Transport Committee on Oct. 24th, 2011

[Gregory Thomas]

I'm saying that in order to achieve density, the real costs in driving huge distances have to be captured. We have gridlock in a place like Toronto because that massive system of freeways costs nobody anything to get on and to get off, except their time and their lives. We don't have road pricing, as it were, except on the 407.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Okay, fair enough.

Does anybody on this side have another question? I could defer my time.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I'm going to go to Mr. Albas.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I want to say thank you to our witness for coming today.

I understand that one of my former council colleagues--he served a different municipality--Jordan Bateman, has joined your organization. Certainly he has spoken to me a few times about some of the different challenges the municipalities have, so you have a great advocate on the west coast.

My questions today are related more towards the study that we've been developing. A number of issues that have been brought up are specific to infrastructure. I was hoping you could answer a couple of questions. Based on your earlier speech, I think I have the general tone, but I'd still like some basic answers from your organization's viewpoint.

Organizations such as the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and the Canadian Urban Transit Association have called for the federal government to dedicate an additional cent of excise tax towards a dedicated fund for transit capital investments. Would your group be supportive of this proposal?

[Gregory Thomas]

No. No, we would strongly oppose that. We think the FCM's collective track record is just absolutely abysmal.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

So you believe the case they make that they are underfunded by property taxes is more due to the political decisions they've made rather than to a legitimate argument?

[Gregory Thomas]

Yes.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Okay.

What is your organization's reaction to the government's commitment towards a new long-term infrastructure plan, as announced in budget 2011?

[Gregory Thomas]

We believe necessary infrastructure in the federal jurisdiction should be justified, debated, and examined on a project-by-project basis. We reject Keynesianism in all its forms. Generally speaking, we don't think the solution to a debt crisis is more debt. We were opposed to the last economic action plan on the whole--not to say that there wasn't good stuff in it.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

For example, you would be more supportive towards a strategic thing like an interprovincial port or something that was key to the economic framework and allowed goods, services, and people to be able to move smoothly. Is that correct? Would you support more of a wider focus than just going from one municipality to another?

[Gregory Thomas]

Yes, and we also believe that the existence of these federal funds in some ways inhibits necessary transit and infrastructure developments, because provinces and cities honestly believe that if they wait long enough and scream loud enough, the federal government will ride to their rescue and throw money that has nothing to do with federal jurisdiction at local projects.

You get something like the Evergreen line in Vancouver, which is just waiting for more federal money to be thrown at it. It would have been built long ago if the cities and the province had had a realistic vision that Ottawa would say no, would continue to say no, and would sit out that project.

I don't think the feds need to bankroll every infrastructure project in the country. They call it a partnership, but if you look at it realistically, it's not how Canada was organized. Ottawa should stick to its knitting. The provinces should stick to theirs.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Yes, well, often when someone calls for “leadership”, I think it's actually funding that they're calling for.

Getting back to it again, can you give us an example of what kinds of projects you think are things that the federal government should stick to? You said that the provinces should stick to their knitting and so should the federal government. Can you give me an example of things that you think would be supported by your group?

[Gregory Thomas]

Sure. We support port developments, the St. Lawrence Seaway, Great Lakes transportation infrastructure, fighter jets, the things that are clearly within the... Northern development....

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

Okay. You mean things that are directly within our jurisdiction and have an economic impact or that at least relate back to National Defence. Is that right?

[Gregory Thomas]

Yes.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan—Coquihalla, BC]

All right.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate it.

I thank you again for your full presentation today.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

We'll go to Mr. Nicholls.

[Jamie Nicholls, NDP, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Thomas, you were in the investment business for 20 years. You're a graduate of a faculty of business in finance and economics. You managed investments for two chartered banks. When you managed those investments, did you look at the information from other banks, or did you work in a silo and just look at your own bank?

[Gregory Thomas]

No, some of the other banks' research analysts were the top-rated ones, so their's was research I read.

[Jamie Nicholls, NDP, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Okay, wonderful.

Normally you would think that we would disagree with everything the CTF says; however, I also look for points where we can come together. Certainly I could agree with the CTF that we should abolish corporate welfare and that the government needs to ease up on the secrecy and stonewalling they've been doing.

You were in the investment business, and you should know that investments for infrastructure, such as public transit capital, improve productivity in economies by freeing up roads from single-user cars. You talked about congestion. If you had an improved public transit system, you would see less congestion.

To get back to the points on which we might agree with the CTF, in talking about the economic action plan, some of the members of your federation said that much of the so-called stimulus money was funnelled to pet projects that probably won't lead to higher economic growth but certainly will add to the deficit and debt, which means higher taxes in the future. We can certainly see that one of the members spending $50 million in taxpayer dollars on his personal pet projects would probably be something your organization would disagree with.

Another point on which we might agree was that another member mentioned that the federal government--

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Watson.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

In fairness, it's an interesting line of questioning, but I'm not sure it relates to a national public transit strategy.

[Jamie Nicholls, NDP, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

I'm getting there, Mr. Chair.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

I would hope that you would get there now.