Evidence of meeting #10 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was area.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
Do you believe that a national--it's my last question--strategy for public transit should include an IT process?
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
That might be the thing the federal government should have jurisdiction over. That's one of its responsibilities, no...?
5:20 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Metrolinx
Intelligent transportation systems are a key part. Whether it's public transit or other forms of transportation, it's a key way of getting more out of the infrastructure we already have. There is a strong role for the federal government to play in establishing standards.
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
With that, thank you.
I'll go to Mr. Watson for our final question.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
5:20 p.m.
Conservative
Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON
My great thanks to my colleague, Mr. Coderre, for his suggestion.
In closing, I just want to zero in on a couple of quick areas. On the funding side, the federal government's funding of public transit over the last number of years has been under the umbrella, if you will, of an omnibus program, the Building Canada plan. It had several components and allowed flexibility so that municipalities could choose what projects and priorities they would prefer to be funding, including public transit.
First of all, in the recent election, we made a commitment. That program has to be replaced in due course. There will be consultations over the next couple of years towards that next long-term infrastructure plan. Should the issue of public transit funding be considered in that process, or should it be done in an ad hoc fashion? That's about the process for coming up with a funding.
Second, should the government depart from the traditional idea that there's an omnibus program with municipal flexibility and choice and have a dedicated fund, in an ongoing long-term fashion, that is specifically for public transit?
I have another important question I want to come back to and get in under the wire.
5:25 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Metrolinx
I'll be quick. I'll give you the time to do that.
Yes, I'm aware of the consultation that will be coming up in terms of the renewal or replacement of the Building Canada programs. That is an avenue, clearly, through which municipalities and regional authorities can engage with the federal government about public transit funding going forward. We've already had some introductory conversations with federal officials about what that process may look like, and we will participate in that process.
In terms of the structure of any programs, I would advocate for a dedicated long-term approach. The Building Canada Fund programs--
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON
Just for clarification, would that be in addition to the omnibus infrastructure program needs of large municipalities, for example? Because right now, there's a municipal infrastructure component--
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON
--for the large cities. Then there's a sort of rural component. You're asking for something on top of that consideration.
5:25 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Metrolinx
Yes, I would say that the way I look at the potential federal programs going forward is that there's a base that all communities should have access to, and gas tax funding is an element of that base.
There probably should be some kind of dedicated stream for mid- to large-sized cities and then something separate for regions. That would be my view, because five-year increments of programs do not allow for the ability to have effective planning for infrastructure that takes you 10 or 12 years to complete.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON
In fairness, Building Canada was a seven-year program.
On the viability of projects, is viability a consideration in Metrolinx's planning? One of the things we've been talking about is that obviously capital costs are typically not recoverable in public transit projects. The cost recovery of operational funding varies. In some cases, it's high. In some cases, it's low.
There are two ways to ask this question. There's sort of a cost recovery quotient you look at and say, okay, that's a viable project and we're going to go after that. Or do you use different criteria to examine why you choose a specific priority? I'm trying to get a fix on whether we should have a quotient that says whether this is a viable project.
5:25 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Metrolinx
We use a mix. We look at each element, each criterion, to see what the value is—for example, in cost recovery—and then how it contributes to the overall mix and relates to the project as a whole.
5:25 p.m.
Conservative
Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON
Are there projects that you've actually conceived of but said no to because they're just not going to be anywhere close to viable economically?
5:25 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Metrolinx
We do a business case analysis on each project we put forward and we rate them. Some of them have a positive of over 1.0 business case, which means that it's a net contributor. Some of them have a very low value.
We take that information to our board and ultimately to our funding partners and say, “These are our recommendations based on all the analysis we've done on the outcomes that we get from these projects”. We have a pretty good track record of being able to follow through, and all of our partners support the recommendations we identify for them.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON
Would you be willing to table the criteria you use for decision-making on projects—
5:30 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Metrolinx
Absolutely. I mentioned the prioritization framework. We've consulted with our municipal partners on that. I'd be quite happy to table that with you as well.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
If you could send it to the clerk, we'll distribute it to all members.
With that, I will thank our guest for being here today. It was certainly a very informative meeting. Thank you very much.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
Committee members, we'll resume on Monday after the break. I wish you all a good break in your constituencies.
The meeting is adjourned.