Transport Committee on Dec. 6th, 2018

[Matt Jeneroux]

Under your opening comments, Minister, you state that in the Canada Infrastructure Bank you freed up grant funding. I don't think you necessarily freed it up. I'll give you a chance to rephrase that.

There's the $5 billion you took from the investing in Canada plan under public transit systems. You took $5 billion from trade and transportation corridors. You took $5 billion from green infrastructure projects. There's now $15 billion that is sitting in the Infrastructure Bank. You've mentioned that you built one project in Montreal, which was a reannouncement of what the Prime Minister announced back in June of 2017.

First, I don't see how that's freeing up money. That's just moving money around. Secondly, the Infrastructure Bank, for which you trumpet so much success in your opening comments, I think across the country, has been referred to as anything but. I've heard it called a disaster and a debacle. I'm hoping you can comment on why this infrastructure money isn't flowing.

Quite frankly, it's not freeing up anything. It's just moving money around at this point.

[François-Philippe Champagne]

I'm very happy to answer that question. I think the Infrastructure Bank is another tool in our tool box to deliver better and faster for Canadians.

We obviously don't talk to the same people. I used to be trade minister, and I can tell you that investors around the world were looking to crowd in investment in Canada. For the Infrastructure Bank, like you said, the first project was the REM in Montreal. It was allowed to give a loan to get that project going, which is going to transform public transit in the city.

I can reassure the member that I speak with the CEO of the bank, although it's an independent entity in its management and investment decisions. I talk to the CEO regularly. They are currently looking at more than a few dozen projects. They have had, I would say, hundreds of conversations across the country with community leaders and representatives of territorial and provincial governments.

For me, it's about doing more. It's making sure that we have more money available to deliver across the country. The bank is allowing us, for example—

[Matt Jeneroux]

You're just moving money around, Minister. That's all it is. It's the investing in Canada plan. You've moved money from there to the Infrastructure Bank.

On the REM project, was it or was it not a reannouncement from a previous announcement?

[François-Philippe Champagne]

I would say no, and I would correct my colleague in a sense. The fact that the bank has provided the loan is freeing up investments that would be otherwise taken from the public transit allocation that Quebec had.

For me, to have been able to attract investors like the Infrastructure Bank to this project is a great thing. It's going to allow us to do more. I can tell the member that we're looking at interties, and we're looking at other light rail transit systems across the country. I think we should celebrate that. Canada was one of the few G7 countries not having an infrastructure bank—

[Matt Jeneroux]

Nothing is getting built, Minister.

[François-Philippe Champagne]

—and having that is another great tool to deliver for Canadians.

[Matt Jeneroux]

But nothing's getting built with the Infrastructure Bank, Minister.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you, Minister.

We'll move on to Mr. Badawey.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for being here this morning.

Minister, first of all, I do have to express my appreciation for the over $300 million that you have afforded my riding over the past few years, in terms of the infrastructure work that's been done. Of course, that alleviates the financial burden on those who pay property taxes, but also it enhances diverse business planning within many sectors of our business community. In partnership with the business communities, our municipalities are looking at sustainable funding envelopes to satisfy community improvement planning and community improvement strategies but also at aligning those investments for better returns on those investments for, once again, enhancing the overall structure of the community as well as the different sectors that are part of the community.

Mr. Minister, can you speak on some of the sustainable funding envelopes that are being made available for both communities and the businesses within them?

[François-Philippe Champagne]

Thank you very much for the question.

What we have done, which is truly transformational in this country, is to provide stability and predictability in the funding for municipalities. The FCM called it a game-changer. I know the member comes from municipal government, so he well understands what it is to be able to plan infrastructure. I keep saying that when we take money and put it in infrastructure, we invest, because by definition, that goes more than a fiscal cycle. It is for 10, 15 or sometimes even 100 years ahead.

I would say that the $180 billion we have provided is really a game-changer. It's historic in our country. If you look at the stream of investment we have decided on, for me public transit is key. Not only does it afford more mobility so that people can spend more time with their families and friends, since commuting is essential in our communities today, but also the green infrastructure stream is really in line with our values. I think Canadians understand today that we want 21st-century infrastructure, which is green, resilient and modern. The social stream is allowing us to bring Canadians together in the community centres that people want to see across Canada. Trade and transportation are very much linked to the 1.5 billion consumers that we have access to now through our various trade agreements. Making sure our goods go to market is essential. Finally, the rural and northern communities stream is allowing us to take into account the particular needs of communities across Canada.

I would say to my colleague that, indeed, what we are doing, especially with the integrated bilateral agreement—which provides funding over 10 years to communities, and they understand where we want to invest—is to fix the framework, but we let communities decide what is best for them in terms of specific projects.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

With respect to meeting what I call the “triple bottom line”—economy, social, environment—in working with municipalities, do you find that the investments you are making are more from a whole-of-government approach and are not just siloed in different ministries, and that those investments are aligning with strategies coming from, say, the departments of transport, environment, or family and children services, and things of that nature?

[François-Philippe Champagne]

Yes, it's key. We have put the framework together, as I said, with objectives such as increasing mobility within communities across Canada and reducing our greenhouse gas emissions, but the way to do it....

Phase one of our program was an asset-based program. The second phase is based on outcome. I think the streams we have developed leave all the flexibility for communities to do what's best for them. We're not here pretending that we know—saying that we were recently in Saanich or Inuvik or Norman Wells—what is best for their community. However, what we have done is the framework to allow them to see, with regard to meeting the objectives we have set nationally, what is best to deliver for the people in their community. I would say that all of these projects—which is why I think this committee is essential—are about delivering for people. My mission is to improve the lives of Canadians from coast to coast to coast. I was in Inuvik, where we are going to have the first wind project in the Arctic, which is going to remove about three million litres of diesel from use, and thousands of greenhouse gas emissions.

This is truly what we want to do, and obviously my colleague Mr. Badawey understands what it is, because, coming from a municipal government, he knows that our role is to set the policy agenda but to leave the communities to decide what's best for them.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

With respect to pollution-related costs, right now municipalities are being defaulted upon with respect to those costs. For example, one-hundred-year storms are now five-year storms, and, therefore, oversize pipes have to be placed in the ground, and the costs are defaulting to those who pay property taxes.

How is your ministry working with the environment ministry to, once again, alleviate a great deal of those costs to the payers of property taxes?

[François-Philippe Champagne]

Madam Chair, I'm very happy to have that question. It's right to the point.

That's why we put forward the disaster mitigation and adaptation fund. I've always said it's better for us to invest in adapting communities to climate change events, which are more frequent and more severe. We have put $2 billion aside to really deal with these issues. I always say that either we invest in adaptation or we'll have to invest in recovery. It's better to prevent that, to remove, I would say, the chance that these disasters would affect communities and people.

We know how disastrous that could be. I look at other members who had flooding, for example. In my own region we know the social toll of that is tremendous. Investing in infrastructure that would withstand storm events, for example, is the right way to go, not only to make our country more resilient but also to prevent the harm and the stress that communities that have to live through these disasters from season to season undergo.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Thank you, Minister.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Aubin.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Minister, thank you for joining us this morning. I am probably one of the rare opposition MPs to have such close contact with you, since we are from the same region.

It seems to me that I have heard you many times, particularly in our region, speaking in support of VIA Rail’s high frequency train, the HFT. Here is my first question. Given the concerns about mobility and reducing greenhouse gases that you were talking about earlier, does your department’s philosophy or vision see the HFT as a green infrastructure project?

[François-Philippe Champagne]

My thanks to my colleague, Mr. Aubin. He and I represent much of a major region of Quebec.

The high frequency train has been one of my priorities since I was elected, if not even before. For our region like ours, it is essential in the development of the economy and of recreation and tourism, as well as for labour mobility.

I feel that Mr. Aubin and myself have, in every possible forum, repeated how much the project could make great things happen for the region and even for Quebec. There is often talk about a labour shortage. With a high frequency train between, say, Trois-Rivières, Montreal and Quebec City, people living in other centres would be able to come and work in ours.

Of course, I feel that the high frequency train is a component in 21st-century smart mobility. If we look at what is happening in a number of cities around the world, we can conclude that this is the kind of project that we want to support. That is why, in its recent statement, VIA Rail announced a massive investment in rolling stock, a vital requirement…

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you, Minister. Unfortunately, I have very little time. I hope that the Minister of Transport will hear your testimony, because it really goes in the direction that everyone is expecting. We are no longer talking about consensus in this matter, we are talking about virtual unanimity.

When we look at the amounts being spent on the REM project in Montreal, for example, and the endless wait for the simple announcement of the government's desire to move forward with the HFT, we get the impression that major cities and regions are treated differently. Is that perception of mine correct?

[François-Philippe Champagne]

As a minister from a region of Quebec, I always energetically stand up for the regions in Quebec and in Canada. I can assure you that we have set aside significant sums in the recent budget, specifically to conduct the studies needed. Of course, building a high frequency train between Quebec City and Windsor requires a certain number of technical and environmental impact studies.

We are certainly going in the right direction, in my view, first investing in rolling stock and then in allocating funds in the budget for the necessary studies. Those are two steps in the right direction.

It must be understood that these are complex projects in terms of engineering and capacity. I feel that the Minister of Transport, you and I have come out in favour of the project, as you heard on stage at the Chambre de commerce et d'industries de Trois-Rivières. In other words, we have to do the studies and everything else that is required so that we have all the information we need to make the right decision.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you, Minister.

In your answer to a previous question, I heard you talk about the Canada Infrastructure Bank as a means to do more and to do it more quickly. The principle seems commendable, but I feel that the results are debatable, to say the least, since the process is not very quick and very few projects have been funded.

I am really in favour of public financing, because financing by the Infrastructure Bank would eventually result in increased costs being paid by the consumers. In your opinion, should the HFT project be financed by the Infrastructure Bank or from the public purse?

[François-Philippe Champagne]

Setting up a new organization like the Canada Infrastructure Bank requires a certain amount of time. Having myself seen Invest in Canada get under way, another agency in the portfolio I was responsible for previously, I know that you always have to create some buzz at the start. Fortunately, a CEO is now in place to make sure that the agency is well managed.

Several dozen discussions are underway around the country specifically to answer that question. This is the kind of project that the Canada Infrastructure Bank could study and, in my opinion, as you recall, it has to do so more quickly. I understand that my colleagues are asking us to do more, and, in Ottawa, I am one of the ministers who is the most anxious to see things move forward quickly. However, these products do present us with a degree of complexity. Because of the confidentiality of the negotiations and discussions under way, you will understand that I cannot talk about the projects under consideration. However, I can assure you that we are monitoring what is happening and that the bank is in the process of analyzing a number of projects all over the country.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

However, this year, the bank has asked the government for $6 million to cover its operating expenses. That does not seem to me like financing a lot of projects or moving forward quickly, or doing more. Moreover, we are still faced with the divide between the scale of the projects financed by the bank and the scale of the projects that the small communities that you and I represent can afford. Is there not a substantial difference between the intentions announced when the bank was created and its accomplishments after three years?

[François-Philippe Champagne]

Mr. Aubin, to answer your question, I would remind you that establishing a new agency requires some unique expenditures, the cost of premises, for example. I can also tell you that the bank has hired someone to be responsible for investments, and that will, in the coming months and years, mean an increase in the number of projects in which the bank will invest.

I am also very aware that the bank must serve not only urban communities but rural communities as well. That is why we are discussing with the bank projects that would see some northern communities move from diesel to renewable sources of energy.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you.