Transport Committee on Sept. 20th, 2023

[Patrick Massicotte]

The city of Trois‑Rivières has experienced significant economic growth in recent years.

In the knowledge field, the Université du Québec à Trois‑Rivières has been a leader in innovation and green hydrogen, for example. That's what encouraged the Quebec government to create the Vallée de la transition énergétique, including Mauricie and Centre‑du‑Québec, and to designate that region as an innovation zone with high growth potential. The city of Bécancour has one of the largest industrial parks in the country, which has made it possible for major industrial companies, like the GMs and Fords of the world, which I mentioned earlier, to set up there.

So we're experiencing a boom, which is why the City of Trois‑Rivières and the Quebec and Canadian governments recently provided funding to expand our airport terminal. Something's happening in our city. We have a port and an airport, and adding the train would help stimulate our economy even further.

Major investments have also been made in tourism. Many tourists come from around the world, from Europe in particular. Cruise ships dock in Trois‑Rivières, and Canadians visit the city, which has truly become a tourist destination.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

You are unfortunately out of speaking time, Mr. Barsalou‑Duval.

Next we have Mr. Bachrach.

Mr. Bachrach, the floor is yours. You have two and a half minutes.

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

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

The fixation of both Liberal and Conservative governments on public-private partnerships has always seemed a bit more of an ideological fixation, rather than being based on an objective evaluation. The auditors general of both British Columbia and Ontario analyzed dozens of P3 projects and found that they're more likely to cost taxpayers more and run behind schedule.

I'm really fascinated by the decision-making to go with this model for the HFR project. Our research shows that the government analyzed 20 different Canadian and international transportation projects when assessing procurement options. None of those 20 used public procurement models.

This is to Mr. Imbleau—and I understand that he's new in the position. Why does he think it is that there was not a single one?

[Martin Imbleau]

First, I have to be humble about the fact that we inherited a mandate to do a procurement process. That was decided by other authorities, so I respect that decision.

That being said, at the risk of repeating myself, having the mix of building the intelligence and expertise internally while relying on the expertise of the private sector, and the innovation, in this case, we think is the right approach.

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

To Mr. Johnson, if we were to look around the world, and if we could go back in time and have the government do a fair analysis of rail projects that have been publicly procured versus ones that have been privately procured, where would we look for public examples?

[Terence Johnson]

That's actually a good question.

I want to make one thing clear. We're not opposed to the private sector. We are opposed to getting this wrong. We want to be very pragmatic about this. One of the lessons of the Ottawa LRT project is that the public partner wasn't sufficiently sophisticated. Actually, it's very good that we have very skilled people being brought into the Via Rail HFR team to hold the public part of this project down.

The thing is that the original plan was a public-private partnership, but it was one for infrastructure. It's one that would have been an availability payment-based project for the infrastructure, and those are quite common. Totally outsourcing your entire railway isn't very common. In fact, the only equivalent I can think of is the deal that the Indonesians have just done with China for their HSR. You could compare that, for example, with what India has done in building its domestic capability.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Bachrach. You had 15 seconds left.

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

I'll take them in my next round.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

That sounds good.

Next we have Mr. Lewis.

Mr. Lewis, the floor is yours. You have five minutes.

[Chris Lewis, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have five minutes and 15 seconds. Thank you, Mr. Bachrach.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Chris Lewis, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Thank you very much to the witnesses for this late evening meeting, but a very important meeting. There's no doubt. It's a very critical meeting. Thanks so much for your testimony.

The first question I have is a really simple question, I think. It will be directed both to Mr. Imbleau and Mr. Johnson.

My riding of Essex is right next to Windsor. It's the busiest international border crossing in North America. Does it make sense to either of you gentlemen—just briefly—that we would now call it the Toronto-Quebec corridor and not go back to the Windsor-Quebec corridor? We could potentially tie the United States into this with the likes of Chicago and whatnot. Are we walking past a golden opportunity if we're doing the investment anyway?

[Martin Imbleau]

The mandate we inherited is very specific, Mr. Lewis. It's really Quebec-Toronto. We know that there are studies being done as we speak by Transport Canada to look at other expansions. It's out of our mandate. Maybe that question should be put to the people of Transport Canada when they appear before this committee.

[Terence Johnson]

I've actually spoken with the study team that's been engaged from CPCS by Transport Canada to look at what they're calling HFR, phase two, in southwestern Ontario.

Now, the problem I have with this is that they're calling it “phase two”, because actually solving the problems in southwestern Ontario is much easier than solving the problem between Toronto and Ottawa, and we could be solving the problems today.

We could be keeping some of the promises that were made four or five years ago—actually, longer—about having multiple trains per day to Sarnia and five or six trains to Windsor and Essex. We could be speeding up the train from Windsor by half an hour to Toronto easily, and we could do it today. Via Rail Canada can do it with the government's proper backing to implement plans it has already made.

[Chris Lewis, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Johnson.

Thank you, Mr. Imbleau.

I'll just build on that quickly, then. Earlier on, the word “grain” came up, on moving grain. Ironically, Windsor has a port. We ship a lot of grain to, ironically, the Chicagos of the world, the Milwaukees of the world and whatnot. We talked about grain, which is awesome.

Now let's talk about the St. Thomas battery plant, and let's talk about the Windsor Stellantis battery plant. These are to the tune of $12-billion investments. Let's talk about critical minerals that one day, hopefully, will be mined in the Far North of Ontario. Let's talk not only about getting people to the locations, but about getting our critical minerals to these battery plants that are going to—are supposed to—fill about 5,000 new jobs, roughly.

Would it not make sense, then, to actually do this in reverse to ensure that Windsor is actually the starting point and we move it east? It only makes sense to me, with all of the infrastructure that's being put in place in these areas, which, by the way, aren't remote. This is actually the hub of North America.

Would you agree with me, Mr. Johnson, that this really needs to be looked at very closely to ensure we're not walking past an opportunity?

[Terence Johnson]

I think it really is the case that the right and left hands can do two different things at the same time here. We can.... This is one of the problems with having separated Via Rail and Via HFR. Via Rail is in somewhat lame duck mode and doesn't know what it's supposed to do for the next 10 years to tackle the challenges we have right now, whereas they could be doing all of the things at once, because these things are synergistic. They all feed each other.

In talking about freight, though, we really need to ask why we let the freight railroads abandon so much of their infrastructure and then tell us how they don't have any capacity left for passenger trains. There was a perfectly good double-track line going from Essex to St. Thomas 10 years ago, and it's all gone.

[Chris Lewis, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Johnson.

Mr. Imbleau, do you have any final comments, sir? You have about 30 seconds.

[Martin Imbleau]

Having more passenger trains on freight train tracks doesn't make much sense, for the reason that you've mentioned. I just don't see, in 50 years, having passenger trains running on diesel between cities and still slowing down freight trains, because the economy is growing.

In any event, with the corridor we're developing we should have dedicated tracks. I have no comment on the specific location, but in general, we should get out of the way and both have our dedicated tracks.

[Chris Lewis, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Thank you, gentlemen.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you, Mr. Lewis.

Next we have Mr. Badawey.

Mr. Badawey, the floor is yours. You have five minutes.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to thank the witnesses for coming out today to give us their testimony.

Folks, this project would be the largest transportation project in 60 years for this country. Quite frankly, it's quite exciting that we're all taking part in this process. I believe, as I said to Mr. Lewis earlier, this goes beyond party politics. This is a team effort by all parties to actually get this project off the ground and get it built to then bring our transportation system up to the year 2023 as it relates to moving people.

The second point I want to make is probably the most important point. It will further galvanize the country. There is no question. It will galvanize the country from Quebec into the west and even into the east, and strengthen a multimodal network, in particular, as it relates to movement of people.

We recognize that we have a very robust system in the movement of trade, albeit fluid and can be improved...a multimodal network. In my neck of the woods, in Niagara, we've been very blessed with a very strong Niagara ports trade corridor that takes full advantage of of the St. Lawrence Seaway and the Welland Canal, as well as the main inshore line rail networks and roads, as well as air.

That said, I want to ask about and be very clear on this process and the best way to take it. Going to Mr. Lewis's comments, which I think were very appropriate comments with respect to concentrating now, yes, on the movement of people.... Equally important is ensuring that we also make the movement of trade more robust in those market-ready areas when it comes to the new sectors we are trying to strengthen, like the mineral sector in the north and, of course, with that, having the proper infrastructure in place with those growth-related areas.

I'm going to go to Mr. Imbleau—by the way, congratulations on your new position. It's the port of Montreal's loss and now Via HFR's gain.

The question is this. I would like you to be very clear on the process, both from the capital side and the operational side, and on how this is going to roll out with respect to your participation and the partners that are going to come on board to make this happen and get the job done.

[Martin Imbleau]

Thank you for the question.

It's funny that you mentioned the maritime St. Lawrence Seaway, because I wrote that down as being the most significant endeavour done in the country.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

That's right.

[Martin Imbleau]

Canada wouldn't be what it is today in the world without that endeavour, which was built decades ago.

Today we're in the procurement phase. We will pick, by late summer next year, one consortium with which we will codevelop the project. We'll embark on a process—us, our team and them—to find the best solution, do the alignment, do the impact assessment and find the economic balance, and at the end of that process, which will last a couple of years because it's very detailed, we will make a final investment decision.

The Government of Canada will invest in the project. The private partner will invest in the project in the proportion that needs to be determined by the process. At that point in time, the private partner will also operate facilities that will be kept on Canada's books. We will own the asset, but the operator will operate our asset at that point in time.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

That's great.

We talk about different areas in which we're going to be investing. What are your thoughts on or what do you anticipate with respect to eventually extending HFR into southwestern Ontario?