Transport Committee on April 11th, 2019

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

I wanted to say to my colleague that the high frequency train is an interesting economic development tool. It would provide an infrastructure to the Trois-Rivière region and the heart of Quebec, obviously. I often refer to it as a socioeconomic engine. This also affects labour mobility. It is a key development project.

My colleague knows that from the beginning, I have supported this project because I think of it as a key development project for Quebec. As he said, we have made historic investments in public transit and green infrastructure. Personally, this is what I say to people: the fact that this did not appear in the last federal budget doesn't mean that everything is at a standstill, quite the opposite. We have already invested $1 billion in renewing the rolling stock. That was, of course, a prerequisite. You need the rolling stock...

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

The underlying question, Mr. Champagne, is to find out whether the implementation of the HFT falls in part under the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities or if it belongs entirely to the Minister of Transport. Otherwise, could the two departments co-operate and could all of the budget envelopes be used to fund it?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

The Government of Canada and its institutions are examining that question. For our part, we are in solution mode and have been from the beginning. I draw a lot of attention to that project because it's important. I see it as an economic and socioeconomic driver as well as a motor for labour mobility. I can tell the people who are listening to us that this project is moving forward. The studies must be done.

There are, of course, environmental issues to consider and indigenous peoples must be consulted. There are geotechnical conditions that remain to be determined. However, since we are talking here about investing public money, may I point out that the more sophisticated our studies, the better we will be able to accurately establish costs and timelines. I can say that things are moving forward well. I understand my colleague from Trois-Rivières' impatience, but I can reassure him by saying that this file is moving forward. We will continue using all of the tools at the disposal of the Government of Canada to make it progress.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Wrzesnewskyj.

[Borys Wrzesnewskyj, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, ON]

Thank you.

I'd like to begin by thanking you, Minister Champagne. You referenced the infrastructure funding for Toronto for flood control. People don't typically think of Toronto and floods, but six years ago in Etobicoke thousands of homes were flooded. The basements flooded, and for days on end there was no electricity. These extreme weather events are happening more regularly, so it shows tremendous foresight, and I thank you for that investment.

Contained in the 2019 federal budget is the one-time top-up that you mention of $2.2 billion for cities like Toronto. It was very welcomed by our mayor and the city council, and I think it's fair to say that we need to have this gas tax top-up because of the simple fact that Premier Ford's Conservatives in Ontario have decided to play politics with infrastructure funds and dollars, and not work with the federal government to get the funding that's so needed in our communities out the door.

Could you tell us a little bit about the thinking behind this top-up?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

As I said, we cannot afford as a country to waste one construction season. I've been talking to unions that are saying they obviously are concerned about making sure their workers will be on site during the coming construction season.

You may have seen a bit of frustration on my part. We signed an integrated bilateral agreement with provinces and territories. In the case of Ontario, we've had about $12 billion on the table for almost a year. The stream that has been opened recently is the rural and northern stream, which is extremely important. I come from rural Canada. That's only $250 million out of $12 billion, so you would understand that there are some concerns as to the speed for the deployment of that money to ensure that communities can build the roads they need, fill the potholes, and to make sure that we invest in recreational centres, make sure we invest in green infrastructure to prevent the severe impact of changing weather.

Clearly, what we saw yesterday is the Ford government opening up a bit on public transit, which obviously seems ambitious. It's interesting, and there are a lot of questions to be asked with respect to the funding of all that. To your point, it's true. I think our colleague Matt Jeneroux said that when it comes to infrastructure, you have to have the long-term vision. This is about building Canada for 10, 20, 30, 50 years ahead, so you will find a bit of an impatient minister. I want to make sure that everyone is playing their role, because under the integrated bilateral agreement, for those who are listening to us, it is the province that has to open the intake, prioritize the project; and then federally we would fund them.

The gas tax top-up, which I call the gas tax rebate, which I said was the one-time top-up of $2.2 billion added into the system, is a way to make sure that we don't waste a construction season, that we put our workers to work this summer.

For example, I was in Sudbury. I think Marc Serré would know that I even went to fill some potholes myself because they said, “Minister, it's good that you bring the money. Why don't we do some work together?” I called the mayor and we did it together, with Marc and Paul Lefebvre who also were there.

My point is that cities have plans to do a lot of infrastructure for years to come, and we want to give them the means, because we know that they are the first responders to make sure that people get drinking water, that roads function, that waste-water treatment plants would be there. This was our way to partner. We did that with the FCM, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, and AMO in Ontario who very pleased because that shows again that we want to be a trusted partner for the municipalities. In addition to the $12 billion over 10 years, we said, “Why don't we make sure people get to work this summer as we need to get the job done?”

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Mr. Iacono.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Minister Champagne, thank you for being here this morning.

In 2017, the government launched the Smart Cities Challenge—in which the City of Laval takes part—which will allow us to see how ingenious our cities are.

What is the government attempting to do through the Smart Cities Challenge? Can you tell us about the various steps and update us on the status of the challenge today?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Madam Chair, I'd like to thank my colleague Mr. Iacono for his question. The Smart Cities Challenge is one of the most interesting projects in my opinion. It really allows us to see that we're using technology and innovation to solve problems we find in various large cities throughout Canada.

We launched a national competition. I'm happy to say, as Mr. Jeneroux mentioned earlier, that six first nations were chosen to submit projects with cities. This will, of course, mean that projects will be implemented. The one that comes to mind, to answer more specifically, is the one in Saskatoon.

Saskatoon is one of the cities in Canada where young people from indigenous communities are often homeless, and look for a place to stay at night. We thought about the reasons for that situation in a city like Saskatoon.

First, we found out that the information was provided between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. We realized that few people look for shelter between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. So, we understood that the information had to be provided when people need it.

The second consideration is that today, the information must be conveyed using a mobile app so that people can receive the information. We also realized that the city had to have Wi-Fi, because not everyone has access to a phone or a tablet.

Finally, human nature being what it is, if a person turns up at a shelter at 2 a.m. and is told that it is full, he or she won't go back. So, we made sure that the information was available in real time, that is to say that someone who needs shelter at 2 a.m., for instance, will know which shelter to go to that evening.

In my opinion, this really allows people to benefit from the ingenuity of Canadian men and women and work together to mobilize indigenous communities; these communities are involved in several projects to provide better services to Canadians using innovation and technology.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

We'll go to Mr. Rogers.

[Churence Rogers, Liberal, Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, NL]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Minister, as a rural member of Parliament, I represent very small communities in my riding of Bonavista—Burin—Trinity. We often hear from these municipalities about infrastructure upgrades. Sometimes they can't afford large infrastructure projects. How is government supporting rural and remote communities with their unique infrastructure challenges and needs?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

I am very pleased to answer the question, Madam Chair.

You know, Churence, I also come from rural Canada. My riding is 37,000 square kilometres. You and I share a passion, in terms of making sure our smaller, rural communities will have services.

We've done a couple of things. First of all, we've made sure that as we look at infrastructure, we have a dedicated stream for northern and rural communities. There's a good reason for that. We understood that we needed to be more flexible. I'll give you an example. In northern Saskatchewan, they were saying, “Minister, if you allow us to use those funds to extend the runway by a few hundred metres, we would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, facilitate transportation and reduce the cost of food in northern communities.” That, for example, would be admissible. That's why we left the program very flexible. .

The other thing we said, in recognition of the fiscal capacity of smaller communities—those below 500,000 residents—was that the federal government would go up to 60% in the funding, which would leave the province with 33%, and smaller communities with 7%. For me, this is really transformational. You would know that, historically, we have this rule of one-third, one-third and one-third. We heard from small communities across Canada that this is not sustainable. When you are a small community of a few hundred people, sometimes there's no way you can finance a $12-million project, for example, to replace the pipes necessary to provide drinking water.

Not only did we listen, but we decided to act, provide more flexibility and increase the funding in smaller communities to allow these projects to go through.

[Churence Rogers, Liberal, Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, NL]

A follow-up question to that is around Internet connectivity and cell service across rural Canada. It's been a topic of major discussion among rural caucus and Atlantic caucus, which represent many small communities.

Internet connectivity is so important for these rural communities, to allow for business development and business expansion, such as in the tourism industry and others. I know in my riding, it's a major challenge. On the Bay de Verde peninsula, for example, we have some great small businesses. However, they are not connected to the Internet. They have a very difficult time trying to promote, develop and expand their businesses.

What are we doing about trying to improve on that?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Again, I come from a rural community. When I go to urban communities, they talk about mobility. When I go to rural Canada, they talk about connectivity. Probably half of my own riding, just like yours, has no Internet and no cellphone coverage.

For me, broadband Internet is the lifeblood of the future. If you want to allow for remote education, remote medicine and remote telework, allow people to innovate, participate in commerce and get a better education, connectivity is obviously essential.

That's why, in the last budget, we decided to add more money to make sure that every Canadian would be connected to broadband by 2030. I think this is a great message to rural Canada. Rural Canada matters. We want to provide the same opportunity for people who live in Saint-Adelphe, in my own riding. Like the people in your riding, they want to be connected, to be able to work from home, get an education from home and even to get medical care remotely, in some cases.

I think this is essential to build a better Canada, and a better life for Canadians.

[Churence Rogers, Liberal, Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, NL]

I know the gas tax fund bumped up the extra $2.2 billion, which leaves $32.9 million for small communities in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, particularly. We truly appreciate that extra funding.

I know that you've been on the road a lot across the country. What are some of the things you've learned on the ground, and some things that may have surprised you about the challenges small rural communities face?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

When we announced the top-up to the gas tax rebate, I was very pleased to meet with small community mayors. This funding, which is direct funding, allows them to really go on with projects that they had in their plan but they could not finance. What I realized is that this is one of the best ways to support municipalities, because this goes to them directly. As I said, mayors in smaller communities would understand what is needed from their community. I always say mayors know best, because they have to deal on a daily basis with the primary services that need to be provided to citizens. Everywhere I've been travelling, they could tell me about the road extensions that they needed and the drinking water that will make a difference to rec centres.

In small communities, the recreational centre or the sports centre is everything; that's where you bring people together. This is true in my riding, and it's true across rural Canada. Having a rural land and making sure we're there.... I used to say we have a lot of ambition for our regions, and there's a reason for that. Through the funding we have now, whether it's broadband or the northern and rural stream, whether it's the recreational centre or whether it's providing more federal money to finance them, I think we're really making a difference in rural Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you, Minister.

Mr. Iacono, please.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I don't want to seem like a broken record and keep raising the same topic over and over again, but as a member from the greater Montreal and Laval area, this issue is primordial.

Could we have a brief update on the Champlain Bridge?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Absolutely. It's an important issue. I should mention that the Samuel-De Champlain Bridge is one of the largest infrastructure projects, not only in Quebec and Canada, but also in North America.

In the summer, there were up to 1,600 workers on that site. They are truly the heroes of this story. These are people who worked 24-7, rain, sleet or shine.

This is what they managed to do. In December 2018, the structure of the bridge was basically complete, and I was able to cross the bridge with some journalists. So the structure was ready. However, there was still some waterproofing to be done and asphalt to be laid down, but that could not really be done during the winter.

My priority has always been the health and safety of the workers on the site, the sustainability of the work, and, of course, respecting the time line.

I can tell you that the Samuel-De Champlain Bridge will be permanently open to traffic in June 2019 at the latest. It is a piece of work that all Montreal men and women will be proud of for generations to come.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Champagne.

I will yield the rest of my time to Mr. Hardie.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Iacono.

Minister Champagne, this is kind of a philosophical question.

Normally we're used to seeing federal government infrastructure support really roll out when times are tough. It's a stimulus. The previous government did that, and I think a lot of people agreed that it was a good thing to do and that going into deficit to do it was a reasonable thing to do. Here we're going into deficit, maybe not specifically aligned with the infrastructure program but certainly, if we weren't doing it, we wouldn't be running deficits or maybe the deficits would not be quite as large.

What is the philosophy between a short-term stimulus versus the long-term program that we've rolled out? What is the difference in thinking here?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

It's long term. I used to say, and I always say to the Minister of Finance, that I don't spend, I invest, and that's the difference. When you're talking about infrastructure, by definition you're looking at more than one financial cycle. You're looking at five, 10, 20, 30, or 50 years. When you're looking at bridges, you're talking 125 years of useful asset. When you look at the life cycle of assets, you realize that, when you invest in infrastructure, you invest in both current prosperity and in future prosperity. I always say that the best way to attract talent and investment in Canada is to have modern, resilient and green infrastructure.

We have all travelled around the world, and we know cities and communities that function well attract talent. That's what we really need to do. I would say I'm pretty proud.

Take the $2-billion disaster mitigation adaption fund. If you're not going to invest in disaster adaption, you're just going to invest in disaster remediation more often. I think not only about the economic costs but the social costs.

I was in Calgary, for example, at Springbank for the announcement. People have been flooded there for generations, and people have lost their lives. We invested hundreds of millions of dollars to make sure that we would prevent, not a one in a hundred years event, but a one in two hundred years event. This is where we are now.

There's a real cost of inaction to climate change. I keep repeating that. If there are people who doubt that, go speak to the people in Drumheller. Go speak to the people whose family members were victims in Springbank. They'll tell you that this is real and that this is today. Extreme weather events are more frequent and more severe.

I think it is a smart thing to do to make sure that we invest in adaptation. Whether we're building things like the Gordie Howe International Bridge, which is about 25% of all merchandise trade between Canada and the U.S. to secure a second link so that our goods are going to market, whether it's about securing the tourism industry in Drumheller, whether it's about securing Springbank in Calgary, or whether it's about doing the Samuel de Champlain Bridge, which has $20 billion of trade every year that goes to the United States, for me, this is investing in Canadians. This is investing in our future.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

You have one minute left.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Very quickly, then, you mentioned there's $12 billion sitting on the table, waiting for Ontario to come forward. Do you have similar statistics for Saskatchewan, Manitoba and New Brunswick?

[François-Philippe Champagne, Liberal, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

The agreements were concluded with all provinces in 2018, the 10 provinces and three territories. We all know there have been provincial elections, different things happening, re-profiling, reassessment of priorities, and this had the impact that there's still a lot of money on the table.

Why I am pressing some provincial governments more than others is that I say this money is there for work this summer, for example. We can do projects, whether it's the rec centre, whether it's to make sure the roads are being built or whether it's about the drinking water.

If you look at our record, we have approved more than 4,800 projects and $20 billion. There's still a lot of capacity in the system. My point is that, if you talk to the unions, they say, “Let's get it done”. We need to do that. I'm saying the same message in New Brunswick, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. I will continue to do so, because I think it's in the best interests of Canadians.

The money is there on the table, but because of the way our agreement works, the provinces—which are co-investors, because the way we structured the agreement was to do more investment in infrastructure—have to open the intake and prioritize. Certainly, they send the project to us, and when it fits the program, we are glad to invest and we want to make sure we will do that together.