Transport Committee on Oct. 28th, 2010

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

I give the floor to Mr. Gaudet.

[Roger Gaudet, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

My question is for Mr. Watson. First of all, I would like to congratulate you for your good work. I must, however, mention that you benefited from the Vancouver Olympic Games. That opened the door. In fact, all of the employers were there. The games took place in February 2010, at the beginning of this year. It was therefore easy for them to just go next door in order to be able to do work. I'm very happy about that.

Last week, representatives from Manitoba municipalities came to see us. They told us that if they had had bad weather in August and September, they would have been obliged to ask for an extension. I also congratulate you for the fact that 99% of the projects in the Canadian west will be completed. We still must be cautious, because Vancouver and British Columbia are neither like Quebec nor Ontario. They have a better climate, and they can work almost 12 months a year in some areas. It is more difficult to work during the winter, but in some areas they can work year-round.

I would like to hear your opinion on the fact that some provinces do not have the good fortune to have the same climate.

[Daniel Watson]

I'm very familiar with four provinces, but I do not know the other six very well in that regard. As far as the Olympic Games are concerned, in fact, they represented a very big challenge for us. People were working on this major project. As a result, the smaller million-dollar projects were not of so much interest to them because there were projects that represented tens or hundreds of millions of dollars. The competition from these major projects made it that much more difficult to sign agreements with the municipalities, particularly in British Columbia.

All municipalities were interested in the Olympic Games. Wanting to discuss other smaller projects was sometimes more difficult, because people were saying that the Olympic Games were coming the following year. The Olympic Games involved many workers and a lot of resources. We were very happy to have the Olympic Games, but it was not an advantage within the context of the program. At times, this represented competition, but despite that, I congratulate the communities and municipalities throughout the west, because it was not only in British Columbia. Many people moved often from Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba to Vancouver in order to finish these projects.

At this time last year, many projects were underway.

[Roger Gaudet, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

I agree with you entirely. It does not change the fact that the contractors—let us take the Olympic Games as an example—had completed their projects in October or November of 2009.

Generally speaking, the projects were completed. The Olympic Games took place in February, and the athletes arrived at the beginning of January. The contractors were ready to start work on new projects at the beginning of March. I am happy that the Olympic Games were held in Canada. For you, it was a good barometer as to whether the employers could go and work elsewhere, on something else.

I have been the mayor of a small municipality. A small municipality is not the same thing as a large municipality like Vancouver or Montreal. In the small municipalities, there are no engineers or architects, there's nothing. Therefore, it takes longer and it is more difficult to launch projects than in a big municipality, because we have to make calls for tender in several areas in order to get several projects done. The small municipalities were lucky, they had the advantage of good momentum.

In Manitoba, the municipal representatives told us that because of the good weather in August and September, they were able to complete all of their projects. Had that not been the case, they would have done the same thing as the other provinces and asked for an extension.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Merci, monsieur Watson.

I have to stop there and go to Mr. Bevington.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

And thank you to the witnesses here.

I'm just going to take a bit of time to understand the nature of the changes that were made to environmental assessment for the projects.

Certainly, in the Auditor General's report, she talks about this in some detail, but she doesn't give me a clear understanding of whether the entire economic action plan projects, whether they be Building Canada projects or infrastructure stimulation fund projects, were exempted from environmental assessment.

What's your understanding of the exemptions?

[John Forster]

I'll ask Bryce to respond to your question.

[Bryce Conrad, Assistant Deputy Minister, Programs Operation Branch, Infrastructure Canada]

When the global recession hit in September 2008, in and around that area, Minister Baird, who was then the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, went on a whirlwind tour of the provinces to engage them in discussions as to how we could speed up infrastructure projects.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Okay, but we're not looking for a history lesson; we just want to get the numbers.

[Bryce Conrad]

The temporary regulations that were put in place have now been made permanent, so that's the first point to be made.

The short answer to your question is about 93% of the projects funded under the infrastructure stimulus fund were exempted from having to do a separate federal environmental assessment. It does not speak to the fact that a lot of these projects would have otherwise had to undergo provincial environmental assessments or municipal class assessments, etc.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

That's in her report, but what about the Building Canada fund?

[Bryce Conrad]

Again, the projects under the economic action plan were the ones that were privy to the—

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

And that would include the Building Canada fund?

[Bryce Conrad]

Correct.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

So there would be some pretty large projects that were exempted, then?

[Bryce Conrad]

Not necessarily. Each project was assessed and verified. The regulations are very detailed and specific as to which projects could and could not be exempted.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Well, you know, environmental assessment is an interesting field, and I worked in it for a while. The environment is one part of any environmental assessment, but there are also alternatives and need for the project.

Was there any process that was kept in place that those particular issues could be addressed in terms of any of these projects?

[John Forster]

Maybe I'll just add to that and respond to your question.

The regulations said for certain kinds of projects you're not going to need to do a separate federal environmental assessment. If you're repaving an existing road in downtown Edmonton, the regulations said you're not going to need to do a federal environmental assessment for that. Large projects that are built in Canada, like a brand-new subway line, you're going to do an EA, and we have done those for sure.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

So none of those were exempted that came up during that time?

[John Forster]

No. The regulations talk about the “kinds” of projects. It covers, sir, all of the programs, but it's specific to these kinds of projects where we have demonstrated in the past there are very small or non-existent environmental impacts. We're exempting those.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Hold on, I didn't quite ask you that. I asked you.... In environmental assessments you look at alternatives and you look also at the benefit analysis. Was any of that work done on any of these projects?

[John Forster]

Where we are required to do a federal environmental assessment, i.e., it wasn't exempted under the regulations, we would have followed the environmental act and the law and the process. So we would have done—

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

So there was no other process done to determine whether these projects had a benefit analysis attached to them, so that there was any sort of understanding of the alternatives that could be proposed to these projects?

[John Forster]

It depends very much on the nature of the project. If it's a very minor work, such as a street repaving, it would be exempted under the regulations. If you're doing a larger project, such as twinning a highway or building a brand-new subway line in Toronto, etc., you would go through that analysis.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

How about creating a new access road through a populated area?