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.
Associate Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada
It is definitely 50% of eligible costs that are going to be reimbursed by the federal government. That's the commitment that was made.
Conservative
Dianne Lynn Watts Conservative South Surrey—White Rock, BC
That was not included in the budget. There was no defined language. It said, “will fund up to...”—
Conservative
Dianne Lynn Watts Conservative South Surrey—White Rock, BC
—and has been the language in every single budget for the past, I don't know, decade. So “up to” gives a clause out. I know that previously the federal government wasn't going to fund any more than the provinces had. Is there committed language that says the federal government will fund 50%—not up to 50%—will fund 50%?
Associate Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada
Our agreements are typically written in a way that it's always “up to”, but the intent here is that the federal commitment is 50%—
Conservative
Dianne Lynn Watts Conservative South Surrey—White Rock, BC
But that's always been in place. It has always been the language in every single budget for over a decade.
Associate Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada
This is what is in our agreements that we're hoping to negotiate with the provinces. The federal commitment is for 50%. If the question is, is there some kind of a formula as to what the provinces and the municipalities are going to contribute, our minister has certainly expressed himself very forcefully that he hopes the provinces will contribute their typical one-third share in recognition of the difficulties that municipalities often face in matching. That's certainly going to be part of the discussion, but the federal contribution is intended to be 50%. There may be instances where somebody at the provincial or municipal levels may want to pay more—and I guess that's why we have a little bit of wiggle room on the “up to”—but the intent is 50%.
Conservative
Dianne Lynn Watts Conservative South Surrey—White Rock, BC
I have 45 seconds.
Will we see a draft of those agreements? Obviously, you'll have a template that will look at what you're going to cover in these agreements. Has that draft been done?
Associate Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada
We do have a draft, but typically, because these are negotiations with provinces and territories, those agreements will be made public afterward.
Conservative
Dianne Lynn Watts Conservative South Surrey—White Rock, BC
Right, but I would expect there would be some benchmarks that you would hit on every single agreement.
Conservative
Dianne Lynn Watts Conservative South Surrey—White Rock, BC
You would have some criteria in every single agreement, such as there must be agreement between municipalities and provinces, or is each one going to be special unto itself?
Associate Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada
No, we try and ensure some kind of standardization—
Conservative
Dianne Lynn Watts Conservative South Surrey—White Rock, BC
Continuity, that's what I'm asking. If you do have a draft, is there any way we can see what that looks like?
Associate Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada
I think that is protected by negotiation of confidence at this point.
Conservative
Dianne Lynn Watts Conservative South Surrey—White Rock, BC
Okay, a blank one that I'm looking at, not one that you're negotiating right now.
Associate Deputy Minister, Infrastructure Canada
The blank one is what we're negotiating. We have a draft template. I don't believe we are at liberty at this time to share them, but I can certainly double-check and get back to you.
Liberal
Angelo Iacono Liberal Alfred-Pellan, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'll go back to VIA Rail. Ms. Jasmin, I didn't quite understand your answer before. Can you repeat it, please?
Chief Financial Officer, VIA Rail Canada Inc.
I'm sorry. In the last federal budget we got $34 million for station and maintenance centres. The $6.8 million that you were referring to is the first year of the $34 million. In the first year, 2016-17, we'll get $6.8 million and the balance will be obtained only next year.
