Transport Committee on April 15th, 2021

[Helena Jaczek, Liberal, Markham—Stouffville, ON]

Mr. Smith, speaking for AMO, have you had any particular role? Councillor Foster just alluded to some role for AMO in terms of assisting some of the smaller, more rural areas in accessing funds for high-speed Internet.

[Graydon Smith]

We've certainly played an advocacy role with both levels of government. Obviously, my being here today is part of that. I am with the provincial government on funding. We have a team at AMO that is working diligently to coordinate all the information out there and share it with the municipalities throughout Ontario.

As we've heard, circumstances differ greatly throughout the province in terms of the level of organization. You have SWIFT in southwest Ontario and EORN in eastern Ontario. In northern Ontario there's not quite the same level of coordination. Even in my own area in Muskoka, there isn't really a group that we're part of. On a district level, we have an RFP going out shortly to try to capture some of the dollars out there. It is confusing.

AMO is trying to play as much of a role as it can in terms of getting information out to municipalities to make sure they are aware of the programs out there and aware of the opportunities. Of course, the Rural Ontario Municipal Association has done an extensive amount of work on that as well. They have really taken the lead in terms of sharing information with their partners too.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Mr. Smith, Ms. Jaczek and Mr. Bradley.

We'll now move on to our third round, starting with the Conservatives.

Mr. Kram, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Michael Kram, Conservative, Regina—Wascana, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I believe it's Mr. Shipley's turn, if I'm not mistaken.

[Doug Shipley, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

Yes, Chair, we switched out.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

My notes still show Mr. Kram.

Mr. Shipley, go ahead. You have the floor.

[Doug Shipley, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

Thanks very much, Chair.

I would first like to welcome all the witnesses. I think on this committee we have a great wealth of knowledge on municipal infrastructure and politics, and now today we have an overwhelming number of people who have been involved in municipal politics for a long time. It's great to have such great witnesses here.

I'll direct my first question to Mr. Smith and maybe Mr. Demers. When I was on council in Barrie, many times we talked about our infrastructure deficit. We called it almost a looming cliff that was going to be approaching us quickly. I'm sure Mr. Smith and Mr. Demers have heard this from many of their members, so maybe they could express what they're hearing from their municipalities on the size of the infrastructure deficit and how that will be impacting municipalities in the near future.

[Graydon Smith]

Certainly, the deficit is enormous and one that the municipalities cannot tackle alone. There's tens of billions of dollars staring down municipal budgets, and we need assistance, quite frankly, to make things happen. To give an example, we've had ICIP for the last number of years. That has been discussed today in a couple of different ways. Within that program, there's a component for community culture and recreation projects, again a bilateral between the federal government and the province. That total was I think around $400 million in Ontario between the two levels of government.

It was simply not enough. When that program came out, it was oversubscribed 10:1. That is indicative of some of the challenges we face with respect to infrastructure deficits. Most communities who applied got the rejection letter and were left wondering what to do now. My community was one of those. We were replacing 180 years of combined infrastructure with an arena and a library. I know that the merits of the project were as strong as they could be, yet we weren't able to access funding. I would put that squarely on the fact that there's just not enough money in the program.

The infrastructure deficit is enormous. It is something that municipalities need help with. Again, that level of flexibility to make investments in communities with targeted projects and targeted dollars is incredibly important, but the quantity of those dollars is certainly important as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Mr. Demers.

[Jacques Demers]

I will hand over to Mr. Boulet, who is better able to talk about that.

[David Boulet]

The same kind of situation certainly exists in Quebec. Municipal infrastructure here is funded either annually or by project. So there is always a deficit in terms of undertaking and completing infrastructure projects.

Mr. Smith talked about communities wanting to build cultural or recreational infrastructure but getting rejection letters. I did not understand everything he said. The same thing happened in January in Quebec with a program that probably came from the same flow of federal funding and was established in collaboration with the Government of Quebec. Most of the projects, such as arenas and sport infrastructures, were rejected because the funding was simply not enough.

According to the Fédération québécoise des municipalités, given the situation of a possible economic recovery and a pandemic, failing to invest money in dynamic economic action and in the long-term renewal of infrastructure is certainly a problem.

The problem can also be attributed to municipal funding. I believe that, in Quebec as elsewhere, municipal funding raises questions. Municipalities do not have the tools they need to finance their infrastructures, as an example. Many solutions exist. However, the infrastructure deficit really is significant, and the solutions are not clear.

[Doug Shipley, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

I'll ask a quick question to Mr. Smith.

During the COVID pandemic, I know, for a lot of municipalities, two of the only ways they have of getting funds are through property taxes and user fees. I know some municipalities have tried to help residents through assisting with property taxes and user fees. Some funds have been provided. I know through the Association of Municipalities of Ontario that a lot has been received from the provinces.

Are municipalities still calling for more money for infrastructure to help assist, with some federal funds or programs?

[Graydon Smith]

Yes, absolutely we are. We've been pleased with the support we've received, both federally and provincially, so far. Recently we received some solely provincial money—around $500 million—for operation and infrastructure for municipalities.

I think the thing to keep in mind is that, if municipalities don't have sufficient operating funds and if their revenues are impaired, what we have to do to stay afloat, so to speak, in terms of providing the services that we normally provide.... If our revenues have been impaired on the operating side, then you start to see scavenging on the capital side and infrastructure doesn't get built and projects start to get scrapped or pushed back or delayed.

That's why the funding to support municipalities today in terms of operational and infrastructure challenges is so vitally important. We've seen user fees crater, and transit ridership crater. The cost of delivering these services continues to rise for us, because we have to do it in unique ways, but they're all services our communities need. Continued investment in municipalities in all forms is needed and welcome.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Mr. Smith and Mr. Shipley.

Just as an FYI for members of the committee, I am going to get through this round, so Mr. Barsalou-Duval and Mr. Bachrach, you will have opportunities for your interventions.

We're now going to go on to the Liberals.

Mr. El-Khoury, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Fayçal El-Khoury, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Welcome to our guests.

My first question goes to Mr. Demers.

Mr. Demers, last month, our government took its collaborative approach to investment in broadband to a new level. Together with the Government of Quebec, it announced an investment of more than $800 million to speed up broadband projects in the province. This new investment will allow every Quebecer to be connected to high-speed Internet by the end of 2022.

Could you tell us how crucial investments in broadband infrastructure are for the province's economic recovery, particularly after the COVID-19 pandemic?

[Jacques Demers]

You are totally right.

It is one of the best investments that the government could make. I don't know if people realize how important it is. It is not actually a recurring investment. By investing in this way, you get the fibre into homes and you provide each one with an Internet connection. After that, the service pays for itself and nothing else needs to be asked for.

We need a rotational management plan for our infrastructure. We know that. The issue will come back in a few years and we have to find the means to address it.

As you were saying about the Internet project, investments have been made. In 17 months, all households in Quebec should have their connection complete. As an investment, it's super.

I think it's the same everywhere. In the COVID-19 pandemic, students were told that they have to study from home. Everyone has been told not to go to the office and to work from home. In other words, everything has to be done from home. But we realized that things don't always work properly from home. In a number of homes, it could not be done, which was an incredible problem. The situation has now gone to another level.

I met the Premier a year and a half ago and I told him the same thing. However, in that year and a half, the situation has changed. Once, we used to say that an Internet connection was essential. Now, because of the COVID-19 pandemic, it has become indispensable.

With that investment, the government has just taken a very important step. I hope that all Canadians will be able to obtain Internet service as quickly as possible.

[Fayçal El-Khoury, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Demers, the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities recently announced that her department would undertake a national infrastructure assessment. The assessment will start a process to identify future infrastructure needs in Canada.

How can our government make sure that our infrastructure investments are building inclusive and green communities—especially green—in which we all want to live?

[Jacques Demers]

I have two answers for you.

First, I would say “great job”. We really need a management plan, which I still say must be a rotational plan.

Our highway infrastructures are in particular need of maintenance. We know that, after 10 or 12 years, the pavement must be changed and the road bed must be excavated once more. Asphalt pavement has to be redone according to the volume of traffic using it. Our engineers are able to calculate that. That's why the plan is rotational.

Once that is in place, you can tell the residents exactly when the work will be done on their streets. That does not vary by one year or several years. You know when the work has to be done again, because it keeps recurring. In a lot of places at the moment, work that has to be done every 10 or 12 years is being done every 30 years.

Your second question was about how to make the infrastructure greener. We know a lot about that here. We do it with our parking lots and in the way we protect them, but we could easily do it with our roads as well. To build roads, you have to excavate the road bed for several kilometres, and at double width, because they have two sides. Given that type of construction and what is called the lower third method, we are able to excavate them and protect them at the same time. So it's not just a question of taking soil away but of protecting the infrastructure so there is less erosion. A lot of methods along those lines should be considered.

Even when grants are provided, methods that are known by the department of transport must be considered. They must also be used in municipal areas. If we want to protect the infrastructure and keep it in good condition over the long term, let's build it in a much greener way, with proven techniques. These are not recent inventions. They have been tested and used in a number of places for 10 or 15 years already.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Mr. Demers.

Thank you, Mr. El-Khoury.

We're now going to move on to the Bloc Québécois.

Mr. Barsalou-Duval, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Here is another question for you, Mr. Demers. You are very popular today. I hope you feel good about that.

Since I have been sitting on this committee as the critic for transportation and infrastructure, I have noticed a kind of mania on the part of the federal government in announcing a string of new programs. It becomes a little complicated to make head or tail of them. Then, because it's a temporary program, it means that when there's no more money, there's no more program. Two years later, they announce another program, but they have changed only a comma here and a comma there. Can that situation be a problem for you in your area?

We know that the federal government has to come to an agreement with the Government of Quebec before the municipalities can get access to the programs. When the federal government does not operate in good faith, it means that there is almost no money anymore or, at least, the investments are late when they finally come.

In addition, having all kinds of new programs that change all the time makes things difficult for small municipalities, who no longer know what is going on. In fact, they often have no full-time employees assigned to seek out grants. Would the ideal situation not be to guarantee some predictability and stability?

[Jacques Demers]

I feel that predictability is needed whatever the size of the municipality, but for small municipalities in particular.

That is why I would find it worthwhile to do a study to assess the state of our infrastructures. A number of municipalities have already done so but I am aware that some have not. They usually say that, even if they wanted to do more, they do not have the means. So they stop at what is most urgent.

You are absolutely right when you talk about predictability. Programs should be developed with the various levels of government working together. Then, once municipalities get access to them, they must be given the freedom to manage them according to their needs. Needs can change from one place to another, which is why we talk about flexibility.

At that point, you can predict. So, when we receive major grants, we are able to ask for things according to the rotational management plan, because we see which infrastructures are moving forward and what remains to be done. That flexibility would be useful, not only to the government, which could see how the work for that municipality was moving forward, but also for the residents, who would understand the issues and the progress their municipality is making.

One elected municipal official might want to delay taxes, for example. However, then another one arrives and he feels that everything needs to be done over. But with a big picture, things are less complicated. I feel it is essential if we want to take a long-term view.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Mr. Bachrach, you have the floor, for two and a half minutes.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to round out this meeting with one final question to Mr. Kariya. It's a bit of a two-part question.

First, could you speak to the risks and challenges that result when communities in our region don't have access to adequate broadband and communications infrastructure?

Second, could you speak to the way you feel broadband—and you spoke a bit about this at the beginning—can unlock the economic potential of coastal communities?

[Paul Kariya]

The big risk or challenge is that these are communities, these are nations, that are trying very much to be a part of Canada. That may sound so trite, but after having spent 40 years, both as a public servant, federally and provincially, having been a professor studying this stuff, and now working directly with the nations, I don't say that kind of stuff lightly.

All of us know the challenges, particularly when these are nations that have rights and title. That's a huge challenge. These are communities struggling to succeed and to be part of the fabric of Canada. There is great opportunity.

Canada has indicated a green recovery and a blue economy. These are nations that have been working with Canada, for example, on the oceans protection plan. Where the risk comes in, if we don't succeed with connectivity, is with regard to human health and safety.

We're on a major reconciliation initiative on fish and fisheries. We need that technology to do things like catch monitoring, having guardians and monitors out there checking the fishery, as well as the safety of family groups and fishermen out fishing. There's a huge opportunity to embrace first nation communities on the north and central coasts.

In fact, the expanse is from northern Vancouver Island to the Alaska panhandle. This is huge. These are nations that have worked together with Canada and British Columbia. We've made some great strides, but we have a bit to go.

I would like to end with the following comment. We've done a good job together on the highway so to speak, the broadband and backbone linkage. Where we're failing a bit, and there's a lot of room to improve, is on the road linkages—using that metaphor—to the nations with the last mile. That's where we need to put our efforts. We're prepared to do our part. We're open-armed in terms of working with Canada and British Columbia on that.