Evidence of meeting #24 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was projects.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Harry Nyce  President, Union of British Columbia Municipalities
Hans Cunningham  President, Federation of Canadian Municipalities; and Director for the Regional District Central Kootenay, British Columbia
Brock Carlton  Chief Executive Officer, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
Gary MacIsaac  Executive Director, Union of British Columbia Municipalities
Barbara Steele  First Vice-President, Union of British Columbia Municipalities
Michael Buda  Director of Policy, Federation of Canadian Municipalities

9:30 a.m.

Bloc

Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC

I do not want the standards to be changed. I do not want to change the programs. I do not want the municipalities to be allowed to change the applications that they have made. The applications have been filed, that portion is done. It is rather a matter of finding a way to ensure that the expenses are not covered by the cities alone.

If I understand correctly, Mr. Cunningham, you are saying that all of the work done before the deadline will be paid for, and that everything done afterwards will be paid for by the municipalities alone. Is that indeed your interpretation?

June 15th, 2010 / 9:30 a.m.

President, Federation of Canadian Municipalities; and Director for the Regional District Central Kootenay, British Columbia

Hans Cunningham

Yes, that's it exactly.

9:30 a.m.

Bloc

Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC

All right.

We must find a way. I will say to you that it is not easy. What interests me is the result, not the political fight. The Conservative government has clearly done its homework, but it is the first time we have seen that. Because of the economic recovery, they chose to set a short-term deadline, which is obviously what all levels of government wanted. When one is stimulating the economy, it must be done quickly. However, we must take reality into account.

Mr. Nyce, you said that you would have preferred a case-by-case approach. You have to realize that as far as other programs are concerned, for example the MRIF, people were able to comply with the deadlines, because they were spread over several years. There was no problem, and additional funding was even provided. In this case, there will be no additional amounts. The case-by-case approach will therefore be reserved for individual programs. We are talking about the recreational infrastructure program, the stimulus projects and the pipeline renewal program, that is PRECO.

Also, Mr. Nyce, for the projects that are underway, you would like the government to deal with each one on an individual basis. For those that cannot meet the deadline, you would like them to negotiate with the government right away. Is that what you are asking for?

9:30 a.m.

President, Union of British Columbia Municipalities

9:30 a.m.

Bloc

Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC

All right.

Among the other programs that you have seen in the past, is this the first that imposes deadlines that are difficult to meet? Since these programs have existed, whether they were created by the Liberals or by the Conservatives, is it the first time you have had this problem?

9:35 a.m.

Chief Executive Officer, Federation of Canadian Municipalities

Brock Carlton

Yes, sir. It is true that it is the first time we have been offered a program with a deadline that is so precise. However, it is also the first time we have had a program that is targeting a specific thing, that is to say the economic crisis in Canada. Because the program was launched to counter the crisis, it was decided that it would only be in effect for a short period of time. Therefore, it is the first time in my experience that a program has established such a specific deadline.

9:35 a.m.

Bloc

Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC

It is the first time that we are confronted with a deadline, a timeline that some municipalities cannot meet, for reasons over which they have no control. That must be explained.

Mr. Nyce and Mr. Cunningham, you have presented certain examples. The government must be made to understand that from the perspective of regulation—you referred to Fisheries and Oceans Canada, etc.—it is not easy when the time comes to deal with each case on an individual basis. Sometimes, it is not a question of money but rather one of will. Permits are required, we cannot begin without that. In Quebec, one must have the government's authorization before beginning the work. That is the reality in Quebec. All of the work done beforehand is not paid for by the government. Authorizations are required, and people must understand that.

Do you have any examples?

9:35 a.m.

President, Union of British Columbia Municipalities

Harry Nyce

Yes, I think that's exactly what we're looking at, whereby it's indeed the provincial government as well as a partner that looks at those regulatory processes that need to be met as well.

9:35 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Mr. Bevington.

9:35 a.m.

NDP

Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT

Thanks, Mr. Chair, and thanks to the witnesses. It's very good to have you here. As a former director with the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, I always enjoy having an opportunity to speak with you, or attend your conferences, or do anything with you, because I think you do a fantastic job of representing the communities. But you're here today to try to soften the government on the deadline they have for the completion of these projects, which were set up really as a national priority to deal with an economic downturn.

So this project is a national priority project, which the federal government opened up to communities in order to accomplish national goals. The national goals were to stimulate the economy and to avoid a deep recession. That was the purpose of this project. Had we been stimulating infrastructure projects in communities simply to improve infrastructure, we probably wouldn't have put a deadline on them. That wouldn't have happened, and it would have been done in a more comprehensive fashion, rather than having it on a project-by-project basis. Money would probably have been allocated on a more global basis to all the communities so that they could participate in developing their infrastructure, whichever community has infrastructure needs. I don't think there's one in the country that doesn't.

So that's the situation. Government doesn't want to change the deadline because idealistically they feel this would compromise other communities that didn't try to participate because they couldn't meet the deadlines. The government has that idealistic issue in its head, so it doesn't want to change the deadline. I don't think it's because they want to punish communities. I reject that. I don't think that's really what this government is trying to do here, and what we need to do is convince them that this is not an idealistic issue; it's just a practical issue right now, and other communities will not be put out if the government changes the deadline.

I just want to get your comments on that, both the B.C. Federation of Municipalities and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. How do you think the other communities that didn't participate in the program would feel if the deadline was extended for these communities that have had trouble meeting the deadline? I think that's the nub of what the government has been talking about in the last while.

9:40 a.m.

President, Federation of Canadian Municipalities; and Director for the Regional District Central Kootenay, British Columbia

Hans Cunningham

Thank you, Mr. Bevington.

Actually, our call was for flexibility, not a change in the deadline, per se. With regard to that, I know Mr. Buda has some comments that he would like to make, because I know he studied the situation thoroughly.

9:40 a.m.

Michael Buda Director of Policy, Federation of Canadian Municipalities

Sure. You're right that municipalities didn't receive stimulus funding perhaps because they didn't have projects that could be completed by March 31, 2011; they didn't put them forward knowing that they wouldn't get them done. So there would surely be concern in some of those communities if there is a national or wide-scale extension to the deadline. The same may hold true for the very many municipalities--in fact, the majority of municipalities--that are going to complete their projects by the deadline. Municipalities really struggled last year to find projects that they knew they could do in what for most projects was probably a fairly compressed timeline. They may have made compromises about the types of projects they decided to choose, knowing that they had to try to at least meet this deadline. If there was a change to the deadline, as I said, a sort of global change to the deadline, it would then, of course, throw into question for community members in those municipalities why they hadn't selected another project, and that they should have known they would have more time.

So there is a certain argument to that. That's why we're suggesting that a case-by-case flexibility, where delays weren't within the control of the municipalities, is going to help deal with that issue. In those cases, municipalities put forward projects that they thought they could do with the time they had. Of course, it turned out that they didn't actually have the time that they were going to have.

9:40 a.m.

NDP

Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT

I'm concerned about the overall impression within your organization. Do you feel that the communities support you in this desire for flexibility, that most communities that didn't get projects would understand that there is a need for a flexible completion date for some communities?

9:40 a.m.

Chief Executive Officer, Federation of Canadian Municipalities

Brock Carlton

I'd say two things. One, this has been a discussion that's a policy of the board, so the board has understood the broad perspective of our membership. Secondly, the folks who run municipalities are imminently practical people, and they know that as you get into projects, sometimes things happen. The weather or other reasons cause delays. We're certainly not getting concern from our membership that the flexibility issue is a broad concern in terms of unfairness and that kind of thing.

9:40 a.m.

First Vice-President, Union of British Columbia Municipalities

Barbara Steele

I'd just like to say from my city's point of view--which is Surrey--that we have been very actively involved in this plan and working really hard, and probably have met most of our deadlines, but we really support our neighbours being able to do the same thing. You'd be hard-pressed to drive through Surrey without being stopped by construction somewhere or another and people working. As a local politician, you see the joy of the people working and share the frustration of trying to get someplace because it is so busy. It's a great atmosphere and it has worked extremely well.

We and many of our counterparts in the province definitely support the people who haven't been able to finish. This stimulus program has really done a lot. It's got people working, it's built up some pride, and it's got some projects off the ground. It's been very positive.

I would like to say that those of us who have been working well with it really support the other communities that haven't quite been able to meet the deadlines, just to have the flexibility to be able to do this.

9:40 a.m.

NDP

Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT

Do I have any time here?

9:40 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

No, you're out.

Ms. Brown.

9:40 a.m.

Conservative

Lois Brown Conservative Newmarket—Aurora, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Steele, gentlemen, thank you very much for being here.

I think I want to go back to the issue Mr. Bevington raised, the issue of fairness, if I may.

Mr. Cunningham and Mr. Carlton, I think you were the ones who addressed this. You said that everybody agreed this would be a short-term program. Mr. Flaherty was very clear in the 2009 budget that the economic stimulus plan going into place was to be timely, temporary, and targeted. Everybody agreed that it should be, because it was to create an instant opportunity for jobs in municipalities to keep people who were in their communities working. Construction was going to create those jobs instantly.

I worked for seven years in a drafting office for an engineering company that worked for one of the fastest-growing municipalities in York Region. As a draftsman in that office, I was always tasked with projects that were being looked at by the municipality as viable at some point in their budget. They were doing the environmental assessments. It was an ongoing process, whether it was waste water, an infrastructure project, or a community building. They were part of a wish list that was ongoing. I'm sure your communities have those as well.

I know the municipalities that I represent in Newmarket--Aurora have ongoing wish lists. They are always in the process with the economic development office, in cooperation with their budget office, to know what's doable when and what money is available. When the money became available for economic stimulus, Newmarket--Aurora, both municipalities, had projects ready to go.

With all due respect, Mr. Nyce, I have a little bit of a problem when people talk about the environmental assessments for archeological digs. That can be never-ending, as we know. Likewise, environmental assessments with Fisheries and Oceans are not short-term projects. Those are ones where I think we expect they are going to be protracted because of the nature of them. With an archeological dig, you never know what you're going to encounter, unlike doing an assessment for putting in a water pipe or redoing a road that needs to be redone.

Getting back to the issue of fairness, my question would be this. There are many communities that have had these projects, have applied for the money, and have been able to do the projects and get them done. I look at some of the ones where I have done announcements on behalf of ministers not in my community, but in ridings around me, in Vaughan, in Richmond Hill, and in Toronto. I did announcements and subsequently have done ribbon cuttings for subsidized housing units. In Aurora, there was a waste water project. In Newmarket, the old town hall renovation, which is under construction and will be completed by the deadline, is something that qualified for the economic action plan. In Scarborough, I did the ground-breaking for a community centre not three weeks ago. Their community centre is going to be done by March 31. Probably one of the most spectacular ones I did was in the riding of Etobicoke--Lakeshore, where the opposition leader is the member. Humber College made an application for money for their new drama centre, which has been completed in the space of about six months.

So when these projects are doable--when they are doable--how is this fair to communities who have stepped up to the plate, who have undertaken a project, have gotten it done, and they're ready to undertake more should the opportunity rise...?

Any comment on those?

9:45 a.m.

President, Federation of Canadian Municipalities; and Director for the Regional District Central Kootenay, British Columbia

Hans Cunningham

I certainly agree with what you've said; however, sometimes things are beyond the community's control. Ontario was able to get under way quite early, and that's good because it gives them a leap. In B.C., because of the provincial election, we actually didn't even get the first announcements out until September, which is one season past.

9:45 a.m.

Conservative

Lois Brown Conservative Newmarket—Aurora, ON

Mr. Cunningham, if I could just interject for a moment, though, you've given us a list of 72 projects and some of them are 100% complete. Obviously a provincial election didn't interfere with the ability of some communities to get some projects done. I find that a bit of a red herring. These projects that you've given us are 100% complete. So I don't know how that intervention of a provincial election could have been the interference with other projects.

9:45 a.m.

President, Federation of Canadian Municipalities; and Director for the Regional District Central Kootenay, British Columbia

Hans Cunningham

Thank you for that. You are correct, of course, that the vast majority of projects are well underlined and complete, and for that I think we're all very happy. But that's not the case for all of them, and that's where we're asking for flexibility.

9:50 a.m.

Chief Executive Officer, Federation of Canadian Municipalities

Brock Carlton

If I could just add, for example, there are situations, let's say, in northern Alberta, where the weather and the transition from winter to summer meant the roads were not usable for a certain period of time. So construction equipment couldn't get into sites and projects are behind. I don't think people in Aurora or southern Ontario would be upset about the reality that the folks in northern Alberta are facing a challenge because of something beyond their control such as weather.

If I can just finish--

9:50 a.m.

Conservative

Lois Brown Conservative Newmarket—Aurora, ON

We face the same kind of weather conditions. There are certain times when we cannot--

9:50 a.m.

Liberal

Gerard Kennedy Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON

A point of order.

9:50 a.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Mr. Kennedy, on a point of order.