Transport Committee on May 5th, 2015

[Jeff Moore]

We haven't received a formal application related to the SmartTrack system or that system in its entirety. There may be certain components that we might look at supporting, but for the time being there are still some discussions going on within the municipality, and probably between the municipality and the province, concerning the way this project or series of projects may or may not be prioritized under our programs.

There are a number of doors they could consider. They could consider coming through the national infrastructure component, if it's deemed that this project may be nationally significant; they could prioritize the project under PTIC; they could go to PPP Canada; or they could wait for the public transit fund to come online. There are several options available to them, once they know how they want to engage the federal government on this.

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

It has not been asked for yet?

[Jeff Moore]

No, not for the entire system.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Ms. Young, you have five minutes.

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

Thank you for being here and for the extensive information you've given us already.

Economic action plan 2015, of course, includes the new permanent transit fund. Coming from Vancouver in British Columbia, where we currently have a referendum under way on transit, I'd like to ask you to tell us, if you can, whether Vancouver has applied for funding and also provide the number of transit projects that have received federal funding and what the amounts are.

[Jeff Moore]

We can certainly give you the information in terms of how many transit projects we have supported. That's not a problem.

Are you asking about transit projects in Vancouver or the surrounding area that may have come in through the public transit fund, or are you asking in general?

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

I'm asking in general.

[Jeff Moore]

In general in B.C. we haven't received any transit project proposals yet under the new building Canada fund. We're waiting to see whether anything will be coming shortly from them.

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

I was also particularly interested in the discussion previously about asset management. Given the range of projects in both small communities and large, and for transit as well as water and sewage, etc., if a system like this were to be put into place, how would you envision it occurring, or through what bodies? Would it be a federal system? Would it be through the Federation of Canadian Municipalities? Has anybody given any thought to this?

[Jeff Moore]

I think it really depends on how the municipality wants to look at this as a priority. There are certainly municipal associations at the provincial and territorial level that have some expertise and knowledge in this area, whereby they can assist municipalities with asset management. The Federation of Canadian Municipalities also has some knowledge in this area that could be of assistance to municipalities.

Again, as I said, we can provide some support to municipalities through the gas tax fund to help them with capacity building to put together an appropriate asset management plan.

Provinces and territories—thank you, Bogdan—also have a lot of knowledge and some support mechanisms that are available to municipalities for asset management.

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

To your knowledge, how many municipalities, provinces, or territories have such a plan in place?

[Jeff Moore]

I don't know the answer to that question, but the Federation of Canadian Municipalities might know the answer.

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

Mr. Chair, how much time do I have left?

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

You have two minutes.

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

That's great.

Just to further explore previous conversations, what I heard—and correct me if I'm wrong—was that we really don't have a set of metrics that is accepted across the board to measure our infrastructure deficit and that this is linked to the asset management piece because it seems to play a role in it.

Given that these are two fairly large pieces that we don't seem to know about in Canada, I guess my question to you is what you as Infrastructure Canada would recommend so as to move forward to gain these pieces of knowledge, so that we can set down a strong infrastructure plan for our future.

[Jeff Moore]

One way we might do this is by using our federal convening power and bringing various organizations together. I know that the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, in partnership with the Canadian Construction Association, the Canadian Public Works Association, and other partners are working on an infrastructure report card.

There was an infrastructure report card published back in 2012 that gave some limited insight into the state of some of the issues with respect to various infrastructure assets. But it was a very targeted survey, I would say, because it only targeted I believe four asset classes, which included local roads, drinking water, waste water, and maybe one or two others. Only a limited number of municipalities actually responded to the survey, which in fact could present some data challenges as well.

Moving forward, the FCM in partnership with other key partners has been looking towards the 2015 infrastructure report card, for which they've expanded their survey to include several other infrastructure assets. We're hoping we might be able to get some more robust information through this next iteration of the infrastructure report card. Doing so might help us in some of our policy thinking as we move forward.

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

How does Canada compare with other countries regarding this? Are we unique in not knowing this information, or is not knowing pretty standard internationally?

[Stephanie Tanton]

I'm not entirely sure, to be honest with you. The thing to take into account in the Canadian context, however, is that most of this is not federally owned infrastructure, and I think that makes us fairly unique. Much of it is owned by the provinces, territories, and municipalities. When you're doing international comparisons, that fact adds an extra complexity to ensuring that we have appropriate data.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you.

We'll now move to Mr. Mai.

[Hoang Mai, NDP, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd also like to thank the witnesses for being with us today.

When you consider infrastructure projects, you assess the spinoff they will generate. When Mr. Braid asked about the plan's objectives, you made it clear that Canada's economic competitiveness was an important element.

When you consider the funding invested through different programs or directly by Infrastructure Canada, do you look at the economic benefits of projects, in other words, their potential to create jobs in Canada? Does that factor into your assessment?

[Jeff Moore]

Yes, absolutely. That's one of the things we look at when reviewing a proposal from a province, territory or municipality. We look at its economic impact.

We look at other factors, as well. In the case of a groundwater artery, for example, we also consider the effects on the municipality.

[Hoang Mai, NDP, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

When the Minister of Infrastructure, Communities and Intergovernmental Affairs appeared before the committee, I asked him about the future Champlain bridge. I asked him whether the assessment criteria for the project included job creation in Canada. Obviously, the amounts associated with the project are going to be huge. The minister said the criteria didn't include job creation. Those bidding on the project won't receive an advantage for generating jobs in Canada. That's what I can't seem to wrap my head around. If job creation is ultimately important to you, why not incorporate it into the assessment criteria for Infrastructure Canada projects?

[Jeff Moore]

When we evaluate our projects, and I'll take an example in terms of the national infrastructure component, we will look at what kind of increased economic activity will result from a project, how we're going to manage disruptions in the economy, as well as how it's going to increase economic productivity.

In many cases it's about the speed at which people, goods, and services can travel, whether it's by plane, rail, or road, or through a port. Speed is very important because the private sector relies on speed these days to be more productive.

We emphasize the productivity aspect more in the increase of economic activity. Of course jobs will always be created through these infrastructure projects, whether they're short-term construction jobs or indirect jobs in the service industry, as well as longer-term jobs and the longer-term impact on the gross national product.

[Hoang Mai, NDP, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

The Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters association made a good point with respect to the Champlain bridge. On Montreal's south shore, whether in Longueuil or Boucherville, they make steel. If Canadian-made materials were used for the project, not only would it create jobs here, but it would also generate direct economic benefits.

You said that, to some extent, speed overrode the increase in economic activity.

[Jeff Moore]

I wasn't necessarily speaking about the speed with which the project is completed. It was more about how the project can impact on goods and services moving more quickly. It also depends on the nature of the project itself. For example, if we are funding a drinking water system we will want to look at how many households are being connected to that system, the quality of the water, as well as some of the economic impacts of that project.