You better believe it. When the son of the Bridge Co. owner, Matthew Moroun, the Vice-Chair of CenTra Inc., makes a public appearance in front of a Canadian Parliamentary Committee, you know that they have something important to say.
Not only did Dan Stamper speak on behalf of the Bridge Co. but so did Matthew. And unlike the Mayor of Windsor, who is a stickler for the Time Limits under the Procedural By-law, the Chair of the Commons Committee had the good sense to "waive" their 10 minute limit by allowing them to both speak for about 25 minutes in total. Obviously, the Chair recognized that it was important for MPs to hear what they had to say. Moreover their noon time limit for answering questions stretched over until about 12:30 PM as well!
Here are Matthew Moroun's remarks:
Thanks for the opportunity to meet with this distinguished Committee to discuss the proposed legislation, Bill C-3.
The Ambassador Bridge has a distinguished record of serving the travelling public for over 77 years. The Ambassador Bridge has weathered much over its history, including the Great Depression, World War, the Autopact, ownership litigation under FIRA, NAFTA, 9-11, and power blackouts. For the last 18 years it has become the most popular and preferred border crossing in North America by measure of traffic count. For all of those years the Ambassador Bridge has been an example of the success of the private sector having financed its construction, maintenance and operation entirely without Government funding of any kind.
Since 1979, the Bridge has been owned by my family. We have operated the Bridge successfully, not only financially for our interests and its long term future as shareholders, but more importantly, as stewards of a great
responsibility.
Permit me to suggest--- there is no meritorious catalyst for additional and burdensome regulation of the Ambassador Bridge at this time. The state of the bridge is strong, its finances are sound, its management sharp and successful, and its track record the best in the industry. Additionally, there exists no national or international event, occurring recently or expected that would encourage or attract the invasive fettering of Government.
However, do not confuse my words as introversion or egocentrism. We are neither. Instead we relish the opportunity to discuss the issues and challenges of the border and specifically the Ambassador Bridge with this Committee and, if we were able to, Transport Canada. We not only favor outside input but look upon the Federal Government of Canada as a primary stakeholder in our long term future and importantly our day-to-day business.
It may seem incongruous that our operation has thrived over 77 years without invasive Federal regulation even though the Bridge itself would be incapable of functioning without the hundreds of distinguished Canada Customs and Immigration Officers on our plaza and inspection areas. To that end, let it not be lost that we are not
suggesting that the Ambassador Bridge "go it alone." That would be a ridiculous statement, and an ignorant one.
We are asking this Committee and Transport Canada to please put down their sword. Set this Legislation aside. Instead, engage in meaningful dialogue not just at a very formal hearing to discuss the legalese of this Legislation but rather to discuss and brainstorm and cooperate with one another toward an even more successful Ambassador Bridge for the advantage of the operation, the Government, and the public.
Not only did Dan Stamper speak on behalf of the Bridge Co. but so did Matthew. And unlike the Mayor of Windsor, who is a stickler for the Time Limits under the Procedural By-law, the Chair of the Commons Committee had the good sense to "waive" their 10 minute limit by allowing them to both speak for about 25 minutes in total. Obviously, the Chair recognized that it was important for MPs to hear what they had to say. Moreover their noon time limit for answering questions stretched over until about 12:30 PM as well!
Here are Matthew Moroun's remarks:
Thanks for the opportunity to meet with this distinguished Committee to discuss the proposed legislation, Bill C-3.
The Ambassador Bridge has a distinguished record of serving the travelling public for over 77 years. The Ambassador Bridge has weathered much over its history, including the Great Depression, World War, the Autopact, ownership litigation under FIRA, NAFTA, 9-11, and power blackouts. For the last 18 years it has become the most popular and preferred border crossing in North America by measure of traffic count. For all of those years the Ambassador Bridge has been an example of the success of the private sector having financed its construction, maintenance and operation entirely without Government funding of any kind.
Since 1979, the Bridge has been owned by my family. We have operated the Bridge successfully, not only financially for our interests and its long term future as shareholders, but more importantly, as stewards of a great
responsibility.
Permit me to suggest--- there is no meritorious catalyst for additional and burdensome regulation of the Ambassador Bridge at this time. The state of the bridge is strong, its finances are sound, its management sharp and successful, and its track record the best in the industry. Additionally, there exists no national or international event, occurring recently or expected that would encourage or attract the invasive fettering of Government.
However, do not confuse my words as introversion or egocentrism. We are neither. Instead we relish the opportunity to discuss the issues and challenges of the border and specifically the Ambassador Bridge with this Committee and, if we were able to, Transport Canada. We not only favor outside input but look upon the Federal Government of Canada as a primary stakeholder in our long term future and importantly our day-to-day business.
It may seem incongruous that our operation has thrived over 77 years without invasive Federal regulation even though the Bridge itself would be incapable of functioning without the hundreds of distinguished Canada Customs and Immigration Officers on our plaza and inspection areas. To that end, let it not be lost that we are not
suggesting that the Ambassador Bridge "go it alone." That would be a ridiculous statement, and an ignorant one.
We are asking this Committee and Transport Canada to please put down their sword. Set this Legislation aside. Instead, engage in meaningful dialogue not just at a very formal hearing to discuss the legalese of this Legislation but rather to discuss and brainstorm and cooperate with one another toward an even more successful Ambassador Bridge for the advantage of the operation, the Government, and the public.
No comments:
Post a Comment