Government Operations Committee on Oct. 22nd, 2009

[Michael Buda]

Obviously only the Government of Canada is going to have the most exact figures. FCM doesn't undertake its own reporting with our members, for the simple reason that there's a very clear set of reporting guidelines through the contribution agreements that flow these moneys through provinces to municipalities, and we don't want to duplicate reporting. In the September stimulus report card it was reported that $3.2 billion of the $4 billion infrastructure stimulus fund had been committed.

Our understanding, anecdotally from our members, but partially from the quarterly reports that provinces are required to deliver, is that not all of that $3.2 billion has yet resulted in construction work on the ground. However, as I said, it is important to note that once project funds have been committed and municipalities receive approval, they can begin the design work, the tendering. There are a lot of jobs required, especially in the design work. We do a fair bit of work with the associations of consulting engineers, and they'll be the first to tell you how important those types of jobs are.

I don't have specific information on those numbers, since those are government numbers.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

I think it's helpful information that these projects, as far as we understand, are being undertaken; they're already moving quite quickly.

In terms of the stimulus, though, I think it's important that we all recognize we have to continue in this effort to get things done and to move as expediently as we can. There will be projects--a good number of projects, actually--that are expected to be in the ground as of next spring, with full intentions of being completed before next fall. I can identify several in my own community, and I know you will be familiar with those as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

We go to Madam Hall Findlay, for five minutes.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you.

I understand the desire to be a little bit politic, given that there is still an expectation of projects being approved and hope for more money. We're hearing pretty clear evidence and serious concern about significant delays resulting from the matching process. We also heard, and made, loud and clear calls for a gas-tax-type approach, specifically to avoid the delays we're hearing about. Today we're hearing confirmation that there have been significant delays in getting shovels to ground. Despite all of the warnings that delays would result from insisting on a matching project, this is exactly what happened.

With all due respect, we have been asking for a list of projects, with details on what has actually been spent, what has actually broken ground. On air the other day, I was promised by another Conservative member that I would get my list of the projects. We have been asking for months; we have not found a list. I'm hoping we can get information from the FCM, not a repeat of what the government has been saying without any evidence to back it up.

So far we have from you that only a third of the projects that were announced have been started. Half of the two-year time limit has now been lost, and there's been confirmation from you that if you don't meet the 2011 deadline for completion, then the municipality in question will be on the hook. I don't know about you, but that means I can't budget. It means I have a real question about whether to undertake a project next construction season, if I don't think I can finish it.

The conclusion I can't avoid is that this government has been happy to get the benefit of all of these thousands of announcements, knowing that at least two-thirds may not ever happen. If the money doesn't flow, come spring, lo and behold, this government might look a little more fiscally positive than their present projections would lead us to expect. I think that's pretty damning. We're looking at municipalities that have asked for help and Canadians that have asked for jobs to be created.

It sure looks to me as though this has all been more PR than job creation. So I will ask if you have any further information. We're not getting anything from the government. We would like to have details on the projects that have actually been approved, the projects that have started to break ground. We'd like to know where we stand. We want to know exactly how many jobs have been created. It's not enough for us to get a repeat of what the government is telling us, because what the government is telling us is not a hell of a lot.

I throw that open to anybody who can give me more detailed information about projects. I understand you have to be politic. You don't want to bite the hand that feeds you, but we're trying to get to the bottom of this.

[Brock Carlton]

We're not being politic here. Our members have a reporting mechanism. They report to the provinces, the provinces report to the department, and the department has numbers. Those are the numbers that we work with. It would be inappropriate for us to go to our members and tell them they have to make two reports. That would duplicate work and create an awful lot more stress for our members, who are working extremely hard to implement the work that is under way.

As we have stated publicly, we believe this is a national program of serious importance and that all this money must be spent to create jobs so that the economy can be stimulated. As we move towards the March timeframe, if this is becoming a problem, we are going to be saying so loud and clear. The fundamental point is that the money has to be spent, so that the jobs will be created and the projects will be finished.

[Martha Hall Findlay, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

We will be echoing that. We feel strongly that we approved the budget to stimulate the economy and get people back to work. If only a third of these announced projects have actually started, that's a whole lot of empty jobs that have been announced. Announcements don't create jobs; actual work creates jobs.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

Mr. Holder.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate being recognized. I'd like to thank our guests for being here today.

Lest we all forget, what prompted all of this was our concern that we're in a global recession, and as a result of trying to do some things that would assist us in getting out of that global recession, we, like other industrialized countries, made the decision to try to help stimulate our economy.

If I have a minute at the end, Mr. Jean would like to say a couple of things. I hope to give him that time.

It is rather interesting. I was trying to think of what the definition of “stimulus” was, and Mr. Cunningham said it best--and I will quote you, sir. You said that if you want to be sure something gets done, you set a deadline. I have not heard any one of our guests say—and I'm delighted you are all here today—that when the municipalities were offered up their projects they did not understand clearly that there was a deadline. Obviously, there is a time deadline for some.

One of the members of our committee made the comment that she was looking for divergence and was surprised that she didn't hear it, but actually nor did I, and I would like to agree with her. I heard Mr. Généreux state that he was very happy that the federal government recognized the importance of infrastructure and was very happy that the federal government invested $4 billion. I heard Mr. Carlton say that infrastructure funding is one of the most effective tools. I heard Mr. Cunningham say not to go back to the 1990s and that John Baird has worked to cut the red tape. Mr. Perras said that hundreds of projects are running. So I agree that the divergence is not there.

I would also say that without the timeliness set for these infrastructure projects, I wonder how long it would take for the cities to spend these dollars. That is the whole point of stimulus, ladies and gentlemen.

I've heard talk about this gas tax format as being the best way to do it, but if that had been the case, there would have been no commitment necessarily from the province and certainly none from the municipalities to be able to create the kind of initiative that in fact we have. What we've been able to do is expand the value of a dollar to three dollars, and that's what's happened as a result of all of the levels of government participating in an unprecedented way.

My fast question for Mr. Cunningham is on the talk of inappropriate funding in ridings across this country. Sir, do you believe that the premiers of Manitoba, Quebec, Ontario, B.C., and Nova Scotia have conspired to help rig federal ridings in terms of stimulus funding?

[Hans Cunningham]

That's a very interesting question, and of course it asks for an opinion on my behalf. You asked if I believed that they conspired. I can't answer that. I have no way of knowing. I read the newspapers like everybody else, and that's as much as my level of knowledge goes. I'm sorry, I can't answer beyond that.

[Ed Holder, Conservative, London West, ON]

I apologize. It probably wasn't a fair question. Okay, thank you.

Madam Chair, I will pass to Mr. Jean.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Thank you very much, and thanks for the opportunity to be here today. I'm wondering if that was Ms. Finlay's mayor and premier telling her about the Spadina investment in her own riding from this government and the over $1 billion we're recently announced in Toronto south, where there are no Conservative MPs. But that's probably another story for another time.

I'm just wondering what the reception has been from your organizations in relation to some of the things we have done. Let's not talk about the money, because it is fairly obvious from anybody who looks objectively that we have represented all Canadians, because all Canadians are receiving benefits from this stimulus funding and the infrastructure funding in a fair and equitable manner. But there are some other things that we've done, such as making the one-page application, cutting some of the red tape. The Liberals, for instance, since they're the only other governing party, have never spent more than $3 billion in any given year. Obviously we have an amazing challenge in front of us, and we've done some of that.

What is the reception in relation to cutting the red tape, for instance, and doubling the gas tax from $1 billion to $2 billion per year, and even accelerating that funding by some three or four months? What has been the reception by your organization?

[Hans Cunningham]

Thank you for that.

Actually, the reception has been very good in all of those cases, and that's one reason we advocated for the continuance and the permanence of the gas tax, which has been a large stimulus and has been very well received. I certainly thank the government for saying, yes, it's permanent. As you know, the leaders of the other parties have also agreed that the gas tax was a very good way to go and it's worked well. That is something that we all agree on, no matter where we sit.

[Jean Perras]

I agree with my colleague, the federal excise tax on gasoline has been welcomed in Quebec. It allows us to plan for more than a year or two, something that is very rare in municipal government. Because of the money that is now available, we can do that.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

That's probably why your premier said, on August 14 of this year, that the Quebec economy is in better shape than the rest of the country because its infrastructure funding is flowing. I know the partnership with the federal government has worked well.

Do I have another 30 seconds, Madam?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

No, not really.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Not even if I force myself in there for 10 seconds?

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

I could give you 10 seconds.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Ten is all I need.

I'm just curious, who's responsible for the engineering, architecture work, designing the projects, doing the environmental assessment—which this government is never going to leave to the side—buying the shovels, organizing the shovels going in the ground, hiring the employers, and giving the contracts? Who's responsible for that?

[Hans Cunningham]

We are.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Is the federal government responsible for that?

[Hans Cunningham]

No.

[The Chair, Liberal, Yasmin Ratansi]

Thank you.

Madame Bourgeois, for cinq minutes.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I just want to go back to a few questions you were asked. You answered one question that I thought was a little special. Certainly your municipalities are responsible for the engineers and the plans and specifications, but I think that if you are given time, you will be able to get them done. You don't have enough time. Maybe it isn't up to the federal government to look after this, but still, as you said earlier, there could have been more flexibility in the allocation of the funds. They could at least have helped you, have given you time to have the plans drawn up.

When the Minister came here in April or May, he was asked whether he didn't think that to build a bridge, or to build a road that was already planned ... I'm not talking about plans already drawn up by a municipality and specifications already in place. I'm talking about a road that is needed but that the municipality doesn't have the money for. It has no money to spend on plans and specifications and it can't invest in the road right away. It will need two years, is that not correct, gentlemen? So it is important to have some flexibility. I don't understand the question you were asked.

That being said, the third report says that 90% of the Economic Action Plan funds have been committed, and you don't seem to agree with this. We are also told that over 220,000 jobs have been created, and you don't seem to agree with this. Correct me when I'm wrong. We are also told that all of the necessary agreements are in place so you can receive the money, and you don't seem to agree with this. And we are told that the federal economic stimulus funds ... The Government has made commitments to over 4,700 provincial, territorial and municipal infrastructure projects, but you don't seem to be sure, and you are the ones on the ground.

Gentlemen, I may be putting you in a corner, but do you think the third report and the items I have just referred to are correct?

[Jean Perras]

I will repeat what I said earlier, Ms. Bourgeois. It is hard to say, because we haven't done that exercise with our members. You understand that there will be an election on November 1 in Quebec.

[Diane Bourgeois, Bloc, Terrebonne—Blainville, QC]

Absolutely.