Transport Committee on April 18th, 2023

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

I was at Fisheries and Oceans Canada at the time, if memory serves.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

You were part of the cabinet. This project has been talked about since 2017. At some point, the impatience becomes justified.

I have a question about the Canada-Quebec agreement. Announcements were made, and we talked about it in the House. We knew that, out of the $7.5 billion, $2.3 billion was at stake for Quebec.

Can you confirm that all of the $7.5 billion that was allocated to Quebec will be spent in Quebec?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

If you're talking about the $2.7‑billion agreement established under the investing in Canada infrastructure program, which is bilateral, I would say that there was frankly a very positive collaboration with Minister Julien and Minister Guilbault. We have reached an agreement and come up with joint projects that we will announce in the coming months.

I will be specific, as we are here to discuss finances. In a former program of the Harper government, an amount of about 700—

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

You know what $7.5 billion I'm talking about. Is that money going to be spent in Quebec? It's a simple yes or no answer.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

In terms of the amount of money that we have committed, as a government, to projects involving the federal government and Quebec, the answer is yes. We can provide you with the details of that, as that question has been raised in the House. I would like to remind you, however, that under a previous program, during the Harper era, funds were not allocated, and in the budget a year ago, the Minister of Finance took back a total of $700 million to redistribute it across the country, including to Quebec.

However, if you are talking about the Canada-Quebec agreement established under the investing in Canada infrastructure program, I would say that all the money allocated by our government will indeed be spent in Quebec.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

I accept your answer, but I would appreciate it if you could submit the relevant details to the committee.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

We will make sure of that. I just don't want there to be any misunderstanding.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Exactly.

I would now like to come back to the Canada Infrastructure Bank. I am curious. I heard the questions from my colleague, Ms. Lewis. As we know, the bank's mandate is being revised. A great deal of criticism has been levied against the lack of transparency in the process. It has therefore been an issue.

This organization is not a bank and has difficulty creating infrastructure. Have you considered changing its name?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

No, we have not. We obviously want to keep the word “Canada” in its name. It's a public funding institution for infrastructure projects. I can confirm that we will keep the word “Canada” in its name. However, I'm open to your suggestions, if you think there's a better word than “bank” to define the organization, for example.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

For the word “Canada”, I could be very creative. Let's keep in touch.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

You have some ideas on that.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Don't ever doubt it.

Earlier, with the deputy minister, I quickly touched on the subject of the dike in Sainte‑Marthe‑sur‑le‑Lac. The City of Sainte‑Marthe‑sur‑le‑Lac was promised just over $20 million. Because of administrative delays, $10 million or more were cut and Quebec paid it out.

At Infrastructure Canada, is there any political will to pay back Quebec's taxpayers for the $10 million that the province spent instead of Ottawa?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

I, too, come from a small Atlantic region. These types of projects are essential in smaller towns, in regions. Let me look into it. We will then provide more details on that. I am sensitive to this type of issue.

I wasn't here when you talked with the deputy minister, but I am sure she gave you a completely satisfactory answer. I will, however, make sure with her that the required details are provided to you. If it's possible to do something else, it will be my pleasure.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Garon.

Next we have Mr. Bachrach.

Mr. Bachrach, the floor is yours. You have six minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for being here with us today and taking our questions.

You and I have spoken in the recent past about the situation facing Prince Rupert, a community that's struggling with a serious infrastructure deficit. This is a small community, a small city, that supports Canada's third-fastest-growing port and can't accommodate future port growth unless it addresses its drinking water infrastructure crisis. As you know, over Christmas the city had to declare a state of emergency after a series of watermain breaks. They now fear the catastrophic collapse of their drinking water infrastructure, which of course would put them in a very tenuous situation when it comes to supporting the port operations and the residents who call that place home. We were thrilled to see the B.C. government come in to the tune of $65 million, which is part of the cost of addressing the immediate needs of the community in their water crisis.

Now, I asked you a question about this in the House of Commons on March 7. I was really pleased that you ended your response by saying you “hope to have good news soon.” I wonder if you could start by talking about what that good news might look like from a federal perspective and what “soon” might mean.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Good news would look like a further significant investment by the Government of Canada with the City of Prince Rupert in this critical project.

Mr. Chair, Mr. Bachrach is absolutely correct that he and I have had a number of occasions to discuss the importance of this project. It is an anomaly that a city with that population would be such a critical piece of the economic infrastructure of Canada. I have heard from business leaders on multiple occasions of the importance of that port.

I have been going to Prince Rupert since I was kid with my dad, who was the fisheries minister in the 1970s, so I understand the size of the community and its economic impact on the Canadian economy.

It is unreasonable for the City of Prince Rupert to assume some infrastructure as critical as a water system. On the full cost, you're right: the Province of British Columbia invested $65 million, which we think is positive. We obviously recognize that. We know there's a program at our department called the disaster mitigation and adaptation fund. All bureaucratic programs have nice acronyms; this one is called DMAF.

On February 28 and again on April 5 there were conversations between the department and the City of Prince Rupert. There's a deadline in July, on July 19, and we'll work with the City of Prince Rupert, to make sure they maximize the possibility for the Government of Canada to allocate funds from that program, and I'll work with the deputy and our colleagues in the department to make sure that they understand the priority that you and I and the government have on finding a way to help Prince Rupert.

That, I hope, may be the first and best place to start, as I said to you, but it won't be the end of our work together, and we're looking at other options where the Government of Canada could continue to make those investments.

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

Thank you very much, Minister.

It's certainly promising and good to hear that there are plans being put in place to get them the assistance they need as quickly as possible. I think the idea of having the catastrophic failure of a city's water system in such an important geographic location is really unthinkable and needs to be avoided.

Once the immediate infrastructure crisis is averted, in the longer term there needs to be a way to support these smaller port communities that are playing such an integral role in our country's economy. One of the proposals that's been put forward is establishing some kind of a threshold under which the federal stipend that port authorities pay to the federal government would be redirected towards municipalities to support the infrastructure they need to accommodate port growth and run their civic operations. Is this a proposal your government is considering?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

The short answer would be yes. Of course, my colleague the Minister of Transport would have the direct line of sight on these port lease payments and so on, but it was an idea you shared with me when we spoke a few months ago. I hadn't thought of that. I talked to Omar Alghabra, my colleague, about exactly that because it speaks to the creative way that our government should partner with a city like Prince Rupert in recognizing that the traditional Canada-B.C.-City of Prince Rupert programs don't meet.... This is not a precedent for a 100 places in the country. There are maybe a handful of smaller places that are huge economic arteries for the country.

The answer is yes, we're looking with Transport Canada at how that might work, but we're not going to stop there. The deputy and I and our colleagues in the department are reimagining new infrastructure programs, whether it's the Canada community-building fund or other instruments we hope to roll out in the coming months. There's a fall economic statement coming up. There's a budget coming up. Your provincial government has been very articulate in advocating for this as well, so I'm hoping that we'll have a better tool kit at Infrastructure Canada to work directly with these smaller municipalities that happen to be, by geography, these giant economic arteries for the whole country. We should have a better tool kit to respond to that.

My commitment to you is to develop that with Prince Rupert in mind, but we're looking at these short-term solutions. The disaster mitigation and adaptation fund can be another contribution, we hope, and perhaps Transport Canada's port leases, but I'll be happy to follow up again with Mr. Alghabra.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Bachrach.

Next we have Dr. Lewis.

Dr. Lewis, the floor is once again yours. You have five minutes.

[Leslyn Lewis, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Thank you, Minister. You stated that the Infrastructure Bank has spent modestly on salaries, so I'm just going to highlight some of these salaries. In 2020-21, spending for infrastructure programs was $25 million versus $17.742 million on salaries. In 2021-22, spending on infrastructure was just $11 million versus salaries of $24 million. In the same year, 2021-22, the bank's executives awarded themselves a 35% increase in salary and bonuses.

Minister, why is this failed bank paying bonuses to underperforming executives?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Mr. Chair, it won't surprise you that I don't share the premise of the question. I just want to be very precise that the executives of the bank didn't award themselves those bonuses. Those would have been approved, of course, by the board of directors, which is at arm's length from the government.

I think the numbers Dr. Lewis was quoting are from the annual report of the bank. It's done in a transparent way. These are approved by a board of directors. The comparable metrics are similar to private sector financial institutions. We also recognize that the bank was ramping up. As the number of investment decisions was increasing and as the equity and financing that was being made available to projects was going up, it's reasonable that the staff should go up as well—

[Leslyn Lewis, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Minister, that's not accurate.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

—but in a modest and reasonable way.

[Leslyn Lewis, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Minister, that's not accurate. In fact, from 2020-21—

[Jennifer O'Connell, Liberal, Pickering—Uxbridge, ON]

I have a point of order.