Transport committee  Again, it all depends on the situation. Every project is assessed on its own merit. Some asset classes perform better as P3s than others. It also depends on size. The bigger a project is probably the more viable it might be as a P3. That's why we use the $100-million screen for total project cost.

Transport committee  In terms of the average age for infrastructure, the best data that's available to us is from Statistics Canada. They use a number of key variables to determine the average age. They look at the amount of investment that's made in public infrastructure. They also look at the year in which the investment was made, and they also look at what we call year-end gross capital stock.

Transport committee  Yes.

Transport committee  Yes, particularly in certain asset classes, as I said. In terms of road, transit, water, waste water, bridge, culture, and recreation, those are all asset classes where the average age has seemed to decrease.

Transport committee  It is a tool in our tool box that we can use to address some of those situations, and hopefully, potentially, reduce the age of infrastructure. Again—

Transport committee  That's pretty much it.

Transport committee  That's based on a pro-rated population base in terms of allocations, yes. The funds flow through us to provinces and territories, and they flow the funding to municipalities. But it's purely population based unless—

Transport committee  It's funny you should ask that because the first project we actually approved under the new building Canada fund was a P3 project in Edmonton for their light rail project. That was our first and our only one so far. There will be others. We hope there will be others. The way that we deal with P3s through the new building Canada fund is that we look at projects that hit a threshold of a total project cost of $100 million.

Transport committee  When we evaluate our projects, and I'll take an example in terms of the national infrastructure component, we will look at what kind of increased economic activity will result from a project, how we're going to manage disruptions in the economy, as well as how it's going to increase economic productivity.

Transport committee  I wasn't necessarily speaking about the speed with which the project is completed. It was more about how the project can impact on goods and services moving more quickly. It also depends on the nature of the project itself. For example, if we are funding a drinking water system we will want to look at how many households are being connected to that system, the quality of the water, as well as some of the economic impacts of that project.

Transport committee  We have a business guide that shows what's eligible and what's not eligible in our programs. Under the public transit category of our program we say we can support: Transit infrastructure and rolling stock, including but not limited to bus rapid transit (BRT), light rail transit (LRT), subways, buses, urban passenger ferries and regional commuter rail.

Transport committee  I don't know the answer to that question, but the Federation of Canadian Municipalities might know the answer.

Transport committee  One way we might do this is by using our federal convening power and bringing various organizations together. I know that the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, in partnership with the Canadian Construction Association, the Canadian Public Works Association, and other partners are working on an infrastructure report card.

Transport committee  Yes, absolutely. That's one of the things we look at when reviewing a proposal from a province, territory or municipality. We look at its economic impact. We look at other factors, as well. In the case of a groundwater artery, for example, we also consider the effects on the municipality.

Transport committee  We haven't received a formal application related to the SmartTrack system or that system in its entirety. There may be certain components that we might look at supporting, but for the time being there are still some discussions going on within the municipality, and probably between the municipality and the province, concerning the way this project or series of projects may or may not be prioritized under our programs.