Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm Gary Losier, president of the Canadian Public Works Association. The CPWA was established in 1986 as a national voice for the Canadian public works community. Our members are drawn from across Canada and encompass all disciplines of public works.
As you know, public works is the backbone that helps make our communities safe, healthy, sustainable places in which to live, work, play, and invest. Public works includes the obvious, from waste water treatment to roads to mass transit, and the less obvious, such as traffic signals, utility systems, snow removal, waste removal, recycling programs, and parks.
Our presentation today will focus on two topics. First is our recommendation for funding for the National Round Table for Sustainable Infrastructure. Second, and in accordance with the committee's request, we will provide feedback on the effectiveness of the government's infrastructure stimulus fund and suggest some enhancements moving forward.
Recent governments deserve credit for the considerable investment being made to Canada's infrastructure deficit. This is a move in the right direction. With tens of billions at stake, we along with many other infrastructure stakeholders believe that investment ought to be maximized. The National Round Table for Sustainable Infrastructure helps to achieve value for taxpayers' dollars. Begun in 2003, the NRTSI is a forum comprising leading infrastructure authorities from across Canada, all levels of government, and first nations. NRTSI is not a policy-making body. Rather, its work provides industry and governments with access to a one-stop shop for analysis, research, and consolidated opinion from a broad range of infrastructure experts unmatched elsewhere.
The federal government has provided a direct, short-term contribution towards the round table's activities, a clear indication that it sees value in the NRTSI format. However, beyond this initial commitment, no assurances have been provided for the NRTSI despite its valuable work to address capacity issues surrounding small community infrastructure, to explore infrastructure financing solutions such as public-private partnerships, and to develop consistent structures for use by the various professions and jurisdictions that are responsible for aspects of asset management.
NRTSI members have made financial and human resource commitments, and we feel there's a role for the federal government to complement these contributions to assist in setting up a management office and hire permanent staff. The upfront cost to the federal government would amount to $1.5 million per annum for the first three years, diminishing to $750,000 per year in years four and five. The reduced federal contribution for the final two years of the five-year plan would be offset by anticipated contributions from the provinces, territories, and municipalities.
Let's quickly talk about the infrastructure spending announced in budget 2009 that formed the cornerstone of the federal government's economic action plan. In many instances, it was our members who worked directly with municipal councils in completing the applications for stimulus funds.
In response to the finance committee's pre-budget study, the CPWA has surveyed its membership about the effectiveness of the infrastructure stimulus fund, the $4-billion two-year fund announced in the budget. Our members were asked to comment on government communications, the accessibility and user-friendliness of the application process, the funding specifications of the various stimulus funds, and the speed with which the money has been disbursed.
I will start first with a positive. More than 60% of members felt that the provision for matching funding did not complicate the process and was based on sound rationale. Criticism of the program focused on the short timeline for completing projects. We were pleased that the government decided not to proceed with clawback provisions initially planned under the ISF for projects not completed by March 31, 2011. However, in some instances work has not proceeded because paperwork and agreements to initiate work have not been received in a timely manner.
Recently Atlantic mayors and FCM called for an extension of two construction seasons, and we support that recommendation. The federal government has done a commendable job in moving quickly, but it should not punish the applicants by strict interpretations of the March 31, 2011, date for ISF-funded projects.
A longer funding horizon for projects that were delayed due to circumstances beyond their control is good policy at no additional cost to taxpayers.
Thank you very much.