Evidence of meeting #96 for Finance in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was project.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Patricia Brady  Director General, Investment Review Branch, Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada
Andrew Brown  Executive Director, Employment Insurance Policy, Skills and Employment Branch, Department of Employment and Social Development
Sébastien St-Arnaud  Senior Policy Strategist, Strategic Policy and Legislative Reform, Labour Program, Department of Employment and Social Development
Marie-Pier Côté  Director, Express Entry Policy, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Glenn Campbell  Assistant Deputy Minister, Canada Infrastructure Bank Transition Office, Office of Infrastructure of Canada
Shawn Grover  Senior Policy Analyst, Canada Infrastructure Bank Transition Office, Office of Infrastructure of Canada
Niko Fleming  Chief, Infrastructure, Sectoral Policy Analysis, Economic Development and Corporate Finance Branch, Department of Finance
Victoria Henderson  Acting Director, Cost Management, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Louis Marcotte  Director General, International Business Development, Investment and Innovation, Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
Roger Ermuth  Assistant Comptroller General, Financial Management Sector, Office of the Comptroller General, Treasury Board Secretariat

10:25 a.m.

Liberal

Robert-Falcon Ouellette Liberal Winnipeg Centre, MB

On the opposite side of that, let's say that a project fails. Could the bank lose everything? How would you divide up the assets? For instance, they might build a brand new green field project and it might not work out as we had hoped. If private investors decided to leave and wanted to sell off, how would you envision that working itself out?

10:25 a.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Canada Infrastructure Bank Transition Office, Office of Infrastructure of Canada

Glenn Campbell

Mr. Chair, the bank will follow modern and robust legal and investment agreements that contemplate all these potential scenarios, through the finance planning stage, the construction stage, and the operating stage. That will ensure everyone knows the rules of the game through agreement.

If something were to happen, the project doesn't perform as intended, it likely means the private investors who absorb risk would take a loss or their returns would be reduced, as intended. If one of the players were to go into some form of default, provisions exist to have someone else enter into their place, which usually happens during the construction phase, no different from any traditional procurement, and these are managed. To the extent to which something happens to a particular investor—who has already put their money in the project—then they may, through a normal court process, have to transfer their liability or sell their position in the project to another investor.

This is largely normal routine in the world of infrastructure and big projects to ensure projects continue to get built and keep moving, and partnership agreements contemplate and manage all these scenarios. That system works very well in Canada.

10:25 a.m.

Liberal

Robert-Falcon Ouellette Liberal Winnipeg Centre, MB

Mr. Campbell, when you talked about a merchant bank, you were not talking about a piggy bank. We're not just handing over $15 billion to investors as a gift. We're trying to use this as leverage to build infrastructure, but also, we maintain an equity stake in a lot of these projects.

10:25 a.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Canada Infrastructure Bank Transition Office, Office of Infrastructure of Canada

Glenn Campbell

The purpose is to use federal support strategically in a project, to put the minimal amount of federal support needed to absorb a risk in a project that would otherwise not have been built or has too much risk, particularly for another government and the private investor to come together.

The comparator would be a project where governments bear all the risk and pay all the funding. So even the federal government would have paid more. The objective is to have the merchant bank or the Canada infrastructure bank work with other partners, including municipal, provincial, or other federal partners, to determine the minimal amount of support needed to make a project viable.

10:25 a.m.

Liberal

Robert-Falcon Ouellette Liberal Winnipeg Centre, MB

If you ever pick a name, I hope you pick the Louis Riel Canada infrastructure bank. I think that's a beautiful-sounding name, Mr. Chair.

10:25 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Mr. Liepert.

10:25 a.m.

Conservative

Ron Liepert Conservative Calgary Signal Hill, AB

I thought maybe I'd just briefly try to answer Mr. Ouellette's question, that yes, if the federal government guarantees a project with a loan guarantee, and the project goes broke, the infrastructure bank investment of the federal government is at risk.

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Mr. Albas.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC

Again, I'd just like to reiterate our position on the infrastructure bank. We don't feel that it is a necessary piece of infrastructure here in Ottawa. Allocations could simply have been made to P3 Canada.

We certainly understand the motive of the government but we just do not agree that this is the correct mechanism, and I certainly hope that the other place does consider whether this committee process with two hours of testimony...I also know about the infrastructure committee, so we'll give it four hours of testimony coupled with clause-by-clause. I don't feel that's adequate given the amount of investment that will be made, and certainly our votes are going to be against this, bearing in mind that when the previous government decided to invest heavily in infrastructure, when the time came, we did so quickly and efficiently without having to add new bureaucracies here in Ottawa, where the governance questions have been played out in the media multiple times, and with the government not being entirely clear which side it lands on.

We will be voting against the proposal, but I want to thank the professionals who are here today for the work they do for Canadians.

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Mr. Ouellette.

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

Robert-Falcon Ouellette Liberal Winnipeg Centre, MB

Mr. Campbell, what's the difference between the infrastructure bank as it's conceived and P3 Canada?

10:30 a.m.

Chief, Infrastructure, Sectoral Policy Analysis, Economic Development and Corporate Finance Branch, Department of Finance

Niko Fleming

In the functions of the organizations, public-private partnerships are a very useful contracting tool when they're applied carefully and for the right kind of project. They can use private sector incentives to get projects built on time and on budget. That has obvious benefits.

As to their capital structure, however, P3s in Canada primarily involve financing through loans for a portion of the project costs. Those loans ultimately have to be repaid by the government, usually by the municipality that owns the infrastructure. The government heard in its consultations that there was a need to help build more infrastructure than could be paid for by the public purse. The infrastructure bank can bring an additional party for funding projects so that it does not just rest on the three levels of government. This would also free up public funding for other projects including infrastructure that would not have the required revenue streams.

In order to attract that private sector investment and do it in the way that protects the taxpayers, a new institution was needed that would have the right kind of expertise and could be the counterparty for the negotiations with the sophisticated private sector equity investors. That requires a skill set different from the functions of PPP Canada, which are focused on providing advice on structuring a procurement contract involving P3s.

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Mr. Liepert.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Ron Liepert Conservative Calgary Signal Hill, AB

Mr. Fleming, would you not agree that there are multiple P3 projects around the world that are operating, say, with tolls, where the government investment is zero and yet the infrastructure is being built?

10:30 a.m.

Chief, Infrastructure, Sectoral Policy Analysis, Economic Development and Corporate Finance Branch, Department of Finance

Niko Fleming

Yes, there can be projects.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Ron Liepert Conservative Calgary Signal Hill, AB

I'm asking whether there actually are such projects, not whether there can be. Are there currently such projects under way around the world?

10:30 a.m.

Chief, Infrastructure, Sectoral Policy Analysis, Economic Development and Corporate Finance Branch, Department of Finance

Niko Fleming

I believe there are different types of projects.

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Ron Liepert Conservative Calgary Signal Hill, AB

I'm asking a specific question. Are there P3 projects currently operating around the world with no government money—operating by way of tolls and other revenue-returning projects? I'm speaking of projects that are completely privatized, with no government money.

10:30 a.m.

Chief, Infrastructure, Sectoral Policy Analysis, Economic Development and Corporate Finance Branch, Department of Finance

Niko Fleming

There can be projects that operate—

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Ron Liepert Conservative Calgary Signal Hill, AB

No, I didn't ask whether there can be. I'm asking you if there such projects today.

10:35 a.m.

Chief, Infrastructure, Sectoral Policy Analysis, Economic Development and Corporate Finance Branch, Department of Finance

Niko Fleming

I believe there are, but I don't have specific examples.

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

Ron Liepert Conservative Calgary Signal Hill, AB

The answer is yes.

10:35 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Wayne Easter

Okay.

Mr. Albas.

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

Dan Albas Conservative Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC

I'd like you to elaborate. I'm not asking you to say whether the policy choices are correct. First of all, P3 Canada has a specific skill set. The government, however, might have chosen to have an expanded focus to include elements that would encourage more investment, rather than to just get all three levels of government more attuned to private sector investment with P3s. With the proper guidance, legislative changes, and support, P3 Canada could offer many of the same attributes as the infrastructure bank. It was a policy choice, I'm sure, that the government made to go ahead with a completely different crown corporation. Theoretically, though, it would be possible if the government chose to do so. Is that correct?

10:35 a.m.

Assistant Deputy Minister, Canada Infrastructure Bank Transition Office, Office of Infrastructure of Canada

Glenn Campbell

I don't think we're going to comment on hypotheticals. We can explain what's before us in the legislation.