Evidence of meeting #48 for Finance in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was federal.
A video is available from Parliament.
3:55 p.m.
Chair, Mayor, City of Barrie, Large Urban Mayors' Caucus of Ontario
Our strategic direction would be that infrastructure investments, particularly in the area of stormwater protection, be made. This is for everything from flood waves to urban stormwater management. We are also seeing in energy infrastructure the need to harden our energy infrastructure to prevent the kinds of blackouts we saw during the ice storm, following flooding.
Those are two areas where we would like to see a focus in infrastructure investment.
3:55 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Thank you for that.
Mr. Woodside, you have a rough estimate on the numbers the FCM is asking for with respect to improvements in waste water. But starting on principles, is it the contention of the Canadian mayors that the federal government has brought in new rules that have cost implications for them but has brought no new money to the table? Am I poorly representing the scenario from the FCM's point of view?
4 p.m.
President, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
I don't think so, but I would say that the costs that will be incurred by municipalities across the country are much greater than had ever been anticipated, when we start looking at what we have to do to bring it up to standard support—
4 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
So rules without the money are challenging for municipal budgets that are already stretched.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but do most of your cities operate under balanced budget legislation, in that you can't run deficits?
4 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
That's interesting.
So in a rough estimate of the numbers you've presented today, you're expecting the federal government, over that 20-year period, to cover approximately a third of the costs of these improvements that are required?
4 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Is that a typical funding relationship that you have with the federal government?
4 p.m.
President, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
It is one that we certainly subscribe to. We don't think any level should be responsible for or should have to take on the burden all to itself.
4 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
So as we're heading into surplus—or maybe we're there already, depending on who you believe—the federal government has all sorts of initiatives that it wants to spend money on, such as income splitting or the like. Why make the argument for funding to go your way when we're already having some transfers from the federal government towards municipalities?
4 p.m.
President, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
Well, I think the funding going our way is actually going your way as well. What we're here promoting is our hometowns, and these belong to you. They belong to federal members, provincial members, and of course municipalities, but we are right there in the trenches every day, so when we strengthen what we do, it's actually strengthening you as well.
4 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
The one taxpayer rule....
Mr. Golightly, I have a question about some concerns you raised. I'll address them as concerns about the housing market writ large. There's a lot of speculation as to why it is becoming increasingly inaccessible. Certainly, market by market, Vancouver, many cities in Alberta, and Toronto are somewhat different realities than those in other parts of the country.
You expressed some concerns over recently announced policies making it more restrictive, particularly for new homebuyers, to get into the market. Do you find the 10-year requirement too restrictive? Am I synthesizing that properly? I don't want to put words in your mouth.
4 p.m.
President, Canadian Home Builders' Association
I'm not sure of your reference about the 10 years, but to try to answer your question, we're seeing the cost of new homes rising exponentially faster than the rate of income, particularly for the new homebuyer, the first-time buyer, and the new Canadian.
4 p.m.
NDP
Nathan Cullen NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Some would argue that, in the past, rules that were too lenient allowed that housing price to increase so dramatically. Can one make the argument—and I suppose I am making the argument—that perhaps loosening the rules further will only exacerbate the problem?
Mr. Flaherty was one to often comment on this, and in fact phoned banks at one point, suggesting that their rates were too loose and that it was encouraging a housing bubble in the market.
4 p.m.
President, Canadian Home Builders' Association
Yes, we're recommending a judicious approach to this, where we're targeting it specifically at the group that needs to get into the market.
They still need to qualify. They still need the five-year rule. We're not talking about reducing their ability to make the debt service. We're talking about increasing their ability to actually get into the market at all. We're watching people being frozen out until at least their early thirties. We're not talking about reducing the entire mortgage rule scheme. We're talking about targeting.
4 p.m.
NDP
4 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Cullen.
Mr. Saxton, please, for you round.
4 p.m.
Conservative
Andrew Saxton Conservative North Vancouver, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks to our witnesses for being here today.
My first questions will be for the Canadian Airports Council.
I've noticed, as a frequent traveller, that security lines in certain Canadian airports are continuing to get longer rather than shorter. I understand that other airports in other jurisdictions, in other countries, handle many more people, much larger volumes, yet do so more efficiently.
How can Canadian airports take best practices and learn from other airports so that the lines can be shortened and that travellers can move on to their flights and destinations more quickly?
4 p.m.
Director, President and Chief Executive Officer, Ottawa International Airport Authority, Canadian Airports Council
Thank you for that question.
Canadian airports are not responsible for passenger screening; CATSA is. So we'd certainly encourage CATSA to look at best practices.
What they are telling us—CATSA is a crown corporation—is that they're not funded for the growth that we're seeing in air passenger travel. What you're in fact seeing is increased delays, and one of our principal requests is that CATSA be funded sufficiently for growth.
Another issue CATSA raises is that they follow regulations that Transport Canada makes. There's kind of an issue there where they say, we would like to do best practices. I know of a Canadian company that has bigger throughputs. He cannot work in Canada. Basically, he can work in Schiphol. He can work in the United States. But he cannot work in Canada, because the regulations will not allow him to screen that way.
So there are different techniques, and we think that is the direction where they have to go. Transport Canada and CATSA have to work together to find those solutions, and we encourage them to do so.
In the meantime, in the short term, the summer lineups are going to get very long next year. CATSA says if they don't get any funds, expect that passengers will be missing planes.
Toronto airport is already asked to fund, out of its own pockets, some increased screening times. This is a very slippery slope, because the passengers are already paying that fee. If you now ask the airports to pay for that above that fee, they're going to be paying twice again.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Andrew Saxton Conservative North Vancouver, BC
Okay, let's move on to your next ask, which is on-arrival duty-free shopping. I've seen it in Asia; it's very successful.
First of all, it's much more convenient for the traveller, because they don't have to cart bottles of liquor around the world with them. They can purchase them on arrival. Also, it gives them a chance to keep their money in the local economy rather than overseas.
However, there are some provinces that are concerned about losing business as a result of this. What is your explanation for that?
4:05 p.m.
Director, President and Chief Executive Officer, Ottawa International Airport Authority, Canadian Airports Council
We don't believe it's an issue, and if it is, it's very minute. Many provinces have already agreed that they don't see that as an issue.
We are prepared to roll it out as a pilot in the provinces that will take it, and the provinces that won't will come around very quickly.
You're not taking away from going to the provincial liquor store. It's an opportunity. They're already buying their bottle of scotch in Mexico and bringing it over. Why not give them the opportunity to buy in Canada and get the sale?
It's an easy ask. I think it's an easy fix.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Andrew Saxton Conservative North Vancouver, BC
Thank you.
My next question is for the Federation of Canadian Municipalities.
Mr. Woodside, if you ever decide to leave the municipal business, you can always go into radio broadcasting; you certainly have a voice for it. That's a compliment, by the way.
In number two of your ask, partnering on important wastewater system upgrades, you rightfully pointed out that in my community there will be a significant investment required in this regard.
When you say “partnering”, what sort of partnering are you referring to?
4:05 p.m.
President, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
We are actually looking at the financial portion of the partnering.
As I stated, it really isn't or shouldn't be up to any one level of government to take on this financial burden. At $18 billion it's just too much.
Municipalities are willing to step up to the plate with a one-third, one-third, one-third split, which we have been doing for quite some time, and it seems to be very acceptable and very successful.