Transport Committee on Feb. 21st, 2017

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Great. Thank you.

My second question is with respect to page 11 of the report, figure 1-4, on the share of projects by province by project value. I'm not sure who it was, but one of you gentlemen mentioned earlier that big cities are obviously going to have more value attached to them because they have bigger projects, especially when it comes to transit.

You state that Infrastructure Canada does not provide lists of approved projects. My question is, was there an opportunity to dig a bit deeper? When I look at these numbers, I do recognize that the percentages in terms of value are specified, but my question is with respect to the actual projects that are being delivered throughout the provinces—urban versus rural.

Again, I'm just guessing. When I look at these percentages and the value attached to them, if I were to think a step further and consider the actual number of projects being distributed, rural versus urban, I'm seeing more being delivered to rural areas. Is that true?

[Peter Weltman]

Yes. There's a chart that we didn't include. Again, this is a work in progress. If you look at the distribution by number of projects, it's fairly uniform. It lines up pretty closely to population as well. It looks far more uniform. Again, as Jean-Denis mentioned earlier, this is an early snapshot that will undoubtedly change with the next report.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

As we move out from phase one into phase two, are we going to see this change dramatically?

[Peter Weltman]

I think, even as we get more current data on phase one, you will see this change dramatically as well.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

You say that very few projects are under construction, but according to Infrastructure Canada's own website, there are more than 700 with anticipated construction start dates that have already passed. Isn't this more of a reporting issue from municipalities and provinces than a lack of projects under way?

[Peter Weltman]

I think it's two-fold.

First, we only looked at projects funded under the new budget 2016 plan: waste water and public transit. We didn't look at the other legacy programs administered by Infrastructure Canada. Some of that 700 number includes a lot of these legacy programs. The reason for that, again, is that we were trying to segregate budget 2016, the new infrastructure plan, versus some of the other stuff.

Secondly, as Infrastructure Canada gets more current reporting from provinces and municipalities, we'll be in a better position to see what's actually started on time. That's what we're going to do, too, with our revised report.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Okay.

This is my last question.

I hear that the Province of Ontario, for example, is using an allocation-based disbursement for its cleanwater and wastewater funding. Were you told this? Why wasn't it noted here?

[Peter Weltman]

Sorry? Ontario is using an allocation?

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

It's an allocation-based disbursement for cleanwater and wastewater funding. I'm just wondering why it wasn't noted in here that that type of disbursement was being used versus application-based funding.

[Peter Weltman]

We were looking at the federal level. We didn't go to the provinces and ask them how they were distributing the money to municipalities. We simply looked at Infrastructure Canada and how their program was set up vis-à-vis the provinces.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Therefore, when you look at the performance measures, a lot of it is dependent on the provinces as well.

[Peter Weltman]

Oh, sure. Sure it is.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Mr. Rayes.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Fréchette, two things were mentioned earlier that concern me, that is to say the amounts of money that have not been spent, and the lack of performance measurement mechanisms, or monitoring of the projects. Mr. Hardie asked you if you had any recommendations to make in this regard.

My question is extremely simple: is it normal that we have to tell a government, or a private organization or a municipality, to give itself a tool that will allow it to monitor its projects? This is said to be an ambitious plan, and the government wants to invest in the area of infrastructure. Given that context, should those performance measures not be there as a matter of course? We expect that officials will have in place a grid or some type of follow-up software. This would allow you to follow the audits and sound the alarm bell if need be.

[Jean-Denis Fréchette]

Concerning accountability, I would not say that this is normal, but it is almost a tradition. For several years now it has been recognized that the federal government provides funds. I think that other witnesses have already said as much. The federal level provides funds, and a partnership is formed with the provinces and municipalities afterwards.

As parliamentarians, you are the ones who approve the funds. Given that fact, you should always ask for reports to find out where the money is going. That is what we would say to you, without making a formal recommendation.

At what level should that be done? I will go back briefly to previous questions. For our part, we focus mostly on the macroeconomic level, as you can see by looking at our table. We do not go into details regarding efficiency and productivity. We will do so in the second phase of the infrastructure plan, which aims to improve productivity in Canada. At that time, it will be even more important that there be accountability so that you can ensure that you are getting the most for our money. However, this will be done through an audit rather than through a review by the Parliamentary Budget Officer.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

I am by ricochet going to talk about the Canada Infrastructure Bank, which was a surprise this year.

A sum of $15 billion had already been set aside to support the municipalities in their infrastructure projects, and then it was transferred to this infrastructure bank. In your report, you inform us that this bank will be subject to somewhat less direct parliamentary monitoring.

When the minister and his acolytes came here, I asked them what the selection criteria would be for community projects. Mr. Aubin also emphasized that aspect. One of the minister's acolytes answered that the choices would be based on performance, that is to say that they would determine if the project was of interest to the investors. As a legislator and as a member of Parliament, I can tell you that that aspect bothers me particularly.

I asked a second question to know who would be making the decision to accept or reject a project in the context of this infrastructure bank, a body that is parallel to government. The reply was that they had not yet looked at that aspect and were working on it.

The creation of the Infrastructure Bank was announced, and the fact that $15 billion would be transferred to it. And yet the Liberals cannot tell us today after being in power for two years who will be responsible for accountability over these funds. Does this mean that the elected representatives will lose control of this money? The government already has full control of the infrastructure budget, and yet there are no accountability measures in place.

Given all that, is it normal to worry about the infrastructure bank that the government will create?

[Jean-Denis Fréchette]

It is difficult to answer that question, because we don't yet have all of the information about how the infrastructure bank will function. The only thing that is certain is that it will not be based in Victoriaville.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

No. I think people are fighting to have it either in Montreal or Toronto.

[Jean-Denis Fréchette]

Yes.

That said, we still do not know all of the modalities regarding how the bank will work. Everyone expects an announcement in the next budget specifying how the Canada Infrastructure Bank will function.

To answer your question, I must say that whether we are talking about a bank or a program, and no matter which party is in power, accountability is always important for parliamentarians. They are the ones who vet the funds that come from taxpayers' money.

You are all parliamentarians. In my statement I said that accountability was very important for you at regional and local levels, which is very understandable. I said the same thing in the other place, to the senators, who also represent the regions. It is important that there be accountability at that level as well.

It is also important for us, but it is not at the core of our examination. If the government states that it will create 50,000 jobs but we estimate that it will only create 33,000, that is where we have an important role to play.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

In light of what the minister and his acolytes answered when they came before the committee, will the Canada Infrastructure Bank be a part of the various follow-up reports you are going to prepare next year? Will we be apprised of your overall perspective on this file?

Our party is very concerned about the money that was supposed to go to the infrastructure fund for the municipalities. We are told that it will have to generate a yield.

I relate this to small and medium-sized municipalities. I asked the minister to name a single project that could be financed in a small or medium municipality through the Canada Infrastructure Bank. I can understand that the minister may not know the file from stem to stern, but none of his officials was able to name one single project.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Sorry, you're way over time. Just give a short answer to a long question.

[Alain Rayes, Conservative, Richmond—Arthabaska, QC]

You can answer with yes or no.

[Jean-Denis Fréchette]

We are going to try to monitor the money that will come out of the Canada Infrastructure Bank.