A truck is parked during a Canadian celebration marking the Gordie Howe International Bridge, which connects Detroit and Windsor, Ontario, on July 24, 2026, in Windsor, Ontario. Paul Sancya/AP Photo
The House of Commons government operations committee adjourned without a vote on a motion to study the federal government’s deal with the United States on the Gordie Howe International Bridge, as Liberal MPs who hold the majority voted to end the meeting.
The Conservative motion had called for the committee to order the Infrastructure Department to release “all drafts” of the proposed agreement around the bridge, request that the Parliamentary Budget Officer analyze the deal, and conduct a study into the bridge that involves testimonies from federal officials.
Before the Tory motion could be voted on, Liberal MP Caroline Desrochers submitted a motion to adjourn the committee. The committee voted 5–4 to adjourn, with the Liberals all voting in favour.
The $6.4 billion bridge connecting Detroit with Windsor opened on July 27 following months of delays and controversy surrounding the terms of the deal with the United States. U.S. President Donald Trump forged a new deal with Ottawa, which will have it share half of the net toll revenues with the United States for the next 15 years, with the other half going toward an economic development fund for the region controlled by Washington.
The original agreement signed in 2012 was for 100 percent of the tolls collected from the bridge’s operations going toward the Canadian government, given that Ottawa agreed to front the full cost of construction, and half of the toll revenue would go to the state of Michigan after Canada had fully recouped the costs.
Committee Meeting
Conservative MP Dan Albas told the committee on July 29 that Carney had made specific comments about the terms of the deal, reiterated those comments on July 17, and then “what we found out from the media was that that was not the case at all.”
“It’s important for the opposition and for Liberal members themselves to hold the government to account to make sure that Canadians are being given factual information so that we can make good decisions,” Albas said.
Prime Minister Mark Carney had described the deal on July 12 as being a 50–50 split of “net profits” with Washington after Canada was repaid its debts, while a release of the agreement on July 21 said Canada would share 50 percent of the bridge’s net revenue during its first 15 years of operation.
When Carney was asked about the discrepancy on July 23, he said he had referenced the deal’s terms “perhaps imperfectly” and that he’d been referring to the original deal with Michigan, while “in parallel” there is a 15-year agreement for payments to Washington based on net revenues after operating expenses.
Conservative MP Melissa Lantsman said that since Canadian taxpayers had paid for the bridge’s construction, they should be given all the details around the new deal to open the bridge.
“We want to know why the prime minister’s answers don’t match the reality of the deal, and the only way that we can know that is by having the deal presented in this committee,” Lantsman said.
Bloc Québécois MP Marie-Hélène Gaudreau said there were many unanswered questions about the bridge deal, such as what the actual terms and clauses are, how the $6.4 billion will be paid back to Canada, and how tariffs or revenues will be handled.
“Right now, it’s been the media who’ve been providing information, but parliamentarians need to know,” she said.
Liberal MP John-Paul Danko said the opening of the bridge would bring “extremely significant” economic benefits to Canada. He said both the original bridge contract and the new deal are available online, and the terms of both are “actually fairly simple and straightforward.”
“Our Ontario caucus actually visited the bridge before it was opened last summer, and it is an amazing structure. I hope all Canadians have an opportunity to travel across this corridor,” he said.
