44th Parl. 1st Sess.
November 24, 2022 10:00AM
- Nov/24/22 1:34:22 p.m.
- Watch
- Re: Bill S-4
Mr. Speaker, I represent an urban riding, but as only one of two New Democrats who represent the province of Alberta. I also feel that I often need to think about the needs of progressive voters across Alberta, so I look at these things such as access in remote and rural areas.
I agree with him that what the government has done is made us promises to make Internet available, and to make broadband available, and it has not delivered on that. It has not delivered on that across the country.
If Bill S-4 is a tool we are going to use to improve our justice system, but we have not yet put in place the infrastructure to allow that tool to be accessed equally by all Canadians, that is a massive problem. The government must do more to reduce costs and make things more accessible for all Canadians in all areas of our country.
156 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, off the top, I would like to send out congratulations to Kimo Linders of Penticton for winning the small business of the year award from the Tourism Industry Association of Canada last night, as well as to the amazing Penticton Vees, who just won their 21st game in a row in the B.C. Hockey League.
I also want to talk about Bill S-222, which will be debated Monday morning. This is a small, but mighty bill that simply asks the federal government to consider the environmental footprint of building materials when constructing infrastructure. This was my private member's bill in a previous Parliament and I was inspired to bring it forward by the new mass timber technology pioneered by Structurlam in my hometown of Penticton.
With new materials such as mass timber, we can build safe and beautiful buildings that will also help us in our fight against climate change. I hope everyone here will support Bill S-222 to literally help build a better future for Canada.
173 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/24/22 2:42:52 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the federal government unilaterally decided to bring the deadline to submit infrastructure projects forward by two years. If Quebec and its cities fail to meet the deadline, the federal government will keep $2.7 billion, and we will be unable to use it in our ridings.
Yesterday, Éric Forest, the former president of the Union des municipalités du Québec, wrote an opinion piece explaining what the consequence would be. The consequence is that Quebec will be under pressure to choose projects based on size rather than value in order to meet the deadline. That means that small municipalities' projects could take a back seat to those of the big cities. That is neither fair nor smart.
Does the government support that? Will the government listen to reason, reconsider and listen to what the mayors have to say?
146 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/24/22 2:43:42 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it will come as no surprise that we do not share my hon. colleague's view that we are being unfair to Quebec municipalities and the Quebec government.
I know he will not be happy to hear this, but I can tell him that I had a very positive discussion with the Quebec minister responsible for infrastructure and with my counterpart, the minister responsible for Canadian relations. I am quite certain that we will reach an agreement with the Quebec government to support the municipalities and the community groups that my colleague wants to support, so I have good news. We will be supporting them as well.
109 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/24/22 2:45:57 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it was not clear, but perhaps the interpretation was better.
Moving up the deadline by two years and threatening to keep the money if cities cannot turn on a dime is almost blackmail.
The federal government wants its infrastructure fund to be used quickly. We agree. However, it should be used intelligently and equitably for the best possible projects for all municipalities, both small and large. The government should collaborate instead of threatening our towns, which are doing their best. This is absurd, it will have to back down.
Can it promise today that all money not spent by March 31 will be transferred to Quebec and not put back in its own pockets?
117 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/24/22 5:36:28 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am here tonight to ask the government for transparency on one of its signature policies, the Canada Infrastructure Bank.
The bank was celebrated with much fanfare by the government in 2016. The Liberals claimed that every dollar invested would yield a return of four private-sector dollars. They even anticipated that with investments from the municipalities and provinces, it would yield a multiplier effect of 11 to one, but that was six years ago and that has not happened. Now what we see is, sadly, a version of corporate welfare, with the taxpayer subsidizing industry projects that they can fund themselves.
The Infrastructure Bank has failed by almost every standard. Not only has it failed to deliver the private-sector investments it promised, but it has never even completed one project. Now we find that a $1.7-billion partnership with Fortis Inc., a North American utilities company that rakes in billions of dollars in revenue every year, has also failed.
The bank promised $655 million to the U.S.-based ITC Holdings, which is a subsidiary of Fortis, for the Lake Eerie connector project. The cancelled project was going to be a 117 kilometre-long underwater power cable under Lake Eerie. It would also have brought in $33 million to the Six Nations reserve. In fact, this line would have run between Pennsylvania and Haldimand County, which is the community I represent.
When the agreement was first announced one and a half years ago, the government gushed about how it would deliver tons of low-carbon energy, billions in GDP and hundreds of Canadian jobs. Now that the project has flatlined, the government needs to answer for the millions it committed.
It is completely unacceptable that at a time when Canadians are struggling to put food on the table, the government cannot account for $655 million that it loaned to a multi-billion dollar corporation. It is a project that, ironically, according to the media reports, failed due to inflation caused by the Liberals.
What is worse is that there has been no transparency. It is a statutory requirement that this bank operates with transparency and reports to the public. We know only from local media reports that the project was cancelled back in July. To this day there is still no information on the bank's website or on government websites about the real status of the project.
Where did the money go? Is the money still in the Infrastructure Bank? Is it with Fortis, the company? Is the money gone? We just do not know. In fact, the bank's corporate plan was tabled in this very House and still lists the deal as an active project. It says that final due diligence is still in progress. This is misinformation.
To have the—
470 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/24/22 5:40:36 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the Canada Infrastructure Bank was established to ensure Canadians benefit from modern and sustainable infrastructure through partnerships with governments and the private sector. The bank helps public dollars go further by investing in revenue-generating infrastructure projects in the public interest and by developing innovative financial tools.
With regard to the Lake Erie connector, which was the subject of much of my friend opposite's speech. It is our understanding from the bank that discussions on the Lake Erie connector project led by ITC Holdings were suspended at this time. The project itself was planned to improve the reliability and security of Ontario's energy grid and allow access to the largest electricity market in North America.
The 117-kilometre underwater transmission line was projected to cost $1.7 billion, with the Infrastructure Bank contributing $655 million. No funding has been provided, but regular and minor administrative costs would have been incurred during the due diligence period. I hope that answers my friend opposite's question.
While this project is not proceeding at this time, it is these kinds of ambitious projects that the Infrastructure Bank is pursuing across the country, literally transforming how infrastructure is planned, funded and delivered in Canada. To date, the bank has advanced over 40 signature projects, committing $8.3 billion in capital from the bank, while attracting $7.8 billion in private and institutional investment. The bank is connecting Canadians, creating good jobs and advancing complex and transformative projects.
By focusing on key priority sectors, such as public transit, green infrastructure, broadband, clean power and trade and transportation, the bank is supporting a recovery that is greener, more resilient and more inclusive. It is doing all of this while empowering private partners to envision quality, high-value projects for Canadians, while reducing the financial burden on taxpayers.
Budget 2022 reaffirmed the government's support for this innovative financing model, broadening the bank's vital role by including investment in private sector-led infrastructure projects that will accelerate Canada's transition to a low-carbon economy.
The bank is also helping to close the indigenous infrastructure gap through its indigenous community infrastructure initiative, which provides low-cost and long-term debt financing for indigenous, community-based projects, including the first indigenous-owned and -operated railway in Canada.
The Government of Canada, together with its partners, is building a better future for Canadians. The Canada Infrastructure Bank is playing a key role in that effort, delivering vital infrastructure to Canadians, while creating good-paying jobs and growing our economy.
I look forward to working with my friend opposite so that we can identify and deliver more innovative and transformative infrastructure projects for Canadians.
449 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/24/22 5:43:20 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my friend for that informative answer, and I am glad that we are finally getting some answers, even if we had to extract them from the Liberals.
The bank keeps failing Canadians and it is missing the mark. During these economic times, Canadians cannot afford to be on the hook for bad investments. Conservatives warned from the beginning that the Infrastructure Bank was not capable of completing this project. We asked reasonable questions early on at committee. We asked, “Why does a multi-billion dollar corporation need a government subsidy in order to build this project?” Moreover, we asked simple questions like, “What are the terms of the loan?” These questions were all ignored.
Conservatives will continue to call on the government to respect the only recommendation made by the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, and that is to abolish the failed Liberal bank and create a—
158 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Nov/24/22 5:44:26 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the Canada Infrastructure Bank is making significant progress in advancing its goals of attracting private and institutional investments to projects, while using innovative financing tools to get more infrastructure built for Canadians.
To date, the bank has advanced over 40 signature projects, committing $8.3 billion in capital, while attracting $7.8 billion in private and institutional investment. The bank is working with all orders of government to deliver more infrastructure for Canadians, while reducing the overall financial burden on taxpayers.
We are helping to expand Canada's economy while meeting our net-zero emission goals through investments in zero-emission buses, energy-efficient building retrofits and clean power transmission, generation and storage. We are doing this alongside our public, private and indigenous partners.
126 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
