Transport Committee on June 2nd, 2015

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

If you were able to amortize that over 10 years, it starts to become doable, and you're looking at $70 million or $80 million.

Would you agree with me that when you have a gas tax fund which with the GST rebate is roughly $33 billion over 10 years that is given to cities, essentially based on population, so the larger cities get more, it's really the way these infrastructure projects should be funded? It's a fund that's quite certain, a fairly large size—$33 billion, or maybe $53 billion—that goes to you directly to do as you wish. If you have the gas tax fund and some targeted funds, would you agree that's the model we should have, and that indeed it gives you the ability to do some creative work with that?

[Dr. Penny Ballem]

I think the structure of the gas tax fund is very elegant. For municipalities it has provided a level of certainty that allows us to plan in advance. The gas tax coming into the Vancouver region—not the city of Vancouver, because as I said the 23 municipalities in the region funnel the gas tax through to TransLink—amounts to about $122 million to $125 million per year, which is a very important investment.

For the city of Vancouver alone, which constitutes only 25% of our region, to replace our infrastructure it would cost us $20 billion at this point in time. We spend anywhere from $250 million to $300 million a year to rehabilitate our infrastructure. Somebody mentioned that about two-thirds of that is renewal and rehabilitation, and about one-third is new to accommodate growth.

It's just really about the demand. Having the gas tax allows us to plan for that, and in the case of transit, to know it's coming and to work it into our plan.

Targeted funds actually help, and if they're clear and we know what they're targeted for and they're sustained and we know what share could come to us, that actually helps, too.

It's just the different layers of complexity, as we've talked about. For us, in terms of simplifying things, the more they're sustained over time and any specific region has an idea of what they might be eligible for, and then the rules about P3s or not, or how those decisions get made, every layer of those kinds of decisions makes it more complicated. If it's combined with that at the provincial level, it's just very difficult to try to drive a project through. The more the provinces and the federal government are coherent around that and the simpler it is for us to have predictability, I think it has a great result.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

I appreciate the fact that if you have merit-based applications, and we're looking at municipalities and cities, when you look at their core infrastructure they all have needs.

[Dr. Penny Ballem]

That's correct.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Perhaps you might give me your thoughts on that. If you have merit-based only, you might have to go with something that's not necessarily your priority, whereas if you have funding that's just dedicated by population, say, you have that.

Do you wish to comment on that?

[Dr. Penny Ballem]

Yes, I think merit-based is a very important issue and I think how you define merit actually does help. If it's clear from the start what we mean by merit-based and what are the elements that we're going to be assessed on, then at least it's a level playing field and it allows everybody to measure the benefit of a project fairly and equitably across the range.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

I have one final question.

On P3s, which obviously are fairly complex arrangements, do you have a dedicated department or group of people within your organization to specifically deal with that?

[Dr. Penny Ballem]

We have established a platform that cuts across the operational areas and is established in finance to basically undertake the work that's required for P3s. Obviously they differ. The complexity of a P3 differs according to what business you're talking about and what kind of infrastructure, but we're establishing a very strong platform to actually undertake that and to be able to respond.

The only other thing I would add is that ideally we have asset plans that look out many years. The municipal practice around asset management has really improved over the last 15 or 20 years. If we're going to do proper asset maintenance, the certainty of how we're going to fund the replacement in time to make the best of it to in turn benefit our economy is really very critical, and critical to all levels of government and the success of our country.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Mr. Yurdiga, you have the last five minutes.

[David Yurdiga, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

We talked a lot about the transit systems, and I never heard anyone really talk about rural communities outside of major centres. I know one city that actually has a park-and-ride set-up and people outside the community have the ability to drive in, park their vehicle, pay a fee, and utilize the public transit system. It's been very successful whether it's to go to a football game, hockey game or various art programs. There is a need in major centres. If I were going to a major centre and I wasn't familiar with the city, I would use that service, because it would make economic sense for me.

Ms. Ballem, does your city provide that sort of service for people who live outside the city?

[Dr. Penny Ballem]

We have a regional authority for transportation planning and implementation and service delivery, so I'll just ask Mr. Dobrovolny to touch on some of the points you raised.

[Jerry Dobrovolny]

The mayor's council plan is comprehensive in terms of different types of infrastructure and assets for different parts of the region. By that I mean there's a 25% increase in the bus fleet overall. That includes small community shuttles to new and emerging neighbourhoods that are the furthest out in the region. It includes direct buses such as you're referring to like the park and ride and direct buses that connect at transit hubs and then go in. It's scalable in the more suburban rural areas. It's a different type of transit. There are community shuttles, 40-foot buses, and then some direct buses. As you move more into the urban core, there is the rapid transit. There's also four times the increase in funding for roads and for walking and cycling improvements.

In terms of the overall region, between the bus improvements and the rapid transit improvements, over 80% of the population of the region would be within an easy walk of transit, but transit is different in different parts of the region.

I hope that answers your question.

[Dr. Penny Ballem]

We do have quite a number of park-and-ride sites that are accessible. Our region is interesting because it has very dense urban areas, as you know Vancouver does, and it has a lot of agricultural land and communities that are spread out and separated by large tracts of farmland and green space.

[David Yurdiga, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Have the park and rides in your municipality increased your ridership? Are they well utilized? I know the ones I'm familiar with are always busy. They could actually expand them and have more parking available and they would be utilized in even greater numbers.

[Fred Cummings]

I can probably answer that.

Over time the use has increased. We have a large inventory of park and rides in our region that we look after that serve the conventional bus system, the rapid transit system, and our commuter rail system. Over time, a need to expand those has been identified and we're going to continue to do that. They're very price sensitive too, which is an interesting thing about park and ride. You start increasing the price of using those park and rides, and obviously use starts to drop off. There's a very important economics piece that plays into making sure you get the pricing of those facilities right. They won't necessarily pay for the cost of the infrastructure, but you will drive up the use and the integration. We have had increased use of our park and rides over time.

[Dr. Penny Ballem]

I think we have a huge benefit in our region in that our transportation plan, as Mr. Dobrovolny and Mr. Cummings said, is holistic. It is the whole region and many municipalities and all different formats in terms of a transportation system, public transit, and public transportation.

[David Yurdiga, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

That's all I have for now.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Does anybody want to use the rest of his time?

Go ahead, Mr. Mai, for one short question.

[Hoang Mai, NDP, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Perez, you wanted to say something when we were discussing public transportation. I saw you raise your hand and I'm sorry you were not given an opportunity to speak. Maybe you could close with that.

[Lionel Perez]

Thank you, Mr. Mai. I'll take the opportunity to touch on a couple of points.

Just to reiterate, yes, our preference is to have a certain, sustainable, predictable, simple formula for funding.

With respect to the public transport fund, one aspect that was raised was about what kinds of business models, financing models, there are.

One of the things we're looking at is using a fund from pension funds. We currently have a bill at the provincial level, Bill 38, whereby the Quebec government is going to allow the Caisse de dépôt to invest in such projects within the province. Currently it can do so outside of the province, but it can't do it inside our province, so that's something that I think...and we have to ensure that whatever federal funding and subsidies are allowed will allow this model.

On the other element regarding the economic impact, I think it's important to note that for every dollar the federal government invests in infrastructure it gets 20¢ back. It obviously helps the GDP. Also, every single study will tell you, whether it be from the Conference Board of Canada or what have you, that the best way to increase productivity competitiveness is to improve our infrastructure, especially our roads.

I also want to reiterate a lot of the things said by my colleagues from Vancouver.

The other thing, and I'll close with this, is that we really have to continue to see that the funding we've had over the last decade is sustained, that it continues. There's an urgency to react. There is a convergence of interests among all levels of government, whether it be economic, obviously, or infrastructure. This way, obviously, Canadians will all benefit at the end of the day.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you very much.

The lights are flashing. We have votes.

I'd like to thank those of you from Montreal for joining us by video conference.

For those from Vancouver, thank you very much for joining us here live.

The meeting is adjourned.