Thank you for the question.
Let me make a couple of points.
First of all, regarding taxes, these are not always federal tools; in some cases these are provincial tools, provincial costs. The aviation fuel tax, which will rise to, I believe, 6.7%, will make Ontario the most heavily fuel-taxed jurisdiction for international flights in North America. I'm happy to be corrected on that point, but that is my understanding—when it rises to its full scope.
I would note that this does add to the cost of travel. Perhaps Toronto can bear it—that's the theory—but I would commend to this committee a Conference Board of Canada study that shows a great number of flights with a value of about $200 million now going to U.S. border airports because of the cost of travel. Particularly those people who have more time, let's say the family traveller, such as my husband and me, perhaps travelling with two children, might have the time on our holiday to travel down to a U.S. border airport and fly down somewhere in the southern United States, whereas a business traveller may decide that the full end costs are worth it to go to Toronto.
I would note that British Columbia, in implementing its revenue-neutral carbon tax, chose not to act in this particular area, again, worried about the disincentive that it would provide between Washington and the Vancouver airport in British Columbia. I think that was a smart decision, because we want to keep that business activity in Canada.
The second point is on infrastructure. I think you make an excellent point about examining airports inside the full logistics network of Canada. The Canadian Council of Chief Executives recently released a report called “Made in North America”, improving our North American relationship, specifically with the United States and Mexico, our primary trading partners. We recommended a review of the North American logistic system, which includes connectivity between airports, and then into our major highways and ports. And it depends on the cargo. I know that many of our Canadian Council of Chief Executives members with high-value but low-density cargo—for example seafood products, biopharmaceuticals, chemical products—do want to ship by air and in many cases are getting over the U.S. border and then using U.S. airports, again because of costs.
Taking a look at that again, I think this government did a fantastic job on the Asia gateway initiative, our port in Halifax. We have excellent assets there. But taking a look at how that connects globally, I would also point out that when it comes to the facilitation of business travellers, mass transit, connectivity into airports remains an issue. Toronto has to be one of the only airports in the world, Jay, that a business traveller goes into and cannot take a public transit option, and that's about to change. We're thrilled to see the federal and provincial governments aligned on creating that kind of infrastructure.
Again, regarding Vancouver, I would argue you shouldn't have to win the Olympics to get mass transit to your airport. You shouldn't have to get the Pan Am Games, which has become, somehow, part of the narrative as to why that connectivity piece was put into place in Toronto. These are our largest cities. To have that connectivity is a huge part of Canada's global value proposition to attract investment and business travellers. Let's not make it so you have to win some international sporting competition—with due respect to anyone who wins a gold medal—to get mass transit that makes sense for cities.
It's an excellent question. I think that's another area for study to commend to this group.