Transport Committee on Oct. 4th, 2023

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Okay, thank you.

On the built form and embedded carbon, we will need as a country to account for our infrastructure and how we have reduced the carbon footprint of infrastructure compared with a previous date. That would be part of the calculation.

We are also aware that building with wood—in other words, mass timber construction—is becoming a solution. It's not so much a solution, but it does replace carbon-intensive steel and concrete. It is also fast to build, compared with previous construction techniques.

I'm interested in your thoughts on how we can advance mass timber construction through your portfolio.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

Thank you for this. I absolutely loved the question.

It's incumbent upon all of us, I think, to do everything we can to get creative and fight the climate crisis. One of the things we can do is find technologies or products that have been around for a very long time and can sequester carbon. Wood construction is actually one way we can do this. In my view, it provides an opportunity not only to use cleaner building materials but also to sequester carbon in the final product.

The other piece that is really exciting about this question is that we have an opportunity to fundamentally change how homes get built in this country. We do not build cars today the way we did a hundred years ago. We do not build anything today the way we did a hundred years ago, unless you're talking about houses. If we are going to solve the housing crisis, we need to build more homes and factories, embrace mass timber and embrace 3-D printing technologies that are emerging to figure out how we can build far more quickly.

If we actually scale up by innovating the way we build homes, including mass timber, we can do the right thing to fight climate change, and we can also build way more homes way more quickly. It's something I want to pursue vigorously, because if we don't, there is no path forward that will allow us to build the 3.5 million additional homes we need to solve Canada's supply gap that exists today.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Thank you for being up to speed on that.

I'm a big champion of mass timber, because UBC, in my riding, built Brock Commons, which is a residence that's 18 storeys high. It is a hybrid mass timber construction. I am told that it took three months from when the hole was dug in the ground to when the students were moving into the residence. It is more efficient. It's cheaper. It's greener, and it's actually better for the forest industry as well, because it utilizes wood that might otherwise be waste.

Another question I have in terms of building—

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

I'm sorry, Ms. Murray. I have to make sure that we provide that one minute to Mr. Morrice.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Okay. Am I at my five-minute mark?

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Yes, you are.

[Joyce Murray, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Oh my goodness.

We'll talk later.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

It works. It's good for the environment. It's fast, and we should do more.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you, Ms. Murray.

Thank you, Minister.

Mr. Morrice, I turn the floor over to you. You have one minute for your question, sir.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you, Ms. Murray, for your kindness.

Minister, I just want to pick up on a significant concern of my community, which we spoke about earlier this week. Back in 2017, the federal government funded $752 million to the Province of Ontario to build a two-way, all-day GO train service from Kitchener to Toronto. In the time since, though, while folks are being left behind on overcrowded buses, the Province of Ontario has yet to commit even to a timeline to complete the project.

Can you comment on your personal openness, and that of your office and/or officials, to work with my team and me to call for some accountability from the Province of Ontario on these federal funds?

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

Thank you very much, and thank you for the chat earlier this week.

I've done a little bit of homework on the project. This is one of many projects that seem to have been hit by COVID supply chain snags. I'll continue, and hopefully I'll make you happier by the end of my intervention.

There are a number of different programs that run into delays or challenges for different reasons. The more serious the problem with the project, the more serious the response can be from the federal government, leading up to withholding funding that was committed to a project in circumstances where there is no plan to deal with the problems that do arise. Some problems are dealt with. We work with partners to get through them.

On this particular project, I'm actually happy to make a team of our officials available to you to discuss, top to bottom, where we see the challenges and opportunities to move the project forward. I would rather not get to a place where we have to have conversations about withholding funding. I would rather get to a place where we see the thing get built, and I'll make available to you whomever you need.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

I would very much appreciate that. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Morrice.

That brings us to the end of the first round.

On behalf of the committee members, I want to thank you, Minister Fraser, for joining us this evening and for giving us your time.

As well, thank you, Deputy Minister Gillis.

We'll suspend for two minutes as we switch over our witnesses.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

I call the meeting back to order.

Colleagues, in the second hour, appearing before us once again, we have Kelly Gillis, deputy minister of infrastructure and communities. Joining Ms. Gillis will be Marco Presutti, assistant deputy minister of investment, partnerships and innovation.

Seeing as we don't have opening remarks, we will begin with a round of questioning, once again, with Dr. Lewis.

Dr. Lewis, the floor is yours. You have six minutes.

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

Thank you for coming here today.

My question is just going to be posed generally, so whoever you think is best suited to answer the question can feel free to do so.

The Canada Infrastructure Bank Act states that every five years “the designated Minister must have a review of the provisions and operation” of the act. We know that the Lake Erie connector project was cancelled. Why wasn't this project, as well as other unsuccessful CIB projects, mentioned in the legislative review?

[Kelly Gillis, Deputy Minister, Infrastructure and Communities, Office of Infrastructure of Canada]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

For that particular project, it was the proponent that cancelled the project.

By the way, we look at the legislative review overall. It's really starting with the premise of the legislation and the mandate. It starts at a higher level than any particular project in and of itself.

We received 40 written submissions. I understand from the OPQ that you had asked for the summary of the submissions, which we didn't have, but we're happy to provide you with the actual submissions, if that's what you're asking for, so you can read what we received from the review itself and take into consideration the mandate of the bank.

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

I think it would have been important in that OPQ to have stated that you do not have a summary because you did not prepare a summary but you do have the actual submissions. What happens is that I get a blank document. The blank document suggests to me that there was no communication and that your report was not based on anything. That's somewhat misleading. I appreciate that you're going to rectify this, but I think there should have been some indication that there was additional information.

In addition to that, even though the proponent took away that project, it's still a failed project, so you could learn from your failures. You could learn from why the proponent took it away. That would have been very instructive in the report, and it was not there.

I'm curious who made that decision and why.

[Kelly Gillis]

Thank you, Chair, for the question.

We met with over 80 intervenors and took in a lot of information. In the report, there also are recommendations for improvement with Canada Infrastructure Bank on how they can be more clear on what their mandate is, how to work with the bank and how they can be more transparent on their results. The bank is taking in all of those recommendations to improve how they work with stakeholders across the country.

Some of the learnings come from what has worked and what hasn't worked with proponents. I think with the Lake Erie proposal, the proponent chose not to pursue that particular transaction. The bank can take that in and see how it can continually improve its interactions to have successful projects.

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

Yes. I would have loved to see that in the report.

[Kelly Gillis]

Now, it does have 48 different projects that it has had financial close with. It has 32 projects under construction, so it has been able to advance in many different areas, as the minister spoke about, in the different sectors.

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

Thank you for your answer.

In budget 2023, the government announced that a new round of the smart cities challenge was coming this year. Does the new round of funding criteria take into consideration some of the concerns that Canadians are having and that I'm hearing from municipal councillors about smart cities, smart technologies and issues of privacy?

[Kelly Gillis]

Thank you very much, Chair, for the question.

The future of smart cities and the smart cities challenge is being taken into consideration. We always want to take into consideration, even in the first round, the different aspects of data and proper use of data by communities. Privacy and governance are very important.

As technology is evolving, certainly since the first round of the smart cities challenge, its use of data has advanced significantly. Any programs that we would put out would take that into consideration, so thank you very much for the comment.

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

In considering that, have any policies or regulations been proposed?

This is something that we're hearing over and over again in communications with municipal councillors. They want to give Canadians some assurance that their privacy will be protected with smart cities. It's something that Canadians are very concerned about.

[Kelly Gillis]

As we look at the policies and regulations from the Government of Canada, we follow all the regulations that are put out from the lead, whether it's from Treasury Board Secretariat.... We do have the CIO for the Government of Canada. We have a chief data officer for the Government of Canada. Innovation, Science and Economic Development has also put out guidelines and best practices for use of technology. All of the best practices that we know of would be taken into consideration, and we're making sure that would be shared with municipalities.

We have also worked with Evergreen. We have asked them to work with experts to help municipalities understand privacy considerations.

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

Isn't Evergreen the company that had that failed project?