Evidence of meeting #64 for Environment and Sustainable Development in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was projects.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Natasha Rascanin  Assistant Deputy Minister, Program Operations Branch, Infrastructure Canada
Mohamed Nouhi  Principal Advisor, Policy and Communications, Priority Initiatives, Environmental Initiatives, Infrastructure Canada

8:45 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht

I call to order meeting number 64 of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development.

Our first hour today is booked with witnesses from Infrastructure Canada. They're going to make an opening statement. Following that, we will have about 20 minutes left. So rather than go with seven-minute rounds, I'm going to suggest that we complete one entire round and go with five minutes each to make sure everyone has a chance to get in their questions.

We're going to begin by welcoming Natasha Rascanin. She will make an opening statement. Our other officials will be available to answer questions as needed.

Welcome to the committee. Please proceed with your opening statement.

8:45 a.m.

Natasha Rascanin Assistant Deputy Minister, Program Operations Branch, Infrastructure Canada

Thank you very much.

Good morning, everyone. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today.

I would like to introduce my two colleagues. Bogdan Makuc is the director of program operations within the program operations branch, and Mohamed Nouhi is the principal adviser in the policy and communications branch.

In the context of this committee's study of urban conservation practices in Canada, I'd like to use my opening remarks to provide you with a brief overview of Infrastructure Canada and its activities. Before that, it would be helpful to provide a bit of context.

The vast majority of Canada's public infrastructure—in fact, well over 90%—is owned not by the federal government, but by provinces, territories, and municipalities. This includes key infrastructure such as highways, local roads and bridges, water and wastewater infrastructure, and public transit systems.

Recognizing the essential role played by public infrastructure in supporting economic competitiveness, a cleaner environment, and strong communities, the federal government provides funding support to provinces, territories, and municipalities to help them finance their infrastructure investments. I would note that this funding has grown significantly over the last decade.

The Infrastructure Canada department was established in 2002 and uses the suite of available infrastructure programs and leads the government efforts in this particular funding area. We have two types of broad categories of programs. There are base funding initiatives and targeted programs.

The base funding initiatives are designed to support provincial, territorial, and local infrastructure priorities. The largest initiative in this category is the gas tax fund, which provides $2 billion per year in stable, predictable funding to municipalities for environmentally sustainable municipal infrastructure.

Following budget 2011, this funding was legislated and made permanent. While the federal government determines which categories of projects are eligible under the gas tax fund, the specific projects are chosen locally and prioritized according to the infrastructure needs of each community that is asking for access to that funding.

Our targeted programs are designed to support both large- and small-scale projects that are national, regional, or local in significance. Federal funding is provided on a cost-shared basis in order to leverage additional funding from partners.

In that category, our largest targeted fund is the $8.8-billion Building Canada fund, which is the flagship infrastructure program of the government. The Building Canada fund is largely delivered through two components. One is the major infrastructure component, which focuses on larger, more complex infrastructure projects of national or regional significance, and then there's a communities component, which supports projects in communities with populations of less than 100,000.

A total of 17 investment categories are eligible for the Building Canada Fund, but the vast majority of projects proposed by the provinces and municipalities—and funded by Infrastructure Canada—are in the areas of transportation, water and wastewater treatment and public transit.

Projects funded under the Major Infrastructure Component are chosen jointly through discussions with each province. Almost all of that component's funds have now been committed to projects, and on-going discussions are being held for the remaining funds.

Projects under the Communities Component were chosen through a competitive process based on applications for funding and are managed jointly with the provinces. The majority of this component's funding has already been allocated.

Targeted funding is also allocated through the Green Infrastructure Fund, which is a merit-based program with the goal of contributing to cleaner air, cleaner water and reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. All of the funding under this program has already been allocated.

Environmental sustainability has been encouraged through Infrastructure Canada's targeted programs in two ways.

The first is through funding support for projects that provide direct environmental benefits, which we refer to as green infrastructure such as wastewater treatment, solid waste management, brownfield redevelopment, and green energy, which also includes community district energy systems. The largest proportion of this funding, which is approximately $1.8 billion, has been committed to over 1,200 waste water infrastructure projects.

The second way that Infrastructure Canada has encouraged environmental sustainability is through program funding criteria, which encourage or require projects to meet certain standards.

But irrespective of our programs, I would like to finish by emphasizing the following points.

Our funding programs outline eligibility parameters for projects. However, within those parameters, our partners have a great deal of flexibility to prioritize investments to meet their particular infrastructure needs. So our role is limited to being a provider of funding and, thus, we do not own or manage any of the infrastructure projects we fund. That particular role is filled by our partners, which are mainly provinces, territories, and municipalities. As a result, it is they that are responsible for undertaking key activities such as project planning, procurement, and prioritization.

Our funding is meant to help cover the capital costs of building new infrastructure assets and refurbishing existing ones, and we do not fund operating costs. Our programs are designed to assist—I mentioned cost sharing—provincial, territorial, and municipal infrastructure projects. As such, we do not support federal assets.

That's an overview. Thank you for your time, and we would be happy to answer any questions.

8:50 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht

Thank you very much, and thank you for providing the written comments as well. They're always very helpful for us to refer back to.

We're going to open up four five-minute rounds, and we'll begin with Ms. Rempel.

8:50 a.m.

Conservative

Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Centre-North, AB

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank the officials for coming. We've had a really good discussion so far in this committee, and we want to get some clarification on a couple of points we heard during testimony on this study.

Perhaps you could start by giving me a little background specifically on the green municipal fund. We heard from some witnesses that perhaps there was a gap on eligibility for conservation or biodiversity types of projects. Do you think that's true, and perhaps if not, what are the eligible programs right now for those types of initiatives?

8:50 a.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Program Operations Branch, Infrastructure Canada

Natasha Rascanin

All right. The green infrastructure fund is a national merit-based system, and proponents for projects apply with their own priorities. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, it is largely provinces, territories, and municipalities that would put forward priorities. The funding was focused on large-scale projects that support environmental outcomes and objectives.

Now, there was no jurisdictional allocation per se, because it's a merit-based program where each individual project is evaluated on its merit, but provincial and territorial support in that regard was hugely important.

In terms of eligible categories, they are waste water, solid waste, green energy generation and transmission infrastructure, and carbon transmission and storage infrastructure. So I am not sure what whoever mentioned that—

8:55 a.m.

Conservative

Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Centre-North, AB

The context would be, for example, the City of Calgary; I'm thinking back to its presentation. It has a wetlands conservation plan and has implemented some infrastructure projects to achieve the goals of that program, etc.

I'm trying to get a sense of, between this program and perhaps other programs across ministries, whether urban green infrastructure is actually a gap or whether it would fall within eligibility criteria within other funding.

8:55 a.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Program Operations Branch, Infrastructure Canada

Natasha Rascanin

I've given you the categories for the green infrastructure fund particularly, but within the larger Building Canada fund program, there are 17 eligibility criteria tranches. A number of them are specifically green or eco-focused. As I mentioned, the proponents design their programs, but we certainly do look at projects having these components—and there is definite capacity to submit such.

I can give you examples of programs we have funded. Under the wastewater category, projects have been funded that included engineered wetlands as part of their treatment solutions. That is possible, and it has happened. In another example, there was funding for brownfield redevelopment projects. The flexibility within the categories certainly allows for that.

8:55 a.m.

Conservative

Michelle Rempel Conservative Calgary Centre-North, AB

We heard this theme from quite a few witnesses. Maybe it's not a funding gap but more about the awareness of the eligibility of certain criteria. Have you had any feedback from stakeholders to this effect at all? We're trying to develop a best recommendation, given that we know we're in tight fiscal times.

8:55 a.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Program Operations Branch, Infrastructure Canada

Natasha Rascanin

We have not consistently been hearing that there's a gap. As you probably know, our minister held a consultation process last year with a variety of stakeholders, to seek feedback and considerations going forward. I'm not aware that we have heard of a major gap in specific categories. But as I say, we talk to a lot of different stakeholders. Certainly from our primary partners—our provinces, territories, and municipalities—the programs are delivering the capacity they need to choose priorities.

8:55 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht

Thank you very much.

We're going to move on to Ms. Leslie.

8:55 a.m.

NDP

Megan Leslie NDP Halifax, NS

Thanks very much, Mr. Chair.

This is not going to be an adversarial committee at all, because we are really trying to drill down to this. I don't know if you saw the briefing put together by the Library of Parliament analysts.

8:55 a.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Program Operations Branch, Infrastructure Canada

8:55 a.m.

NDP

Megan Leslie NDP Halifax, NS

Well, a number of witnesses said that they couldn’t access this money. I appreciate what you're saying about the terms being flexible enough that people probably could access it.

Maybe one of the reasons you haven't heard that there's a gap is that it's not intuitive to talk to the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society when you're doing consultation, for example.

I like how we're uncovering what's going on here. When you say that there is flexibility in the terms, I would point out for example that we had witnesses who said, “What if we wanted to access that infrastructure money for a tree canopy because trees are a part of the green infrastructure. Or what if wanted to access it for a habitat restoration project because in urban centres we want to make sure people can access nature within cities”. Would you say that the terms are flexible enough for projects like those?

9 a.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Program Operations Branch, Infrastructure Canada

Natasha Rascanin

It's hard for me to tell you exactly, because we would need to look at the specifics. In general, we certainly don't try to preclude them, but we do have to review each project on its specifics and make sure that it fits the terms and conditions we have. That is our primary role: to ensure that the specific eligibility requirements designed for our funding programs are satisfied. We certainly do not automatically exclude them, but it's up to the proponent to identify them specifically, to put them forward as a priority. Then we would be able to determine if, for some reason, it doesn't fit. But as I said, we largely do have a lot of flexibility.

9 a.m.

NDP

Megan Leslie NDP Halifax, NS

I don't think this committee is interested in making prescriptive recommendations, but would there be any alarm bells or any problem with starting a conversation with some of these conservation organizations to talk about how awareness could be raised, that folks could try and apply for it, or maybe having a conversation with them about possible gaps? Would there be a problem with that? I can't imagine there would be.

9 a.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Program Operations Branch, Infrastructure Canada

Natasha Rascanin

I don't think there's a problem with starting those kinds of conversations. I would emphasize as well that all the conversations definitely need to happen with municipal, provincial, and territorial partners, because all of this prioritization happens at that level.

9 a.m.

NDP

Megan Leslie NDP Halifax, NS

I don't have any other questions.

9 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Harold Albrecht

You have about two minutes.

Mr. Choquette.

9 a.m.

NDP

François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC

Thank you for your presentation.

I would like to ask a question about the Green Infrastructure Fund. You mentioned that this fund is merit-based and that its goal is to encourage cleaner water, air and so on. But you said that all of the funding under the program has already been allocated. Is that for this year or forever?

9 a.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Program Operations Branch, Infrastructure Canada

Natasha Rascanin

That is all of the funding, total.

9 a.m.

NDP

François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC

Will the Green Infrastructure Fund be renewed next year?

9 a.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Program Operations Branch, Infrastructure Canada

Natasha Rascanin

No decision has been made yet, so I cannot answer that.

9 a.m.

NDP

François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC

So, the Green Infrastructure Fund was a success.

9 a.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Program Operations Branch, Infrastructure Canada

Natasha Rascanin

It is not up to me to determine that, but—

9 a.m.

NDP

François Choquette NDP Drummond, QC

All of the funds were allocated, which means that municipalities and provinces came looking for subsidies. How quickly were the funds distributed?