committee voted to adjourn the meeting before holding a vote on the Conservatives’ motion.
During the two hours of debate, Liberal MPs focused on the fact that the bridge is now open with attendant economic benefits for Canadians. “This is a tremendous good news story for Canada and the United States,” said Hamilton MP John-Paul Danko.
Liberal MP Caroline Desrochers said she had not heard from the Conservatives on what they would have done differently given the situation with the bridge.
“How long would you have been willing to keep this bridge unopened?” she said. “This was the best course for taxpayers in the current context.”
During the meeting, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre made a brief appearance in the committee room to greet the members of his caucus, according to an Official Opposition spokesperson, but did not formally address the committee.
Moments ahead of the end of the meeting, Mrs. Desrochers noted that Mr. Poilievre had earlier been in the room for about 20 minutes, claiming he was taking time that could have been used to discuss the Conservatives’ motion.
“Given that, Mr. Chair, I’d like to propose that we adjourn the meeting,” she said before the adjournment vote.