Evidence of meeting #24 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was program.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Deputy Minister, Transport Canada
What Mr. Cannon confirmed—I know he said it publicly—is that we have our process to follow, and we do follow that process, but Treasury Board also has its own process and requirements to follow. They carry out their own due diligence, and it's—
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
So are there new criteria or new standards that you're going to be asked to approve now for the release of the funding for Vancouver, Toronto, and Edmonton that heretofore your department has not included?
Deputy Minister, Transport Canada
As I said, we have our own due process, and we'll carry on with that process.
Liberal
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
Okay.
Then we'll go back to Mr. Scott. We're still finishing out the round.
Liberal
Andy Scott Liberal Fredericton, NB
Thank you very much.
Can the gas tax money that goes to the municipalities be used as the municipality's contribution under MRIF? In other words—
Deputy Minister, Transport Canada
You cannot compound the.... I don't know whether that's your question. Is it whether you can combine that money with other programs?
Liberal
Andy Scott Liberal Fredericton, NB
At the end of the day, the reality is the gas tax money is coming to the municipality. I think it is encumbered. There are selected uses. It's a green fund, right?
Liberal
Andy Scott Liberal Fredericton, NB
So if the municipality wanted to, they could use that money to do something that would free up other money that they could then use to do another project under MRIF. There's nothing to preclude that.
Deputy Minister, Transport Canada
Well, strictly speaking, there is a requirement that it be incremental money. Once a year we obtain a report from the provinces on how the money was used, and it's audited. The audit is conducted partly to verify that the money has actually been incremental. We all appreciate that it can be difficult to actually measure that, but that's one of the criteria, that it be incremental.
Liberal
Andy Scott Liberal Fredericton, NB
I ask because there is a large number of small municipalities in the country that have never accessed the Infrastructure Canada program or the MRIF program, because of the lack of capacity themselves to come up with the third. It occurs to me--and I can tell you it occurs to many of these municipalities--that this becomes an innovative way for them to actually be able to participate in the programs that up until now they've not been able to participate in.
Then there was some problem with the fact that they may not be able to use...or if it looked like that's what was happening, there might be some problem with their applications. I would hope that wouldn't be the case. Otherwise they don't have access to a very worthwhile program that they've just not been able to participate in. That would be one.
Are all of the programs under the Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund now being reviewed in terms of the criteria?
Deputy Minister, Transport Canada
They've all been signed now. You're talking about the gas tax now?
Liberal
Andy Scott Liberal Fredericton, NB
Sorry, I'm now talking about the Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund.
Deputy Minister, Transport Canada
Both the gas tax agreement and MRIF agreements have been signed now, so the programs are in place. The only exception is that there is a small portion, which is for first nations, that still needs to be resolved.
Liberal
Andy Scott Liberal Fredericton, NB
What I'm trying to get at is that the reference was made by the minister earlier that these programs were being reviewed. Are all of the programs now subject to that review? Is MRIF, because there was an announcement that it was going to be extended? Is it extended as basically the same program, or is it being reviewed?
Deputy Minister, Transport Canada
No, I think that's what the minister alluded to. As you know, the budget in 2006 did provide money for each of those programs. As we reflected on architecture, if you wish, we assumed there could be some flexibility in how the money is administered. The eligibility criteria also, we believe, could be revisited.
