Evidence of meeting #30 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

Yaprak Baltacioglu  Deputy Minister, Department of Transport
John Forster  Associate Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada
Daniel Watson  Deputy Minister, Western Economic Diversification Canada
Bryce Conrad  Assistant Deputy Minister, Programs Operation Branch, Infrastructure Canada

October 28th, 2010 / 11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Lois Brown Conservative Newmarket—Aurora, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I just want to first of all report, Minister, on a project that has been completed in my riding, and I want to compliment the Newmarket curling club for their effectiveness in getting this done. They applied for money to increase the size of the curling club. They are on time--in fact, earlier than expected--and on budget.

They were determined not to lose a season of curling, and they now have a facility that is going to be a revenue-generating facility for them, as they will be able to host provincial bonspiels. I want to commend them; I was there at the opening last Saturday.

My question revolves around the economic stimulus that we've seen and the economic action plan. You spoke in your remarks about the need to integrate different modes of travel--that's what your reference was to. But what I've heard from my constituents is how, through this economic action plan, they have seen three levels of government come together on projects to get things stimulated in the economy and get these projects done. They've been very happy to see their tax dollars at work and a cooperation between various levels of government.

You also referenced the Building Canada fund. My question is this: with this new cooperative spirit that we have experienced, is there room for us to now have a long-term discussion about infrastructure projects across Canada, to do an assessment on a go-forward basis?

We saw Advantage Canada put in place four years ago by this government, which is really a long-run business plan for the country. Is this something we can build on because of our experience with the economic action plan?

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Chuck Strahl Conservative Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC

Thank you.

First, my congratulations as well to the Newmarket curling club. I think it shows that when curling is at stake, no rock will go unturned.

11:55 a.m.

Voices

Oh, oh!

11:55 a.m.

Conservative

Chuck Strahl Conservative Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC

Anyway, congratulations to them. We've seen many of those examples coming in ahead of time. That's great news, and congratulations.

In November, for example, there will be a discussion, by mostly big city mayors. It's being held in Saskatoon. The mayor of Saskatoon has called a meeting. A lot of the big city mayors are going to be there to talk about exactly what you're talking about: What's the long-term strategy? How do we work together?

Transport Canada will have representation there to observe what's going on. I have also talked to the FCM. While the FCM is supportive, they understand it's not just a big city issue. They're saying maybe we should think bigger than the big cities, and I concur. Infrastructure is important in big cities, but it's equally as important in small towns. While our needs may be different, infrastructure investment of all kinds needs long-term planning.

I think they're on to something. The provinces already do this. They develop a long-term plan already; they have identified their needs. And they are typically the ones that have to determine that jurisdictionally.

We're a funding agent, but we're not picking the priorities. We're helping. We're observing. We're giving our experience in best practices and what's working elsewhere in the country. So we can contribute to that.

To get back to your first point, I think that discussion is already happening. I think it will happen more, and I think it's a good discussion. I think the lesson for all of us is on the cooperative side. Regardless of individual projects or whether you like the signage or not, what taxpayers like to see in between elections is people downing their political tools and showing they can work together. When you do that, everybody benefits.

In fact some of the early friction, when people were trying to find their way, soon disappeared. Each jurisdiction found out--all of us found out, I'm not picking on anyone here--that the taxpayers were saying get that behind you, we've got a crisis on our hands, all three governments work together. If there's something to be learned in that, I think we should take note. All of us should do that. We'll have an electoral fight when we need to, but let's do the necessary infrastructure investment while we can.

Even better than that is the experience we've had with the gateways. The gateway experience, and I can speak most closely about the Asia-Pacific gateway, is not only three levels of government, it's regional governance, port authorities, railways, airports, private sector, highways people, truckers associations. It's everybody sitting around a table as big as this saying it's not just about money; it's about fluidity and how we keep this line moving.

When I was in China, the word that came back from everybody, from the chairman of Costco, to some of the biggest companies in the world, was that they know when they ship...even if they're going to Chicago, it's two to three days quicker to go through Canada than the United States of America. That's because they appreciate what's happening on the Asia-Pacific gateway.

Again, that's not attributed to just one government; it's a full court press of every private and public sector possible saying what's the quickest way to get a container to Chicago and what can we do as part of that? That why the business community and overseas investors say they need to do business with Canada.

You show me that and we'll be there in spades.

Noon

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Thank you, Minister. I thank you for being here today.

We're going to recess for five minutes while we transfer from TV back to the regular committee meeting. Then we'll ask the officials to come forward.

Thank you for your attendance today.

12:10 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Welcome back, everyone.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we are studying the impact of the Government of Canada's deadline of March 31, 2011, for completion of projects under the infrastructure stimulus fund and the recreational Infrastructure Canada program.

Joining us for the second half, from Infrastructure Canada, we have Mr. John Forster, associate deputy minister, and Bryce Conrad, assistant deputy minister. Joining us from Western Economic Diversification Canada, we have Daniel Watson, deputy minister, and Cathy Matthews, director general, finance and management accountability.

Mr. Watson, I understand you have a brief presentation, and then we'll go to questions and answers. Please begin.

12:10 p.m.

Daniel Watson Deputy Minister, Western Economic Diversification Canada

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'm pleased to be here today to discuss Western Economic Diversification Canada's work at implementing Canada's economic action plan and activities in western Canada over the last 18 months. I am joined today by my colleague, Cathy Matthews, our deputy chief financial officer for the department.

As you know, Western Economic Diversification Canada, or WD as we're known, is the regional development agency responsible for the four western provinces.WD's primary mandate is to promote economic growth, development and diversification in western Canada.

In addition to our core programs, our department has also been responsible for delivering a number of federal adjustment programs in western Canada on behalf of the Government of Canada over a lengthy period of time.

WD has developed strong relationships with provincial, regional, and municipal bodies and a range of community organizations that played an extremely valuable role when it came to delivering Canada's economic action plan.

Just like other regions across Canada and countries around the world, western Canada was hit hard by the recent economic downturn. Many communities had the misfortune of seeing their major employers reduce their operations and in some cases shut down completely. The economic events of 2008 were unprecedented and proved to be the challenge of our time.

As you know, the Government of Canada responded to the global financial crisis with the announcement of Canada’s economic action plan on January 27, 2009.

Immediately following the January 27 announcement, WD began work in earnest on program design, operational and delivery aspects of the programs.

By mid-May, WD launched the community adjustment fund and recreational Infrastructure Canada program, sometimes known as RInC, in western Canada with calls for proposals.

To ensure all Western Canadians were informed, all EAP program information was made available on the public website, regional staff engaged in dialogue with provincial governments and held numerous outreach activities with partners, communities and a number of organizations across the west.

The volume of applications was significant. By the June deadline, WD had received over 1,600 applications for the RInC program, requesting in excess of over $400 million in federal funding, almost triple the allocation we had available.

At the same time, WD processed over 1,000 CAF applications, requesting in excess of $2 billion in funding--again roughly six times the allocation we had available--and approved 314 projects that will use all available project funds for western Canada.

Consistent with the objectives and guidelines established for CAF and the RInC program, WD'S due diligence not only ensured projects met all eligibility requirements, but also focused on guaranteeing projects could start quickly and create jobs, while meeting the March 31, 2011 timeframe of the Economic Action Plan.

Through the exceptional contributions of staff, these projects were evaluated and by June we were already starting to announce funding commitments.

If I use the word “exceptional”, and it's not something I use on a regular basis, I simply say it because in comparison to the economic action plan, WD processed approximately 10 times the number of applications that we would typically see in a normal year.

That means that less than six months after this program was announced, western communities were already seeing the benefits.

Communities began receiving the much-needed support to improve recreational infrastructure across the west. But perhaps most important of all, jobs were being created and people were getting back to work. In fact, if you look at the project reports that people send in to us, our clients forecast nearly 3,000 full-time-equivalent jobs will be created or maintained as a result of RInC projects in the west. We'll confirm those numbers as time goes on and fit them into the modelling that is going to be developed. But we did ask the clients as they were developing those things, and those are the numbers they tell us.

Since then, our department has continued to work extremely hard to deliver RInC program funding to the communities that need it most.

To date, under the RInC program, WD has approved over $149 million in funding for 718 approved projects. Our RInC investments have leveraged an additional $415 million from other sources towards western communities. This leverage funding, which would not otherwise have been invested, particularly in the economic context we've been through in the last year and a half in these communities, is particularly important in the context of this economic climate.

More than 200 of these projects are already complete and over $55 million has already been expended.

To date, the RInC program has helped approximately 440 communities across the west, communities ranging from the Pacific Ocean to Hudson's Bay. Funding has already reached communities like Winnipeg, where RInC has helped replace the fields at the Winnipeg Soccer Complex. The upgrades are increasing the number of games that can be played each day, and as a result of this project the complex is a more attractive venue to hold national and international events. The official grand opening of the Winnipeg Soccer Complex was held on September 25, 2010. And in communities like New Westminster, British Columbia, where funding helped upgrade and expand the Century House Centre for Active Living to better serve the community, added amenities and a 4,000-square-foot addition will allow the centre to introduce new multi-generational activities.

The grand opening of this renovated centre just last month had over 200 people in attendance—a sign that this facility really will bring the community together.

These are just some of the examples of how RInC funding is being delivered in communities across the west.

On the issue of winding down these stimulus programs, the Government of Canada has always been clear this funding will end on March 31, 2011. This was an explicit term that was part of all public materials, our project funding decision process, and our contribution agreements with proponents.

WD will continue to work with proponents to ensure that the projects will finish on time. In our opinion, most of the projects will finish on time. I would even add that the vast majority will do so.

We have monitored projects closely, we have maintained close contact with proponents throughout this timeframe, and our analysis suggests we can anticipate 94% to 96% of the funding will be delivered on target. In reference to other programs we deliver on a usual basis, this is a very high standard of achievement. We will continue to monitor the progress of these projects closely, as we have done throughout the process, and we will continue to provide regular reporting and accounting to our ministers and to Parliament.

In addition, I would also like to note, we are continuing our work with our colleagues at this table from Infrastructure Canada to ensure Building Canada Fund—Communities Component top-up projects in western Canada also finish on time.

To summarize, we have worked closely with proponents throughout the program's life to ensure they stay on track. We anticipate 94% to 96% of the funding will be delivered on target. Nearly 3,000 full-time-equivalent jobs will be created or maintained, we're told by our project proponents, as a result of RInC projects that touch approximately 440 communities across western Canada.

We are making a difference in the lives of western Canadians in these communities.

Thank you for your time this afternoon. I look forward to your questions.

Merci.

12:20 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Thank you very much.

Mr. McCallum.

12:20 p.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

Thank you.

Perhaps this is to Mr. Forster, or whomever of you feels it's appropriate to answer.

I'd like to follow up a bit on my questions to the minister, because I honestly don't really understand the downside of a blanket extension at this time. I fully appreciate and support the deadline in the first place. But now that we're close to the end of the construction season...if a blanket extension would give certainty to municipalities for their planning, it would reduce the amount of overtime and competition for materials and bidding up of prices; it would still likely be a period of high unemployment where stimulus was a good idea. What's the downside? What's the negative in terms of this alternative?

12:20 p.m.

Associate Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada

John Forster

I think the minister presented the government's view on the deadline. The original program was for a two-year period. The stimulus was to be temporary and targeted. We think the deadline was very important, to make sure that projects actually got built in that timeframe. In some of our other programs, where you don't have a deadline, things can tend to go on. He has indicated that the vast majority of projects--and it's the same with Daniel's experience with RInC in western Canada--are in good shape and will be finished in time for the deadline. There is still almost a quarter of the program to go.

We're monitoring projects very closely, as is Daniel, to see how they're finishing. We're working and showing flexibility to replace projects or re-scope projects to help our partners finish by the deadline. The minister pretty much outlined the government's position at this time on the deadline.

12:20 p.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

Okay. I won't continue on that subject.

Let me shift to another subject, which is jobs. I was concerned that the information on jobs was so poor, in the sense that the Auditor General said different departments use different definitions, that the numbers were not terribly reliable, and she used words like “anecdotal”. So in contrast to signs, where there was meticulous detail, it seems that concerning the jobs, which is really what the program was for, we still don't have a clear picture of how many jobs were created or saved under this program. Why is that? Is that the case, and if so, why was more effort not expended to get accurate information on job creation?

12:25 p.m.

Associate Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada

John Forster

Maybe I'll start and then Daniel can add to it.

The government is obviously very interested in jobs and the impacts of the economic action plan. As the minister indicated this morning, the plan is much more than just infrastructure. There are tax credits. There are training programs. There are a number of initiatives.

There are a couple of ways...and I think the job impact was presented in the last report to Parliament tabled in the House. There was a whole chapter there. The Department of Finance is leading the analysis across the government on the entire job impact of the economic action plan. The report indicates that there can be challenges if you try to do it on a project-by-project basis and then add up all the numbers, for a number of reasons, such as consistency and interpretation. Again, you're not going to get part of the action plan that is not project-based. As well, you're not going to capture indirect and induced jobs. I may be able to ask my contractor how many people he hired, but he's going to have no idea how many jobs were created by the asphalt company, by the person who built the sewer pipes, by the truck driver who delivered them. So you don't get a complete picture.

The government's approach was to do modelling. That analysis was presented in the last report, and actually we appeared with Finance last year at the government operations committee, where they explained and presented it.

I don't know if you want to add anything on your side.

12:25 p.m.

Deputy Minister, Western Economic Diversification Canada

Daniel Watson

I'll add something, if I may. I'd say pretty much the same thing that my colleague had to say. I refer to some numbers here. Those are the ones that the proponents tell us, but they don't tell us how many people were employed at the lumber store to sell them the lumber or the other materials to do these things.

There is another very interesting thing we can't count here. A number of the communities that we have supported, as you can imagine, are small communities in rural areas. In a bunch of cases you can tell--by the power savings reductions that they're looking at and by the upgrades they're doing--that for a small municipality, it's got to be a choice between keeping the system or facility going and not keeping it going for some years into the future. Having visited a number of these places, I'm quite convinced that without some of these upgrades, in some cases they would have had to close down. How you calculate the employment per facility that doesn't shut down is one of things we just can't do at this point in time, but there are models for trying to figure those things out.

In the short term, obviously the goal was to get people directly employed in replacing cooling and heating systems and stuff like that, and in the longer term to figure out the right modelling for exactly the number of jobs that will be created, indirectly and directly, as my colleague pointed out.

I will briefly go back to the question of the March 31 deadline. Obviously I can't speak as the minister could to the public policy choice there, but what I will say is that proponents have worked extraordinarily hard to make sure they will be done by March 31. They've taken us at our word that the date will be March 31. We've written it into agreements; they seem to honour those agreements and they expect us to as well.

One of the things we have heard an awful lot is that as people have done extra work and rearranged things, re-scoped things, and so on, they've said very directly to us, “We're going to a lot of effort here to make sure this happens; we want to make sure that you're being straight with us that the date is March 31.” As we've talked to them about that, they've relied on that information. I think the results are pretty clear in the fact that we expect 94% to 96% of the money to be spent with the current deadline.

12:25 p.m.

Liberal

John McCallum Liberal Markham—Unionville, ON

Okay. Thank you.

12:25 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Go ahead, Monsieur Guimond.

12:25 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My question is for Mr. Forster.

As the Associate Deputy Minister of Infrastructure Canada, do you acknowledge that the province experiencing the most difficulties in completing the projects today is Quebec?

12:30 p.m.

Associate Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada

John Forster

First of all, let me say that Quebec has been a very good partner with us in rolling out this stimulus program, as have all the provinces and the municipalities. As the minister indicated this morning, we have some information on the status of projects in Quebec, but it's not a complete picture. He's been in discussions with his provincial colleague on that matter, and when we have more information on the status of projects there, we'll be able to give a better picture of where the program is.

12:30 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC

I'm referring to a very good article that appeared in today's Le Soleil, Thursday, October 28, 2010. This is a Canadian Press article found on page 33. The article talks about the fact that the Parliamentary Budget Officer estimated that nearly 1,000 projects receiving federal funding may not be completed by March 31.

Is the Parliamentary Budget Officer correct or has he made a mistake?

12:30 p.m.

Associate Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada

John Forster

We've worked very closely with the Parliamentary Budget Officer in providing him with data and information. The report on which that number is based was using data as of the end of March 31. He was using data from last year and didn't capture any of the huge--as you know, if you travel in this country and through cities--the incredible amount of construction that was taking place this summer. We provided him with some more recent information lately. As we get it and clean it up, we provide it to him regularly.

He was also doing estimates of what he felt the worst-case scenarios were. I'm not sure we would agree with the methodology on some of the scenarios. We've just provided him with some more recent information.

12:30 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC

In that same Canadian Press article, in the last paragraph, it states that some provinces have suggested that the unspent funds be put into a trust account and that the provinces be allowed to spend it on problematic projects after the federal deadline.

Could you tell us which provinces made those suggestions? Is the article consistent with the truth? Is it true that some provinces suggested the money be placed in a trust fund? If so, which provinces?

12:30 p.m.

Associate Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada

John Forster

There are a number of options on how you could do it. We have received suggestions from provinces that should the government wish to extend it, you could.

12:30 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC

Which provinces? You are not answering the question. The Rideau Canal is not yet open, we cannot skate on it yet. I asked a specific question: what provinces made those suggestions?

12:30 p.m.

Associate Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada

John Forster

There was a letter provided by the Premier of Manitoba on behalf of provinces, all of them, following the last meeting of the Council of the Federation, requesting the federal government to consider extending the deadline, which the government is doing. In there they've suggested you could extend the deadline; you could do a trust fund arrangement. There a number of mechanical options on how you could do it.

12:30 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Guimond Bloc Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC

Who are you discussing the Quebec projects with? Who is your counterpart? Are you speaking to the Deputy Minister of Municipal Affairs, Regions and Land Occupancy for Quebec? Who are you speaking to?

12:30 p.m.

Associate Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada

John Forster

We are working with several Quebec ministries. My counterpart in Quebec is the Assistant Deputy Minister of Finance for Quebec. We are also working with several ministries, such as the Ministry of Municipal Affairs, Regions and Land Occupancy of Quebec, the Quebec Ministry of Transport and the Ministry of Culture, Communications and the Status of Women in Quebec. Those are the ministries with which we are working.