Evidence of meeting #81 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 year.
A video is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you to our witnesses for appearing.
I first want to ask Mr. Juneau a couple of questions.
You're asking for $20 million for land remediation—I think it's pretty clear what that money is for—and you're asking for an additional $38.7 million. I assume that's for operating expenses. Is that correct?
Chief Operating Officer, Windsor-Detroit Bridge Authority
The first point to make is that it's a result of a re-profiling.
Let me ask Ms. Hurdle to give you the specifics on this.
Linda Hurdle Chief Financial Administrative Officer, Windsor-Detroit Bridge Authority
It's a mix of operating and capital dollars. The re-profiling is mostly due to some of the utility work we're doing with Hydro One for utility relocation on the Canadian side, and fro some P3 procurement costs as well.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Okay.
I think a lot of us are very concerned about this project. Last summer, the CEO of the authority was put on leave. We've also had delays in this project. It was recently announced that the selection from the short list of three contractors will not be made this year but will be delayed well into next year, and possibly even into the fall of next year. Also, we've just recently had the approval permit being granted to the Detroit International Bridge Company to construct a new Ambassador Bridge.
When you put this all together, it could very well be the case that the new Ambassador Bridge will open before this particular bridge, the Gordie Howe bridge. In the context of declining cross-border traffic numbers in recent years, this is a cause for concern. Will we be saddled with a bridge that opens after the new Ambassador Bridge, one that won't be able to generate the tolls necessary to pay for the costs of this bridge, which could be in the $4-billion plus range?
Maybe you could speak to the delays that are taking place and to why it's taking so long, despite parliamentary appropriations for operating and capital costs that have been approved each and every time. Why are these delays are taking place and how sure can we be that this bridge will be completed in the time that has been suggested, which is now 2023, three years after the time in the original commitment that was made? That commitment was made not just by the previous government, I might add, but also by the bridge authority's board and the Michigan governor's office.
Maybe you can speak to these delays. Why are these delays taking place? What is being done to make sure there are no further delays in this bridge, particularly in the context of the permit that the current government has granted for the new Ambassador Bridge?
Liberal
Amarjeet Sohi Liberal Edmonton Mill Woods, AB
I'll start.
First of all, I want to be very clear that our government's commitment to the Gordie Howe International Bridge is unwavering. We are committed to this bridge, and we will build this bridge. When the initial business analysis was done, there was always an understanding in the business case that we need two crossings, so the permitting related to the Ambassador Bridge does not impact upon the business case of Gordie Howe International Bridge.
November 9th, 2017 / 4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Michael Chong Conservative Wellington—Halton Hills, ON
Minister, with respect, when the Gordie Howe bridge was proposed, it was in the context of an old Ambassador Bridge with only four lanes. We are now looking at a new Ambassador Bridge with 50% more capacity that could very well be completed ahead of the Gordie Howe bridge.
Liberal
Amarjeet Sohi Liberal Edmonton Mill Woods, AB
Mr. Juneau will speak to the particular details overall, but I can assure you that the business case is strong, and that both crossings are needed, based on the business case.
On the delays, I want to assure you that we are taking a very responsible approach to this bridge. When we got into power, a very nominal number of the properties that are required to build this bridge were in possession at that time, and now we have the vast majority of the properties on the U.S. side under our control to start construction. It's a more responsible, more appropriate, and less risky approach than the approach taken by the previous government.
Mr. Juneau.
Chief Operating Officer, Windsor-Detroit Bridge Authority
Thank you, Minister.
I don't need to add to the basic points the minister made, but I will say in respect of the timing of the work next year, we've adopted a very careful timetable. It's my priority to make sure that we are able to move through that timetable with our partners.
The delay you referred to was one that allowed us to do some work with the proponents on the timing and the cost, and we are satisfied that we got a positive result out of that delay. I'm confident that with the support of the government and our other partners.... As I said, we're devoting a lot of energy to working with them. For instance, I met with Governor Snyder recently, and the minister spoke to him last week, I believe, so we have our American partners onside to meet a demanding timetable, and I think we will meet it.
Conservative
Liberal
Vance Badawey Liberal Niagara Centre, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Minister, thank you for being here this afternoon. I appreciate your presence and that of your staff and the members of the Windsor-Detroit Bridge Authority.
Minister, last week the Canadian Press reported that the government planned to re-profile to future years about $2 billion in planned infrastructure spending. With that, some folks have speculated that this means funding would be lost. Can you explain how federal infrastructure dollars flow to these projects and are generally managed within the Infrastructure Canada program?
Liberal
Amarjeet Sohi Liberal Edmonton Mill Woods, AB
Through you, Madam Chair, thank you so much for this question.
Since taking office, we have approved more than 4,000 projects with a combined provincial, federal, and municipal investment of $35 billion. Once we give approval to a project, we are committed to supporting that project so construction can proceed immediately after the federal approval.
As you know, it takes a number of years to build a particular infrastructure project. Our proponents usually don't send us the invoices until the project is completed. The money that we may have budgeted in one particular year may not be paid out in that particular year because we are still waiting for the invoices. That's why you see the $2 billion being re-profiled from one year to the next year.
It is very important for us to understand that this $2 billion is committed to projects. It is not money that is not making a difference. Because of that approval and that commitment, jobs are being created, and communities are getting the benefit of having clean water to drink, or roads are being paved, or bridges are being constructed. All the work is taking place, but we have to wait until we get the invoices. Then we pay out on those commitments that we have made to our partners.
Liberal
Vance Badawey Liberal Niagara Centre, ON
You're essentially putting that money into a reserve, protected for that project and, of course, for the timeframe of that project in which it otherwise would be paid out.
Now, when that money is sitting here, are we—I'll use these words—taking advantage of investment opportunities, such as the percentage we're getting back because the money is sitting in the bank? Or is it just sitting there being stagnant?
Liberal
Amarjeet Sohi Liberal Edmonton Mill Woods, AB
That money is within the federal government's fiscal framework. That is allocated to Infrastructure Canada on an annual basis, based on the projection of how much funds we can flow. There's always a lag time between the project approval and project construction and when we get the invoices; at that time, we pay the money. The money is there. The money is committed to those particular projects. Because of that commitment, those projects proceed. That's the commitment we have to honour with our partners.
Liberal
Vance Badawey Liberal Niagara Centre, ON
Minister, we're two years into the government's mandate and, with that, I'm wondering where things stand generally with the government's infrastructure plan to this point. It's very robust. We all recognize that, regardless of which side of the floor we're sitting on. All 338 ridings, I'm sure, are taking full advantage of the infrastructure funds you've announced, and again, regardless of what party or what part of the country they're from.
What has been achieved to date and what's still to come? For example, I know you're now in the process of negotiating long-term bilateral agreements with the provinces and territories. Is there anything you've learned from phase one that is helping with negotiations and the design of long-term programs with sustainable funding for those programs? As well, are we recognizing other residual benefits to those investments in terms of the outcomes that are being achieved from those individual investments at the municipal and provincial levels?
Liberal
Amarjeet Sohi Liberal Edmonton Mill Woods, AB
I am extremely proud of the work we have been able to accomplish in partnership with the provinces, territories, municipalities, the non-profit sector, and indigenous communities. I gave you the number of projects that we have approved. There have been more than 4,000 projects approved, with a combined investment of $35 billion. The vast majority of those projects are currently under way.
What our partners have told us is that they want a more collaborative approach to decision-making, the development of the criteria, and the project approval, and a streamlining of some of the process. We have done that and we are still engaging with them. Another thing they told us is that the kind of ad hoc, one-time infrastructure funding approach is not really a good approach. What they're looking for is long-term predictability. They're looking for long-term sustainable funding.
That is why, after listening to them, we have initiated discussions on a 10-year plan. We want to make sure that every province knows how much money they're going to receive from the federal government under the different funding envelopes and in such a way that they can start aligning their capital plans and their priorities with the federal capital plans and federal priorities. That's one thing we have learned: to give them the sustainability and predictability.
Liberal
NDP
Robert Aubin NDP Trois-Rivières, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Minister, thank you for being here. We greatly appreciate it.
My first question is on a topic that certainly hasn't escaped you, Mr. Minister.
Increasingly, the voices of all citizens are rising loud and clear across the country. They are finding it increasingly difficult to accept that the great fortunes of this country, whether they are held by businessmen or businesswomen or by large corporations, do not pay their fair share of taxes and resort to tax havens. And now the Paradise Papers are adding a layer to that.
In setting up this infrastructure bank that you sponsor, have you put in place mechanisms to prevent the bank's clients from being big companies that use tax havens to move some of their profits and not to assume their responsibilities for taxation?
Liberal
Amarjeet Sohi Liberal Edmonton Mill Woods, AB
Through you, Madam Chair, thank you so much for that question.
The reason we have created the Canada infrastructure bank is to build more infrastructure that our communities need, along with giving them a historic amount of grant funding that we will continue to provide to them. We are tripling our investment and we see that the public sector and private sector can work together to undertake projects that are large and complex and may not otherwise get done.
With regard to the infrastructure bank, we want to make sure that we have the right type of expertise in the bank that will allow us to always protect the public interest, to make sure that we have the right board, the right chair, and right staff. Their goal is to make sure that whatever deal is structured, it is structured to make sure the project is in the public interest, but that the deal itself does not put dollars at risk, that we make sure the private sector is able to absorb this—
