Transport Committee on Nov. 7th, 2006

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Is there any idea of the timing of this so that the municipalities that are waiting, where the MRIF is already gone in some places...?

[Louis Ranger]

As you know, we were asked to consult throughout the summer. We visited all ten provinces and three territories. We're right in the middle of it now. We have several options under consideration.

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Does the same apply to HBIF as a new program?

[Louis Ranger]

That's correct.

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

To some extent, is it a combination of the old strategic highway program and the Border Infrastructure Fund?

[Louis Ranger]

Well, yes, actually. It's the old BIF, the Border Infrastructure Fund, and the SHIP, the Strategic Highway Infrastructure Program. You could see it that way.

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Okay.

Then, finally, for the Canadian Strategic Infrastructure Fund, I think the money was to flow in 2007. I don't think there was any for 2006. Am I correct in terms of its extension?

[Louis Ranger]

Yes, in terms of its extension, you are correct.

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

If it was announced that the money was to be available in 2007, are we talking about the same timelines? Therefore, provinces and municipalities are looking eagerly at that now and are waiting for the criteria, but that's still not resolved.

[Louis Ranger]

What's extremely helpful in those programs is that the money can be carried forward. In other words, in the budget there actually was money for HBIF, and here we are in November, so that money will be pushed back for future years. Not a penny is lost if we get to the end of the year.

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

It isn't so much that the money would be lost, but if the money isn't spent in, let's say, the next three years, then it makes it hard to make a case for new money in three years. I know that's been a problem in the past. So the government, in taking its time in figuring out how to give it out, buys time in the back end.

[Louis Ranger]

One thing that is interesting is that when you look at past commitments, in infrastructure you are easily working in cycles of four years or five years, by the time you get the engineering design and so on. In fact, from past programs there's still a lot of money. It's all committed, but it's not necessarily spent. So it's not as if there's no money available for next year's construction season. There's quite a bit of money in the pipeline.

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

It's more about when the amount is available notionally, for instance, to New Brunswick, but to all the provinces. Once the money is all committed, the municipalities line up for the next program.

I appreciate that much of the last round hasn't been spent, but as long as it's all committed you can begin the process of allowing people access to the program. They're impatient waiting to get a sense of when that might be, because the money has been made available for MRIF since the budget. It was announced for 2006-07, but they can't get at it because they haven't decided what the criteria are.

[Louis Ranger]

They will very often be impatient, not so much because they have projects in the pipeline for the next construction season, but because a detailed engineering design can easily take a year and they're planning for summer 2008 already.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you.

Mr. Laframboise.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I'd like to come back to Mr. Grégoire. Earlier you told me that you have 140 inspectors who can undertake unannounced safety inspections. This involves places like airports, ports, bridges, tunnels, anything that falls within your mandate, am I correct?

[Marc Grégoire]

The 140 inspectors are working in airports and ports.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

What about bridges and tunnels?

[Marc Grégoire]

In the case of bridges of tunnels, not yet. We are waiting for the bill to be adopted. We do not yet have regulations on bridge and tunnel security. We will be in a position to put in place a regulatory program once the bill on bridges has been enacted.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Perfect. How many ports and airports are they in? Do you know the specifics, or are they all...

[Marc Grégoire]

They go to all airports and ports. Obviously, there are different categories or ports and airports. As for airports, we frequently verify the 89 airports where CATSA, the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority, does the screening, but even among those, resources are clearly allocated, as the minister explained earlier, according to risk assessments.

So in the large airports, that we call class 1 airports in our jargon, in other words in eight Canadian airports, inspectors are always on site, like for example at Pierre-Elliott-Trudeau, in Toronto, Vancouver, and Ottawa. There are always inspectors at these airports. As for small airports, our inspectors conduct occasional visits based on traffic, but mainly based on potential risks.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Despite all of these inspectors who are always on site, you do get caught by journalists, because there are complaints about unsecured zones on the tarmac, etc. That is what you are telling me.

[Marc Grégoire]

If you wish, yes.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

You must not have enough inspectors.

[Marc Grégoire]

No, I do not think that we are short of inspectors. In fact, it is an issue of awareness by the parties involved. Be they tenants in airports or port authorities, a lot of vigilance is required. It is impossible to have enough inspectors to cover all facilities. The awareness of all parties must be raised. Everyone is responsible for security.