Transport Committee on Nov. 19th, 2020

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Mr. Rogers and Minister McKenna.

We'll now move on to Mr. Barsalou-Duval.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Welcome to the committee, Ms. McKenna.

Earlier, I heard you talk about all kinds of infrastructure projects but there is one topic that I did not hear you raise. However, I have had the opportunity to discuss it with you on a number of occasions and perhaps your thinking may have evolved since.

For about a year, we have been talking to you about the criteria imposed on municipalities under the Gas Tax Fund and Quebec's Contribution, or TECQ. Municipalities have been writing to me in their hundreds—and we have made a collection of their resolutions—to denounce those criteria and to demand to finally be able to use the funds for city halls, fire stations, municipal garages and warehouses. I feel that you are very familiar with the subject.

I would like to know whether any specific loosening of those criteria is foreseen. You will understand that, at the height of this pandemic, municipalities need money in order to carry out their projects. It will help them financially and it will also help the economy.

[Catherine McKenna, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Thank you for the question.

The federal gas tax fund is certainly important for Quebec. We have contributed more than $2.5 billion to support communities, whatever their size.

As for the way in which it works, I feel that it is really important to understand that the situation in Quebec is different from the other provinces of Canada. Quebec is responsible for administering the federal gas tax fund through its own program. This allows it to ensure that the investments support the infrastructure projects that directly benefit municipalities.

The federal gas tax fund provides money for infrastructures that are mainly intended for public use or benefit, such as sports centres or cultural and tourist infrastructures, rather than municipal buildings that principally serve the municipal administration. I know that we have talked about that a lot.

Discussions are underway with the Government of Quebec with a view to establishing a new component with a broader scope: the COVID-19 Resilience stream of the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program. This will help municipalities a lot, including with their municipal buildings.

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

Thank you, Madam Minister.

I think I have an answer to my question, but essentially, you read the program description to me. I am pleased to know that discussions are underway. It will be interesting to find out whether those discussions go in the direction of what is being proposed here. In fact, according to the information I have, it seems that the blockage is on the federal side, in terms of giving more flexibility to the municipalities.

The problem is that those small municipalities are in difficulty at the moment. They have experienced huge drops in revenue and I feel that it would be good to give them flexibility and space during these times. It would help them a lot. We are talking about municipalities like Berthierville, Amos, La Sarre, La Malbaie, Saint-Denis-sur-Richelieu and Louiseville, to name but a few. Hundreds of municipalities are affected by these restrictive policies and I feel that a sympathetic ear on the part of the government would be welcome.

You talked a lot about the Canada Infrastructure Bank with my Conservative colleague and you also brought up the Contrecœur Terminal project for the Port of Montreal. You were the Minister of Environment and Climate Change in the past. You have probably therefore kept an eye on the file and you must also know that yesterday, the project received approval from the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada.

I would really like to know why the project has not yet received federal funding through, for example, the National Trade Corridors Fund. Although Quebec has a lot of good projects like that, it receives less than 10% of the money from the fund.

I know that your answer will be that the Canada infrastructure Bank has a $300 million agreement. But that agreement is just a loan, not a grant. Yet grants exist and the other provinces have had access to that fund. Why do Quebec and the Contrecœur Terminal project not have access to it?

[Catherine McKenna, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Yes, I was indeed the Minister of Environment and Climate Change previously, but I feel that we are talking about two different things. The Canada infrastructure Bank has shown an interest, but there's also an environmental impact process.

I think you are also talking about access to funding. The Minister of Transport operates the funds that have to do with trade, including the National Trade Corridors Fund. So I can ask him the question.

We recognize how important infrastructure is for trade, for international trade. We are always seeking to invest in new projects.

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

Thank you. However, what is important to me is that Quebec receives its fair share of federal investments. At the moment, that is not the case. When we put good projects on the table, I feel that those projects must be financed and get the appropriate attention.

We currently have another problem: all the cities are in difficulty, of course, but airports are too. The aviation sector is severely affected.

Earlier, you also talked about the Canada Infrastructure Bank and said that funding for the Réseau express métropolitain, or REM, was on your list. However, because of the pandemic, the Montreal airport no longer has a penny to its name, which puts the link with the REM at the airport in jeopardy.

The Government of Quebec has so far invested $1.2 billion in the REM project. It seems like the federal government does not want to provide its share of the investment required to bring the project to a conclusion and we would like to know why. Will you eventually be putting any money into it?

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Mr. Barsalou-Duval.

Be quick, Minister McKenna.

[Catherine McKenna, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Of course, we recognize that the situation is difficult because of the pandemic and that there are also economic consequences.

The REM is a very important project. Like you, I read in the newspaper that the Government of Quebec does not want to invest any more in the REM. On our side, we have invested in the project through the Canada Infrastructure Bank.

So we will study the matter, because public transportation is really important. I always try to have more public transportation than less.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Minister McKenna.

We'll now move on to Mr. Bachrach.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for being with us today, Minister.

I want to start with the topic of the climate crisis. I know this is something that you and I share as an urgent concern. You've spoken quite a bit about climate action being a priority for your department. Yet looking at the departmental plan for 2020-21, it really doesn't speak at all to Infrastructure's role in meeting Canada's emission reduction targets. I believe there is one line in there with a target of having 3.5% of municipalities enhance their “capacity to reduce [greenhouse gas] emissions and adapt to climate change as a result of federal funding”, but there is no quantification and there are no metrics.

With none of these specific measures in the departmental plan, how can Canadians be assured that we're on track to meet the targets with regard to the contribution of specifically Infrastructure?

[Catherine McKenna, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

That's a really great question.

As you know, I am passionate about action on climate change. We just announced our net-zero legislation. Infrastructure, as I say, either increases emissions or reduces them, and makes us either more or less resilient. We have a climate lens on projects right now. The legislation was actually brought in. It was a private member's bill, as you would know, by my great parliamentary secretary Andy Fillmore. It only applies to projects of $10 million and over.

I certainly agree that we need to be looking from a climate perspective at every single project. That is something that I am committed to and we are looking at instituting. I also agree that we need to be creating incentives for communities to make the right decision to lower their emissions. We need to be understanding how much they're going to be lowering their emissions. We need to be looking from a longer-term perspective at how we're going to be at net zero by 2050. I've talked about the importance of a national infrastructure assessment so that we have a lens to the longer term, all the way out, so that we are very clear about where we need to be with clear goals along the way.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Mr. Bachrach.

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

The question was, how are we going to know that we're on track? I listened as carefully as I could, and I didn't pick that up.

I'll move on to my next topic, which is rural broadband. You've spoken a little bit about it. This is a really key concern for the region in northwest B.C. that I represent. It's a large rural region, as you know very well. The department's goal is to get high-speed Internet to 98% of Canadians by 2026. How did the department arrive at that number of 98%?

[Catherine McKenna, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

I can certainly sympathize with folks who are having such a challenging time right now, and in your own riding. ISED is the lead on broadband, but we do play a supporting role. I play a supporting role in terms of the investing in Canada plan. We've invested over $340 million for 11 connectivity projects through the rural and northern stream. We are but one part, and that requires the provinces and territories to actually prioritize broadband over, for example, roads and bridges.

There is also the Canada Infrastructure Bank, which has made $2 billion in new funding available to connect. They've said three-quarters of a million homes and small businesses, at least. That's something that I will be following extremely closely, because I could not agree more; I think the biggest infrastructure challenge is connecting all Canadians as quickly as possible.

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

Minister, in your departmental plan, you talk about inclusivity. I'm wondering if this inclusivity includes equity between rural and urban communities. Is that something that is referenced there? If it is, does your department explicitly measure this dimension of equity?

[Catherine McKenna, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

I should say that inclusivity is extremely important to me. We do have community benefits, but it is a different way of looking at inclusivity to include people who live in rural areas, and I absolutely agree that this is part of inclusivity. Once again, I'm looking at how we get outcomes, outcomes in terms of jobs and economic growth. How do we get outcomes in terms of climate action? How do we get outcomes, in terms of inclusivity, in designing programs where we can explicitly measure and track those goals? We are certainly working on that.

I think you raised an extremely important point. A lot of times, people think of inclusivity as the LGBTQ+ community or maybe people from an accessibility standpoint, but I think we need to also look at it from a rural-urban lens as well.

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

According to your departmental plan, Minister, important results of public infrastructure are inclusivity and sustainably increased economic growth, yet the only indicator that is listed in the plan is GDP growth. How do you plan to measure inclusivity and sustainability? The challenge, and what I'm getting at, is that these words are in the departmental plan, but there are never metrics or specific objectives to give the public any sense that progress is being made towards these goals. How can people have a sense...? I'll come back to my previous question: How can we have any confidence that progress is being made if there are no metrics and there are no quantifiable objectives in the departmental plan?

[Catherine McKenna, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

I think that's a really great point. Our plan, just to be very clear, the way it's structured is that, for example, we have a stream that's called green infrastructure. It is provinces and territories that determine what projects come to us, or community, culture and recreation. We get projects that have been submitted by municipalities or other partners to the provinces. They decide which ones end up on my desk.

I do think that we need to be looking at that very closely because, I agree: When we make investments in infrastructure, we need to be making sure that everyone is getting an opportunity to access good infrastructure. We know that we have an infrastructure deficit in indigenous communities. We know that, in racialized communities, there is often a deficit and a gap. I think we need to do more. We are looking at.... I've talked to the chief statistician to figure out how we do that better, how we can develop the tools.

As I said, I'm outcomes-based. I think that every dollar we spend, every taxpayer dollar, needs to reach three outcomes. It has to create jobs in the short term and economic growth in the long term. It needs to tackle climate change, reducing emissions and building more resilient communities, and it needs to build more inclusive communities for all. I am looking at how we do that. I am happy to work with the member—because I know the member cares about this greatly—and to get input from the member on what the best practices are. I know that in British Columbia there are some great initiatives. The City of Toronto has ways of looking at inclusivity. I think that really is the opportunity to make sure that we're getting multiple—triple—benefits from every dollar that is spent.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Minister McKenna.

We're now going to our second round. I have lined up, for five minutes each, Ms. Kusie and Ms. Jaczek; for two and a half minutes each, Mr. Barsalou-Duval and Mr. Bachrach; and for five minutes each, Mr. Kram and Mr. Fillmore.

We're going to start off with Ms. Kusie.

You have the floor.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister, it's good to see you. Finally, we get to do our salutations here after some time. James certainly sends his regards as well. He asks about you from time to time within the house.

Minister, you just said something that really catches my attention, as well as that of the opposition and Canadians. It's that you're outcomes-based. However, your CEO of the Infrastructure Bank received a performance bonus for zero outcomes; that's zero projects completed. It doesn't seem to me to be very outcomes-based that someone would receive a performance bonus—your outgoing CEO—for zero projects completed under the Infrastructure Bank.

I'm not sure if there were other metrics that you used in an attempt to reward him—initiative or motivation or other types of things. Perhaps you can explain to me, the committee and Canadians why your outgoing CEO received a performance bonus for zero projects completed under the Infrastructure Bank.

[Catherine McKenna, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

I should just note, and I think this is really important, that the Canada Infrastructure Bank is an arm's-length Crown corporation, and it absolutely does need to deliver on its mandate to invest in major nation-building projects. This is something I've been absolutely focused on since I've come in.

I'm very pleased that we were able to attract Michael Sabia, the new chair of the Canada Infrastructure Bank, who just announced a $10-billion growth plan.

We now have a new CEO. I note that the CEO's base salary range and performance pay compensation total is 40% lower than previously. I have high expectations for the CIB and for Mr. Cory. I know they're going to deliver on their mandate to get more infrastructure built across this country, nation-building projects, projects that really would never have been built under a Conservative government that wanted to cancel infrastructure projects from coast to coast to coast.

We need to move forward. This is how we are going to grow our economy. Investments in infrastructure are the largest driver of GDP, of growth of our economy, but also great jobs, union jobs for Canadians. I talked to the unions about how important these jobs are—

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Thank you, Minister. I agree with you.

See? We're getting along already. We both agree that performance is important. That's fantastic.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Ms. Kusie.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Thank you so much, Chair.

I'm going to move on to a question regarding the Ontario government. In May, the Government of Ontario sent you a letter requesting a formal agreement in regard to the subway transit plan for the greater Ontario area, but they have yet to receive a response. That was six months ago.

Minister, when can they receive a response in regard to that important plan?

[Catherine McKenna, Liberal, Ottawa Centre, ON]

I have many discussions with my counterparts in Ontario, and I think there's a huge opportunity to get public transit built. As I said, we've already spent 13 times the amount that the previous government spent on public transit. It's key, including in my hometown of Hamilton, where we're really hoping that the Ford government will step up. LiUNA, the union, is very keen on this happening. They want to be a partner, as does the Chamber of Commerce.

Look. My goal is to get infrastructure built, but what we need to see are business plans. I'm responsible for taxpayers' dollars—