Transport Committee on April 22nd, 2021

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

Thank you very much. I may not have looked properly. You can appreciate that there are a lot of programs and sometimes it's hard to navigate. I do hope I'm the one who is wrong about this.

This is unfortunately not the first program that I've had trouble finding information on once it has been announced. When a program is announced, I don't understand why the information on how to participate is not included right after the announcement. For example, there could be a hyperlink at the bottom of the page, along with related documents. It seems to me that it would be a good practice.

I have another question for you.

The Auditor General found that recent disbursements under the Investing in Canada plan represented 20% of planned spending, and therefore the remaining amounts would have to be carried forward to future years. Amounts are often announced but end up not being spent in full.

What are you going to do to ensure that the funds are disbursed in a timely manner, so that the money actually goes to the people, instead of re-announcing the same amounts of money over and over again?

[Kelly Gillis]

Thank you. Your question is very important.

In the budget forecasting process, we really do use the forecasts for projects already approved with the provinces, territories and communities. When we have to carry over funds due to delays in the delivery of projects, in circumstances beyond our control, it's up to the communities, provinces or managers—

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

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Go ahead, Mr. Bachrach.

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

My apologies for interrupting, but I believe we're getting the interpretation at the same volume as the language spoken. I am, at least.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Okay, we'll take a second. Mr. Clerk, can you check on that, please?

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

Sorry, Ms. Gillis.

[The Clerk]

Mr. Chair, I believe it was potentially caused by Ms. Gillis. If she is speaking French but using the English channel, it may cross over.

If you're going to be speaking both languages, it's best to select the floor channel; otherwise, it can cause a little issue.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Mr. Clerk.

Ms. Gillis, you can continue.

[Kelly Gillis]

In our fund allocation exercise, we need to look at projections for a project as a whole and appropriately distribute funds over the years in which the project will be carried out. If I look at three projects [Technical difficulties]. We are currently managing 5,000 projects where we are in the process of allocating funds. For the three community transportation projects, we need to carry $500,000 forward to future years to make sure that we have the funds to meet our obligations.

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

Thank you.

I'd like to ask you another question about our current study.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

It will have to be quick.

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

I will ask my question quickly, Mr. Chair.

During his testimony before the committee, the president of the Fédération québécoise des municipalités, which represents over 1,000 municipalities in Quebec, called for a return to the old federal gas tax fund formula, which provided funding for community centres, for example. You just announced that you want to pay for those types of centres through another fund.

Do you intend to listen to that request from the municipalities? I've asked this question several times before. The municipalities have also brought it up on a number of occasions.

[Kelly Gillis]

Thank you for the question.

The federal gas tax fund agreements are in place through 2024 and will be renewed thereafter. When the time comes, we will have discussions about whether to create new investment categories.

We currently have a $1.5-billion program that communities can use to build, renovate or upgrade community centres. In addition, the integrated bilateral agreements have a community centre component.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Ms. Gillis, and thank you, Mr. Barsalou-Duval.

We're now going to move on to Mr. Bachrach.

Mr. Bachrach, you have the floor for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Ms. Gillis, for being here today.

My first question is regarding the climate lens for infrastructure investment.

I wonder if you could tell us how many infrastructure projects have received approval by your department pending a climate lens assessment.

[Kelly Gillis]

At this point in time, we've had 173 projects approved using the climate lens, representing 85% of the funding that's been approved. As I believe the member is aware, it's for projects over $10 million and those within the green stream.

Of the 173 approved projects that have gone through an assessment, some have been deferred. Of the deferrals—and we've had this conversation before—13 have completed the climate lens and have met that particular condition. With all of our programs that require a climate lens, any of the approvals we give are conditional on completing what's required.

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

Ms. Gillis, have any project approvals that are conditional on completing the climate lens been withdrawn, based on the result of the climate lens assessment?

[Kelly Gillis]

The climate lens assessments have been submitted to us, and they go through a quality assurance and due diligence process. We work very closely with communities and provinces across the country in understanding what the requirements are, sharing guidance with what the climate lens requirements and steps are, including having the appropriate expertise to complete the actual assessment.

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

I asked the question because my understanding is that the climate lens assessment was meant to guide your department's decision-making around investments so that those investments went into projects that drive down emissions. If the assessment process is being done retroactively, after the project is approved, it's hard to see how that assessment guides the decision-making process. It's describing the emissions impact of the project, but that's not the most important aspect of the climate lens, arguably.

In the budget, there's $36 million to develop a new climate lens methodology. I'm wondering what the scope of that initiative will be and what lessons your department takes from its current climate lens that will inform that process.

[Kelly Gillis]

The funding in the budget is for Environment and Climate Change Canada to look at a broader applicability of the climate lens as we look at our commitments to net zero in 2050 and reducing emissions as we move forward into 2030. It has a broader applicability than Infrastructure Canada or even just infrastructure.

Certainly when we looked at the climate lens, it was about behavioural changes and understanding how you build projects differently. It was part of the project approval process to bring in different understandings and doing things differently from business as usual.

That said, we also have been investing with the National Research Council in more resilient materials, and also working with the Standards Council of Canada to, again, look at building in the north more resiliently, as well as looking at net-zero types of material with NRCan, working with the National Research Council. It's other things to bring upstream opportunities that go beyond the investments of project-specific opportunities that we've been looking at.

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

Ms. Gillis, in budget 2021 it was noted that $17.6 billion in new funding was being earmarked for green recovery, yet when The Globe and Mail did an analysis, they could only count $8.75 billion.

Could you explain the $17.6-billion figure? Also, what spending is a part of that figure as green recovery?

[Kelly Gillis]

For the budget overall, which was an extensive budget, I can talk about Infrastructure Canada and the commitments in there, the important parts of what we're doing in contributing to the enhanced climate plan.

The $1.5-billion green and inclusive building that was part of the enhanced climate plan is an important commitment in advancing what we can do in climate, but for the actual individual programs within the budget itself, I don't have an itemized list beside me at this point.

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

Ms. Gillis, turning to the departmental plan, under “Planned Results for Public Infrastructure, Communities and Rural Economic Development Policy” on page 8, we see that for the departmental result identified as “Infrastructure improves the ‘quality of life’ for all Canadians”, indicator 1.2.3 reads, “GHG emissions per capita in current year less 0.0000085 megatons (2005 reference year)” and the target is less than zero.

I read this over several times trying to understand what it meant. Could you explain it in simple terms?

[Kelly Gillis]

Mr. Chair, as we look at GHG investments per capita, we are looking at investments to reduce our GHG, and I will ask my colleague Gerard Peets to go through that particular indicator.