Evidence of meeting #15 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was million.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Thank you all very much. We very much appreciate your keeping your comments brief so the committee members can get as many of their questions answered as possible.
We'll start with Ms. Block, for six minutes.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
I want to welcome everybody back after a break week. I know both the Liberal and the Conservative members attended some conventions, but it's good to be back here in Ottawa doing this very important work.
Witnesses, I thank you for coming and giving us the opportunity to question you around the supplementary estimates.
My questions are going to be for the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority.
CATSA is requesting $142 million in additional funding, which represents approximately a 22.8% increase. According to the preamble included in the supplementary (A)s, $113 million of this funding will be used to comply with an International Civil Aviation Organization standard, which I know came into effect July 15, 2013. It required member countries to ensure that non-passengers and items they carry are subject to screening and security controls prior to entering security-restricted areas serving international civil aviation operations.
I have a number of questions. I'll ask two at a time, and then give you an opportunity to answer them.
Why was there a delay in receiving the 2016-17 incremental funding to deliver enhanced screening of airport staff in restricted areas?
3:55 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Air Transport Security Authority
I'm not sure I understand. Did you say a delay?
3:55 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Air Transport Security Authority
In what...? Essentially, this is a ramp-up program. We started in 2013 and are in the third year of implementation of that ramp-up. This is the completion of that implementation phase.
3:55 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Air Transport Security Authority
Once this year is done, then we go into long-term sustainment, and the financial basis changes at that point.
I'll pass it back to Helena, if she wishes to comment more.
3:55 p.m.
Associate Deputy Minister, Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, Department of Transport
No, it's exactly as Mr. Watt said. It's a three-year funding initiative, and this is the final year. Every year in the estimates that CATSA has been provided there is the annual funding for implementing this initiative. This is the final year of the initiative.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
Okay. Considering that Transport Canada and CATSA have known about this, why isn't it included in the main estimates?
3:55 p.m.
Associate Deputy Minister, Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, Department of Transport
It's a good question. Because we need to know that CATSA is going to need all the money that was appropriated when it was first announced in the budget, it's better that we wait and make sure that it gets the money it needs for that year. That's the only reason. But it had been appropriated in an earlier budget.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
In effect, it is a delay to see whether they actually will need it or not.
3:55 p.m.
Associate Deputy Minister, Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, Department of Transport
It's responding to the planning for that year. Crown corporations every year have to submit a corporate plan to the government, and the funding they get for that year is based on the plan they submit to the government. It's not a delay. It's the annual appropriation based on the corporate plan for this year.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
3:55 p.m.
Associate Deputy Minister, Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, Department of Transport
That's right, and it has received funding in the other two years as well.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
Okay.
Has this enhanced security standard been met over the past three years? If it has been in place since July 15, 2013, why has the cost of delivering it risen so steeply?
4 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Air Transport Security Authority
We started off in 2013 spending approximately $15 million a year on non-passenger screening. We had a very minimal program at the time, which essentially consisted of a sampling of non-passengers accessing the sterile areas of airports. It was decided by the government at that time, with Transport Canada's regulatory oversight, that we needed to improve our standard of delivery of that service based on the coming into force of the ICAO standard.
To go from $15 million to what will eventually be almost $150 million of annual expenditure required an implementation phase: implementation to hire the screening officers, to purchase the equipment, to train the people, to put the infrastructure into place, to get the airports ready. To do all this, there has been a huge amount of work over the last three years. What you see isn't a delay; it's a planned implementation phase, which is just culminating now, as we reach the maturity of the three-year implementation.
I'm quite proud of what we've been able to do, to go from $15 million to a tenfold increase in three years.
4 p.m.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
Okay. The main estimates state that the incremental cost of delivering this enhanced security service is $72.2 million, but here we are with supplementary estimates (A) looking at another $110 million since the main estimates.
Is that what I'm seeing?
4 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Air Transport Security Authority
I'm not sure where you're getting those figures.
4 p.m.
Associate Deputy Minister, Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, Department of Transport
The main estimates would have included funding for CATSA's regular programs, which were the three elements that Angus spoke about earlier, for its identity card, for its passenger screening, and those elements. This is a separate program, and it received three-year funding. It was allocated at that time in the budget, and now, as he said, he's just rolling out the plan.
It is quite complicated because at every single airport, the airports also have to make adjustments to the way that people who are not passengers—the people who work on the air side, for example, who drive those trucks you'll see, the little carts that are moving the aircraft.... They have to basically minimize the entry points for those, making sure that those people who are coming into the airport or getting access outside are meeting these requirements.
It takes a lot of time, because there are many airports and many activities that have to happen all at once.
4 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Thank you very much, Ms. Block. I'm sorry, but your time is up.
The next questioner will be Mr. Badawey, for six minutes.
May 30th, 2016 / 4 p.m.
Liberal
Vance Badawey Liberal Niagara Centre, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I note that the supplementary estimates contain $22.7 million in operational funding for the Department of Transport's role in a $254 million horizontal initiative to assess, manage, and remediate federal contaminated sites throughout the country. Originally, municipalities and utility companies, etc., invested quite heavily in the economic strategic gateway sites, which you spoke of, whether they be airports or whether they be ports. With that, a lot of those investments had to do with water, waste water, roads, sidewalks, utilities, hydro, gas, information technology, etc. With that, it also contributed to local economies, their identity, as well as past and future initiatives as they relate to the economy, once again recognizing a lot of them were airports and ports, as you recognized.
Today, a lot of these lands throughout the country.... I have a good-sized chunk right in the middle of one of the cities in my riding, and I'm talking right smack dab in the middle, which makes it a complete eyesore to some extent, albeit in a strategic location.
They did contribute, as I have said, to local identity and economic initiatives. Sitting stagnant, a lot of them sit with existing contaminants of concern, many of which are worse than others. In my neck of the woods, there's a piece of land that Transport Canada currently owns which contains a heavy concentration of arsenic, lead, etc. Once again, it's in the heart of our city, right next to residential areas and parks and areas where a lot of kids play.
My question is for you, ma'am. Does the federal government, Transport Canada in particular, have an asset management plan attached to the contaminated sites? It is an asset to Transport Canada, so I would assume there would be an asset management plan attached to those sites which takes into consideration ongoing risk, return on investment to bring those sites back into productivity some day, especially if the municipalities are asking for that to happen so that they can add it to their economic portfolio.
Finally, I know some of the sites do have site-specific risk assessments attached to them. Those risk assessments do identify the contaminants of concern. With that said, is there a strategy to actually look at those sites to have them remediated, then once again attach themselves to the latter, which is both returns on investment and the ongoing risks that are attached to those sites?
4:05 p.m.
Associate Deputy Minister, Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, Department of Transport
Thank you very much for that question.
This amount of money, the $22.6 million, is to address our high-risk contaminated sites. When you're talking about risk assessment, yes, this one really is focused on human health and the environment.
As I mentioned, we have a large inventory of sites, a lot of them are former airport sites, or port sites, or existing airport sites. We have a three-year investment plan for all of our sites, including our contaminated sites. We bundle them into two envelopes. The federal contaminated sites, which are the high-risk to health and the environment, get funded from this envelope, and the other ones get funded from other funds within the department once we have those funds.
We do assessments at every single one of them. The assessments are to identify the contaminants. As part of that assessment, we develop what is called the remediation plan, which is how we are going to address decontaminating the site and undertake that work. Every year we're funding a variety of sites across the country. This funding is really going to help us make a good dent in our highest-risk sites in terms of making sure we are addressing those that are at the highest risk in terms of human health, such as if they're getting seepage into the water or the effects are right on humans or into the environment.
Because we have such a large number of sites, we cannot do them all in one year. We do have this investment plan that basically allows us to chip away at them. Once the sites are cleaned, we will normally transfer them to municipalities or local interests that are interested in the sites.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Vance Badawey Liberal Niagara Centre, ON
That's good news. I'll be sure to give you an idea of some of the sites that I have at front of mind.
According to the budget 2016, public transit infrastructure will receive about $3.4 billion in funding over the next three years. These supplementary estimates propose $844.4 million to be administered by the office of Infrastructure Canada for a public transit infrastructure fund both in 2016 and 2017. The transit funding is to be allocated to provinces and territories based on their share of total transit ridership. I say that emphatically, “based on total transit ridership”. Therefore, will the provincial and territorial governments alone decide how their shares of public transit infrastructure funds will be distributed to public transit agencies, or will the office of Infrastructure Canada have some role in which public transit systems are immediate priorities?
4:05 p.m.
Associate Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada
Thank you for the question. The allocation formula that was used with respect to the public transit fund came from ridership data provided by CUTA and has been shared with the provinces and territories. The intent is that it goes to all of the transit systems within each province based on ridership. There is a small floor to recognize that some transit systems are very small—$50,000— and that's to ensure there's a minimum amount of funding that will go to every transit system within a province. Those amounts are set.
There are very rare instances where there might be a transit system that is not a member of CUTA. Under those circumstances, we'll be working with the provinces to understand how some monies could flow to those systems that are not currently part of CUTA.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Vance Badawey Liberal Niagara Centre, ON
What types of project costs would not be eligible for 50% federal contribution under this fund?