THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL FINANCE
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Wednesday, October 2, 2024
The Standing Senate Committee on National Finance met this day at 6:45 p.m. [ET] to study the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2025, with the exception of Library of Parliament Vote 1.
Senator Claude Carignan (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Honourable senators, before we begin, I would like to ask all senators and other in-person participants to consult the cards on the table for guidelines to prevent audio feedback incidents.
Please make sure to keep your earpiece away from all microphones at all times. When you are not using your earpiece, place it face down on the sticker placed on the table for this purpose.
Thank you all for your cooperation.
Welcome, senators and Canadians joining us on sencanada.ca.
My name is Claude Carignan. I’m a senator from Quebec and chair of the Senate Committee on National Finance. Now, I would like to ask my colleagues to introduce themselves, starting on my left.
Senator Forest: Good evening, and welcome. Éric Forest from the Gulf division in Quebec.
Senator Gignac: Good evening. Clément Gignac from the Kennebec division in Quebec.
Senator Loffreda: Good evening, and welcome. Tony Loffreda from Montreal, Quebec.
[English]
Senator MacAdam: Jane MacAdam, Prince Edward Island.
Senator Fridhandler: Daryl Fridhandler, Alberta.
Senator Pate: Kim Pate, and I live here in the unceded, unsurrendered territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabeg. Welcome.
Senator Ross: Krista Ross, New Brunswick.
Senator Marshall: Elizabeth Marshall, Newfoundland and Labrador.
Senator Smith: Larry Smith, Montreal.
[Translation]
The Chair: Honourable senators, today we are resuming our study of the Main Estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2025, which were referred to committee by the Senate on March 19, 2024.
We are pleased to have with us today several senior officials and Crown corporation representatives from VIA Rail Canada, VIA HFR Inc., Canadian Heritage, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and the Canada Council for the Arts.
Welcome, and thank you for accepting our invitation. I understand that one official from each organization will make a brief statement and then answer our questions.
Allow me to introduce Carl Delisle, Chief Financial Officer, VIA Rail Canada; Martin Imbleau, Chief Executive Officer, VIA HFR; David Dendooven, Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic Policy, Planning and Corporate Affairs, Canadian Heritage; Carol Najm, Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation; and Michelle Chawla, Director and Chief Executive Officer, Canada Council for the Arts.
With that, I’ll give the floor to Carl Delisle, followed by Martin Imbleau, David Dendooven, Carol Najm and Michelle Chawla.
Carl Delisle, Chief Financial Officer, VIA Rail Canada: Mr. Chair, thank you for this opportunity to answer the committee’s questions about our major expenditures and modernization projects.
I’m here today with my colleague, Denis Lavoie, who’s just back here.
Mr. Chair, on the eve of our company’s 50th anniversary, there’s never been a better time for passenger rail development.
We recently published a new strategic plan, VIAction 2030, designed to leverage our expertise and improve our performance.
Our goal is clear: to make VIA Rail a best-in-class operator in North America and a leader in integrated mobility at the heart of the passenger journey in Canada.
We’re proud of our achievements to date.
[English]
First, the progressive commissioning of our new Venture trains in the Quebec City-Windsor corridor since 2022 represents a prime example of the modernization trend that VIA Rail is undertaking. The full rollout of these 32 trainsets should be completed by the summer of 2025.
[Translation]
Meanwhile, we are carrying out major modernization work at our Montreal and Toronto maintenance centres to equip them with the technologies required to service this new fleet.
A new reservation system was also launched last November. More intuitive and incorporating a wide range of innovative functions, this new reservation platform contributes to offering our passengers a travel experience that is more user-friendly and more accessible.
Finally, the last federal budget highlighted the importance of investing in the passenger rail system by confirming the replacement of the aging trains that serve our long-distance and regional routes. This investment will transform passenger rail in every region of the country in the years to come. We are excited about completing this crucial new project for VIA Rail. Our experienced and motivated teams are already hard at work to make this project a success for the benefit of our passengers.
As you know, VIA Rail is financially supported by the federal government. We would therefore like to express our gratitude for its continued support and confidence in our work. This funding demonstrates a strong commitment to improving sustainable transportation across the country.
Mr. Chair, during the current fiscal year, we have been very careful to strike a balance between maintaining the services that are essential to Canadians and rigorous financial management in a sometimes unpredictable and challenging operating environment. As a sign of prudent management, VIA Rail has undertaken an in-depth review of its operational strategies and cost structures. This comprehensive review of all facets of our business is aimed at improving both our operational and financial performance.
We believe that the financial results for 2023 presented last spring bear witness to this rigour. Total revenue increased by $97.7 million or 29.2% over 2022, thanks to increased frequencies and demand. More than four million passengers chose to travel by train in 2023, enabling VIA Rail to record its highest ridership level since 2019. Ridership increased by 24.7% compared to 2022. In this way, VIA Rail is striving to increase its revenues, limit its operating deficit and reduce its reliance on public funding.
[English]
If the demand for our services continues to grow at the same pace, we should reach the same level of activity this year as the record performance achieved prior to the pandemic. However, we already know that some events — namely, the wildfires in Alberta — may have an impact on our ridership results.
[Translation]
In short, we can be proud of the work we’ve done to modernize our services and offer our passengers a renewed, safe and fully accessible travel experience, while helping to protect the environment and stimulate the Canadian economy.
We will be pleased to answer your questions.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Delisle.
Martin Imbleau, Chief Executive Officer, VIA HFR – VIA TGF Inc.: Mr. Chair, ladies and gentlemen of the committee, I am sincerely grateful for this opportunity to share with you the latest developments in high-speed rail in the Quebec City-Toronto corridor. This important undertaking may well be the largest public infrastructure project since the construction of the St. Lawrence Seaway 75 years ago.
Before I get into progress to date, I’d like to point out that this project is not just about building new infrastructure. This is a strategic undertaking for the country’s future. By offering passengers fast, frequent, reliable service on dedicated electrified track, we will significantly improve intercity mobility, stimulate productivity and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In short, we will improve Canadians’ lives.
This project will offer a real sustainable transportation alternative to serve the rapidly growing population within the corridor and address existing infrastructure capacity limits. Dedicated tracks will enable trains to run without having to stop for freight trains, thereby improving efficiency and reducing congestion issues. Separating passenger and freight service is essential to the future and productivity of all sectors. This will enable faster delivery of goods to consumers.
[English]
Why now? Because if we know that the cost will not go down and the necessity will only grow, now is the time to do it. If we don’t act now, we will only find ourselves further behind with even more significant obstacles.
Let’s take a quick look at how far we’ve come.
In the past year, the Toronto-Quebec City rapid train project has undergone significant evolution, both in its management structure and its overall direction. We have assembled a highly skilled management team because strengthening the leadership is crucial for the next phases of this project. The project’s ambition has also evolved. In addition to working on increasing the frequency of passenger rail, we are also placing more emphasis on speed, aiming for the shortest possible travel times so that passengers can benefit from the same modern, efficient and high-quality transportation options found in Europe.
The project being developed is crucial for the population. The way it is being managed is quite interesting. Last summer, the Government of Canada shortlisted three consortia to take part in a competitive bidding process, inviting leading Canadian and international firms to present proposals to offer the best value to Canadians. They were invited to present us with two distinct proposals: a conventional option allowing trains to reach 200 kilometres per hour and a more ambitious one without limits or, as we like to say, as fast as possible.
In the coming months, the government is expected to announce the selection of one of the consortia as a private developer partner to collaborate with us to develop the infrastructure. This partnership will bring together the private sector’s innovation and execution expertise with our public service mandate, ensuring that from the design phase onward, we deliver maximum value to Canadians. By significantly reducing travel times, increasing frequency and investing in passenger-dedicated electrified tracks, we will deliver a major shift toward more sustainable transportation.
This project will address the key challenges of the corridor situation, improving efficiency, capacity and connectivity. It will boost the Canadian economy by tackling one of the biggest challenges, which is lagging productivity.
Just as the St. Lawrence Seaway transformed the Canadian economy 75 years ago — and still continues to do so — the Toronto-Quebec City rapid train will create stronger connections between our cities, boost economic growth and make travel easier and more accessible.
Additionally, it will help mitigate rising costs of living by offering affordable alternatives throughout the corridors and the cities that are served. The project also focuses on meaningful collaboration with Indigenous communities. We will prioritize economic reconciliation by creating meaningful opportunities, including investment opportunities.
Now let’s talk human beings. Imagine a young musician from Quebec City travelling to Bluesfest in Ottawa without the environmental impact of a flight. Imagine a daily commuter from Peterborough enjoying a stress-free journey to work in Toronto and back in time for dinner. Or imagine an elderly person from Trois-Rivières going to Montreal for treatment, avoiding car expenses and still making it back in the afternoon for bowling. This is what this project is all about. If there are only three things that you remember when we exit the room tonight, it is that this network is the following: First, it is a transportation service that will shrink distances and bring people closer together; second, it is an investment opportunity to generate economic and environmental benefits for Canadians for generations to come; and third, it is a generational opportunity to bring three capitals and two metropolises of the country closer together.
[Translation]
Thank you for your attention. I’m looking forward to discussing this with you.
The Chair: Thank you.
David Dendooven, Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic policy, Planning and Corporate Affairs, Canadian Heritage: Thank you, Chair. I’m pleased to be here with you today. I would also like to acknowledge that we are gathered on the traditional and unceded territory of the Anishinaabe Algonquin. I’m here with Joëlle Montminy, Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Cultural Affairs. We’re happy to share information about the 2024-25 Main Estimates for Canadian Heritage.
Canadian Heritage and its portfolio organizations play a vital role in the cultural, civic and economic life of Canadians. Our policies and programs promote an environment where Canadians can experience dynamic cultural expressions, celebrate our history and build strong communities. The department invests in the future by supporting the arts, our official and Indigenous languages, multiculturalism, and our athletes and the sport system.
The department received a total of $1.9 billion in the 2024-25 Main Estimates. That includes $1.6 billion in grants and contributions, $237.8 million in operating expenditures and $30.9 million in statutory items. This is a total reduction of $46.8 million, or 2.4% compared to the Main Estimates for the previous fiscal year. This reduction is due in large part to the termination of temporary funding initiatives and a return to pre‑pandemic funding levels.
The department will use the funding from the 2024–2025 Main Estimates to fulfill its mandate by delivering on its various core responsibilities.
[English]
Funding of $636.2 million will serve to support the promotion of Canada’s two official languages and the development of official language minority communities, as well as a coordinated federal approach to the implementation of the Official Languages Act. This includes new funding announced in Budget 2023 to support initiatives under the Action Plan for Official Languages 2023–2028, as well as the implementation of the Use of French in Federally Regulated Private Businesses Act.
Canadian Heritage will continue to work to support an environment in which Canada’s arts and culture community can continue to play its vital role. Funding of $542.3 million from the Main Estimates will support those efforts around creativity, arts and culture in 2024-25, including efforts to ensure that a range of Canadian artistic and cultural content is accessible at home and abroad, and to modernize Canadian legislation and regulation in areas such as broadcasting, digital news and copyright.
Sport is also a part of Canada’s national identity and culture. The department has access to $253.6 million in funding in these Main Estimates to deliver on that important component of its mandate.
Canadian Heritage’s focus in this area will be guided by the objective to create safe and welcoming sport environments that reflect Canada’s diversity and our values of equity, fairness and inclusion. Canadian Heritage will rely on $250.7 million in funding to support diversity and inclusion in 2024-25 for initiatives including an Action Plan on Combatting Hate, which was launched just last week, as well as a renewed anti-racism strategy and the continued implementation of the Indigenous Languages Act.
Funding of $119.4 million will be used by the department to continue to offer opportunities to Canadians to participate in celebrations and commemorations and to facilitate access to heritage.
Further to these Main Estimates before you, Budget 2024 announced a new investment of $723.4 million, which is not reflected in the Main Estimates, over five years for Canadian Heritage related to supporting festivals, live events and performing arts; building museums and cultural centres; promoting access to books, news and journalism; supporting Indigenous languages and cultures; countering hate; supporting official languages; supporting sport; and building diverse and safe communities. And there is a new investment of $307.2 million over five years for our portfolio organizations.
As noted, this funding is not reflected in the Main Estimates before you but will be accessed through supplementary estimates throughout the course of the year. Thank you for the opportunity to discuss these Main Estimates, and I also look forward to your questions.
The Chair: Thank you.
Carol Najm, Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation: Good evening, chair and members of the committee. Thank you for the invitation to discuss the Main Estimates on behalf of CBC/Radio-Canada.
The 2024-25 Main Estimates show that CBC/Radio-Canada’s total appropriation is $1.38 billion. This is an increase of $94 million. This is the result of two factors: The first is CBC/Radio-Canada’s portion of the Treasury Board salary funding to all departments and Crown corporations to compensate them for inflation costs on salaries. For CBC/Radio-Canada, this represents an additional $116.8 million in permanent, ongoing funding.
The second factor is a reduction in the appropriation of $21 million for the additional temporary one-time funding that the corporation had been receiving in the previous three years that have ended.
I know that your focus today is on the Main Estimates, but I thought it might be helpful to provide you with a bit of an update on the overall financial situation of the corporation.
[Translation]
We are still facing financial challenges that are affecting the entire media industry in Canada. Audiences are moving away from television to digital platforms. Our programs are very successful — 21 million Canadians tune in every month — but while television advertising revenues and subscription revenues are dropping, two foreign companies, Meta and Google, have captured 80% of the advertising revenues for digital services.
About a third of the total budget for the CBC/Radio-Canada comes from commercial revenues, which have been adversely affected by this shift. As you know, last December, the CBC forecast $125 million in financial pressures for 2024–2025, which would result in the elimination of 800 positions and reduce our investments in programming created by independent Canadian producers.
[English]
The corporation did eliminate 205 vacant positions and 141 occupied positions, but it was able to preserve the remaining 450 positions because of three factors: an additional one-year investment of $42 million in Budget 2024, which is not yet included in the Main Estimates; additional internal cost savings; and improvement in our corporation’s revenue. We will balance our budget this year without further significant reductions.
We also continue to manage our resources in a way that protects the programs and services we provide to Canadians.
Thank you for your time. I would be happy to answer questions.
[Translation]
Michelle Chawla, Director and Chief Executive Officer, Canada Council for the Arts: Thank you for inviting the Canada Council for the Arts to speak to you about the 2024–2025 Main Estimates. With me are my colleagues Eva Jacobs, our Chief Financial Officer, Administration and Security, and Lise Ann Johnson, Acting Director General, Arts Granting Programs.
The Canada Council for the Arts is Canada’s public arts funding body. It was created in 1957 as a Crown corporation with a mandate to “foster and promote the study and enjoyment of, and the production of works in, the arts.”
In the 2024–2025 Main Estimates, the current year, the Canada Council for the Arts received $363.8 million in funding. That figure is close to the amount received in 2023–2024, which was $364.9 million.
As you may have noted, the Canada Council’s actual expenditures were higher in 2022–2023, as were those of the department. They totalled $423.4 million. That is the result of federal recovery funding that the Canada Council distributed to the arts sector in response to the pandemic.
The Canada Council will use the funding allocated in the 2024–2025 Main Estimates to carry out its mandate. Essentially, we award grants, prizes and funds to professional artists and arts organizations in all disciplines: music, theatre, dance, visual arts, media arts, literature and so forth.
To give you an idea of the order of magnitude, the Canada Council supported more than 3,500 individual artists and close to 2,000 arts organizations. In addition, through our Public Lending Right Program, we made payments to more than 18,000 authors and other creators for their works in public libraries. That provided access to the arts for Canadians in more than 2,000 communities in all provinces and territories.
[English]
The Canada Council for the Arts also supports research on the arts, pursues partnerships that strengthen our contributions to the sector and creates public engagement activities. The Canada Council Art Bank has the largest collection of contemporary Canadian art in the world. It showcases these artworks by renting them out and through exhibitions.
The Canadian Commission for UNESCO also operates under the authority of the council. The commission promotes the values and programs of UNESCO within Canada toward a future of peace, reconciliation, equity and sustainable development.
With our support, the arts sector contributes significantly to the lives of Canadians. The arts are a major economic driver in Canada, with a culture GDP of $60 billion and over 850,000 people working in culture occupations. The arts foster a sense of belonging, and they improve physical and mental well-being. The arts also create spaces for Canadians to come together to explore difficult topics that might otherwise divide us, and they create experiences for shared joy.
The arts sector is facing some notable challenges right now. Revenues are down because audiences, donors and sponsors are not engaging in the same ways they did before the pandemic. At the same time, expenses have gone up. The arts sector now needs to transform to become more sustainable. The council has an important role to play because we have a strong track record of supporting the arts with impact and with efficiency.
We are also connected to and have a robust understanding of all parts of the sector. We remain committed to supporting our country’s arts sector to the benefit of Canadians economically, socially and culturally.
Thank you very much. I look forward to the questions and conversation.
The Chair: Thank you. We will start with questions. Each senator will have five minutes for the first round.
Senator Marshall: Welcome to all the witnesses. I’m interested in the High Frequency Rail project. That would be you, Mr. Imbleau.
Your associates were here last year, and they gave us some information, but I know you’ve been busy the past year. They were speaking about accountability to Parliament. They told us last year that there’s no enabling legislation and that you were incorporated through articles of incorporation.
I was looking for some financial information. I found some quarterly financial statements for 2023-24, but I couldn’t find them for the last quarter of 2023-24, which would have been the three months ending March 2024. They weren’t on your website. Are all of your financial statements available?
Mr. Imbleau: Thanks for the question.
Actually, our annual statement will be available in the coming days, so it’s a question of time. It’s in the hands of the minister, so it’s expected within the coming days. Since it’s in the minister’s hands as we speak, it should be made available when it is approved and made public.
Senator Marshall: Last year, your colleagues told us that because there was no enabling legislation, the corporation was governed by the Financial Administration Act. When I inquired about an annual report, they indicated it was a requirement of section 150. There’s a requirement there to have a report released within three months of the fiscal year-end.
Is there going to be an annual report? If the statements aren’t completed yet, there’s no annual report.
Mr. Imbleau: There is an annual report that was provided by the corporation to —
Senator Marshall: And is it public?
Mr. Imbleau: It’s not public yet. It has to be made public by the minister, from the way I understand it. I just finished my first year; I joined the corporation a year ago. It is in the process. My understanding is that all of this is within the minister’s hands.
Senator Marshall: It’s not on your website.
Mr. Imbleau: It’s not yet because I think it has to be made public initially by the minister.
Senator Marshall: Okay, so I was looking for that. That does have a three-month time limit. Last year, we were told there were three directors appointed, but there are going to be seven. Have the full seven been appointed now?
Mr. Imbleau: We have a board of six now, so the intention would be to complete the board as soon as practically feasible.
Senator Marshall: There’s one more to come?
Mr. Imbleau: There’s one more to come.
Senator Marshall: Okay.
I’m interested in the project because it’s going to be quite a large one that will cost billions of dollars. Does the corporation have authority to borrow? I’m wondering about your source of financing.
Mr. Imbleau: Today, the sole source of financing is via the government budget process. We’re not looking at other borrowing possibilities.
Senator Marshall: The corporation has no authority to borrow?
Mr. Imbleau: No.
Senator Marshall: Okay. That’s good.
Last year, we were told the estimated cost was between $6 billion and $12 billion. In your opening remarks, you said the project is evolving. Is there a new number?
Mr. Imbleau: There’s not a new number because the scope is not defined yet. One thing that has changed since last year is that we’re focusing on dedicated tracks, so most of it could be greenfield. Regarding the scope that may have been envisioned before me, I don’t know those numbers. The way we’re structured is that the co-development phase of this project is starting as soon as the government announces its decision. We will need time to define the scope and calibre before we provide numbers. We don’t have an estimate, because it wouldn’t be prudent to have an estimate considering the early stages of the project as we speak.
Senator Marshall: So maybe next year?
Mr. Imbleau: When we’re sufficiently advanced on the engineering and the relations with the community to present something credible and solid, we’ll make those numbers public.
Senator Marshall: You’re familiar with the report issued by the House of Commons Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities. They expressed a lot of concern over the accountability and the transparency of the corporation. What are you doing with that report?
Mr. Imbleau: I read that with interest. Most of my job is reaching out to communities and presenting the concept and explaining what the project is all about. In terms of transparency, we cannot be more transparent. We’re presenting the options to everyone. Our job really starts when the co-development phase starts. We’re still in the procurement phase today, which is led by the government, not by us. We’re preparing ourselves by staffing and getting ready to take over the responsibility of the project when the project starts.
Senator Marshall: When will the co-development phase start?
Mr. Imbleau: Probably early in the year when the government makes the announcement of whom the winning consortium is. Then, basically, they pass along the puck to our team and tell us to develop that project. Maybe it’s at the end of the year or early next year — that’s the timing we’re contemplating.
Senator Marshall: Okay.
I have a last question for you. I understood from discussions last year that there was going to be money paid to the three consortia. Who’s paying that, and is it included in the Main Estimates? How much is it?
Mr. Imbleau: How much? I’m not sure if that’s public information. I’ll need to take that under advisement, but it’s paid by the procurement process. It’s not coming from the corporation but from the government. The procurement phase is led by both Public Services and Procurement Canada and Transport Canada.
Senator Marshall: Okay. Could you get back to us on that?
Mr. Imbleau: Yes, if it’s public information, we will share that.
Senator Marshall: A second round, please. I have questions for some of the other witnesses. It goes fast.
[Translation]
Senator Forest: Thank you for your presentations, and thank you for being with us this evening.
My first question is for Mr. Delisle. It really seems that the number of delays is increasing every year: 72% of trains were on time in 2021, while just 59% were on time in 2023. Sometimes the delay is just a few minutes, but we all remember when 225 passengers were stranded on the train in May 2024.
How can you explain this decline in service reliability?
Mr. Delisle: Thank you for the question. There are two factors involved. First, you have to remember that VIA Rail owns 3% of the rail lines, while the rest is owned by the freight component. So we do not have control over the whole environment.
Secondly, our internal data show that 80% of our passengers arrive on time or within 30 minutes. Certain situations can arise and we try to minimize them as much as possible. As I said, we do not control the entire passenger environment.
Senator Forest: Since there is a significant increase in delays, is there a particular plan for the equipment and maintenance? Do you have a game plant?
Mr. Delisle: Regarding equipment, a new fleet has of course come into service nearly a year ago. We already have 18 trains in operation at this point. Modernization of the new fleet will of course resolve some of the issues.
Senator Forest: Mr. Imbleau, last week, the House of Commons Transport Committee tabled its report on high frequency rail. The partners would like to get a budget and timelines for this initiative within six months. Is that deadline feasible? Is it reasonable? Will it be possible to assess the costs for high frequency and high speed rail?
Mr. Imbleau: Thank you for your questions, senator. I will start with the second one.
We asked the three consortiums to tell us where we could launch the system, what it would look like and what would be feasible. We will review that with them next year.
The government will choose the consortium that we will work with, and we will assess the best options for Canada. There will probably be one option that will be assessed and put forward as regards engineering, permits and relations with First Nations communities. That will take a certain amount of time, of course.
It will take some time to develop a plan regarding speed. I don’t really like the term high frequency rail, you know, because it is hard to define high frequency.
What we want to achieve for Canadians is rail service that is the fastest and best suited to Canadian realities, that is, the shortest travel times possible.
Will that be 200 km per hour? Will it be 330? We will look at that with our partners in the coming years and, once we have made enough progress, we will present the concepts and cost estimates to you.
The middle of next year is probably too soon. Unfortunately, that is the way projects are developed. Rushing and putting out figures too quickly undermines project development.
Senator Forest: So essentially, it would be train service that is as fast as possible for Canadians.
Mr. Imbleau: Rapid rail from Quebec to Toronto. We might have to change the name. We are also thinking about that.
Senator Forest: That’s a good idea.
Moreover, parliamentarians are saying they are worried and so am I, considering that the new service that will be established could end up reducing service in the regions. We know the situation is already catastrophic in the regions.
In eastern Quebec last year, there was a train that left Mont-Joli every morning for Quebec City, and returned the same evening. Now there are only three trains per week and they run in the middle of the night.
There is a lot of concern in the regions about the establishment of this new service. Connecting service with the regions is key to balancing that concern.
For your part, are you analyzing that to see how to optimize connections and link the regional service with the national service?
Mr. Imbleau: Regional services are not my area of responsibility, unfortunately, so I will let my colleague take that question. Moreover, the plan is to maintain the existing services in the corridor. Between Quebec City and Toronto, the services operated by my colleague on my right will be maintained. The goal is not to reduce service, but above all to increase availability.
Secondly, it is essential for our service to have efficient connections with interurban transport services. For the consumers of tomorrow, it has to be easy, not just reasonably priced, but easy in order to be a competitive option.
Our job is to offer connections to all urban centres and the local network as efficiently as possible so that the young people of tomorrow have a real alternative for public transport.
Senator Gignac: Thank you, and welcome to the witnesses. My question is for Mr. Imbleau. Thank you for allowing us to dream. I need to share an anecdote with my colleagues. The last time I had this dream was 15 years ago, when I was a member of the Jean Charest government. Incidentally, Mr. Charest was at the Senate last week. He and the Ontario premier at the time, Dalton McGuinty, held a joint cabinet meeting. They put a lot of pressure on the Harper government back then to get a high-speed train. Unfortunately, the financial crisis happened, priorities completely changed and we heard nothing about it for 15 years. That’s my story.
I would hope that in 15 years, we will see something materialize instead of reminiscing about a lovely evening spent dreaming once again.
My question is the following. As I understand it, you prefer a high-speed train. You even changed the name to avoid confusion with VIA Rail. My questions are about Toronto and Montreal.
Will passengers have to go downtown to Union Station and Central Station, or will it be like in Europe, where they build stations outside of downtown to improve speed? In other words, would it be absolutely necessary to go to Union Station or Central Station to catch the HST, or will a station be built farther away from the interconnection?
Mr. Imbleau: Thank you, senator. Good ideas are proved right over time. This week, Japan celebrated the 60th anniversary of its bullet train, the Shinkansen, while last year, France celebrated the 40th anniversary of its high-speed TGV.
Gravity is a powerful force. Getting in and out of cities is crucial, and we haven’t chosen the stations yet. We need to be smart. We need to know what is allowed and how much a new station will cost. Do we optimize existing stations? Do we share infrastructures with local services? We need to think about all that.
Montreal and Toronto have very different realities, and each has its constraints. The same goes for regional stations. This is an important mandate. The location, design and intermodality of stations are important. As I like to say, senator, we have to think in terms of the next 50 years. We can’t think about the way we got around in the last 50 years in Montreal, Toronto and Trois-Rivières. We have to be smart and make projections for four, five or six generations.
Senator Gignac: I really hope so. By the way, this is not the first time this has happened. Whenever there is a change of government, the priorities suddenly change. I hope the second time’s a charm.
In terms of the financial model, Canada has the most pension funds by percentage of GDP. They are looking to invest in infrastructure. I understand that you don’t want to get into the details in public, but do you think that pension funds could play a major role in the financial arrangements and risk sharing by the private sector instead of the government?
Mr. Imbleau: The words you used are very significant. A private partner will take operational and financial risks. It will partially invest in the project. If you looked at the detailed makeup of the three consortiums, you would be pleased to note that there are big national and international players, including some pension funds.
These are the kinds of financial partners that are interested in building and running this type of infrastructure, given the magnitude of the investments behind a public service. This isn’t a private company; it’s really a long-term public service. Clearly, this is the type of financial profile that seems advantageous to them.
Senator Gignac: I’ll finish up this line of questioning. As I understand it, over the next year decisions will have to be made and many more details provided. You have put the proposals on the table. You are about to make a decision. Is that correct?
Mr. Imbleau: Yes. I will take 30 seconds to explain the model. For the proposals, we didn’t ask the private sector how much it would cost, because we provided a detailed design. We’re looking for a consortium to team up with, a partner to develop the project. We will make a joint decision.
That will take time, because we will look at the project with our engineering teams and theirs and then get to work. We will make decisions together. It might take more than a year to get the details. A thousand kilometres is quite a network. I’ve worked on long-term projects, but this one will be really long-term. We’ll try to break it up into smaller projects. As we go along and get on better footing, we will be able to present the timelines, the scope and the associated costs.
Senator Gignac: Could you give us a rule of thumb for dollars per kilometre? We’re talking tens of billions of dollars. When I look at what it cost in Japan decades ago as well as in Europe, these are large figures.
Mr. Imbleau: What I don’t like about rules of thumb per kilometre is that construction costs aren’t the same in the Peterborough suburbs as north of Trois-Rivières. They’re not the same in downtown Montreal as in suburban Quebec City. A rule of thumb would be easy to grasp but would distort the process.
Senator Gignac: It wouldn’t be helpful.
Mr. Imbleau: It’s not good project management.
Senator Gignac: Great.
Mr. Imbleau: We have to do things right. To protect Canadians’ money, we need to invest and take the time to do things right.
Senator Gignac: Thank you.
[English]
Senator Smith: Mr. Delisle, according to VIA Rail’s most recent corporate plan, some of its more than 250 cars and locomotives are being refurbished through the Heritage Fleet Modernization Program. The aging cars — some over 65 years old — present ongoing safety and reliability challenges.
To the best of your ability, could you provide us with an update on the number of cars and locomotives refurbished to date with a breakdown of the rough cost?
[Translation]
Mr. Delisle: Thank you, Senator Smith. We are currently refurbishing these cars and locomotives. At the moment, we have started the process, and the goal is to continue refurbishing the locomotives over the next two or three years. Safety is our priority. We discuss this every week. We’re making sure everything’s under control.
Senator Smith: If I understand correctly, you’ve just started?
Mr. Delisle: We’ve only started the procurement process for starting to refurbish and update the locomotives.
Senator Smith: Until now, nothing in your fleet was rebuilt?
Mr. Delisle: Exactly, the process is under way.
Senator Smith: When will you implement your action plan and start the work?
Mr. Delisle: We’ve just finalized the process for the first phase, so it will be done in the coming months. Our plan is that over the next two or three years, we will upgrade all the cars.
Senator Smith: Do you have a priority in terms of the number of cars in your fleet that need to be rebuilt and recommissioned?
Mr. Delisle: The objective is to do all of them before the next project, a long-distance project, which will happen soon. The idea is to refurbish the fleet to avoid service interruptions until the new trains are delivered.
Senator Smith: In the meantime, will you buy new equipment?
Mr. Delisle: It won’t be new equipment. The current trains and locomotives will be upgraded.
Senator Smith: Okay. You’re organizing the operation right now?
Mr. Delisle: Exactly, we’re organizing the transition.
Senator Smith: You haven’t bought new equipment?
Mr. Delisle: No, that’s correct.
Senator Smith: Can you look into a crystal ball and explain the schedule? When will it start and how many can you rebuild in your 2024–2025 fiscal year?
Mr. Delisle: The objective is to carry out the new long-distance project with the new trains that were announced in the last federal budget for 2032 to 2035. Until then, the objective is to refurbish the current trains so we can continue providing the service. The objective over the next two to three years is to rotate out the current trains, refurbish them and get them back on track to support the current service.
Senator Smith: You talked about your current level of service for Montreal-Toronto and Montreal-Quebec City. What are your service objectives in the meantime, between the work you’ll do to refurbish your equipment and the service delivery? You need to balance your growth and repair objectives with your service objective. How will you do that?
Mr. Delisle: Just to clarify, when I referred to upgrading the trains, I meant for long distances outside the corridor. Within the corridor, we should take delivery of all the new trains by mid-2025. We will start decommissioning the old trains that run on the corridor.
Senator Smith: Thank you.
Senator Dalphond: I have a few questions. In terms of the high-frequency train, congratulations, Mr. Imbleau, you’ve gone from the port to trains.
You say that there are two options for each bidder. What happens if bid A, at 200 kilometres an hour or less, is better than all the others, but solution B, at over 200 kilometres an hour, is not as good as the other two?
Mr. Imbleau: The beauty of the process is that we receive six proposals at this stage, and we own all of the information. That was a very wise decision on the part of the government and the procurement and transportation people. Since we own the intellectual property, we can choose the best concepts among all those submitted.
In terms of your concern, if the best consortium’s idea isn’t as good, we are not married to it. We’ll take the best ones. We have our own ideas, they have theirs and we’ll combine them to offer the best value to Canadians.
Senator Dalphond: They would have to revise their bid in some cases because what they proposed will not be the contract they’ll be given.
Mr. Imbleau: Not necessarily. We don’t actually need to go back to tendering. Everything is structured in a way for us to select a consortium. The technical solution is one aspect, but we don’t just select the technical solution. They have to convince us that they are the best in every aspect of the project’s development, including the operations that will take place several years down the line. It’s a lesson we’ve learned from studying major infrastructure projects around the world: You have to get married early, be very present — our Crown corporation and the private sector — and do everything together from the outset. That minimizes the risks for Canadians.
Senator Dalphond: Thank you for those answers.
Mr. Delisle, I must say that I use trains every week between Montreal and Ottawa and I have seen the new trains arrive; it is a great improvement. I miss the cars that are older than me. I’m very happy with the cars, which give the impression of being on European trains. I’ve also noticed that speeds of 160 and 170 kilometres an hour are being reached. I always look at that. We’re a long way from what I saw in China at 350 kilometres an hour, but we’re reaching good speeds. We’re almost at the 200 kilometres an hour that’s being talked about.
On the other hand, we may be travelling at 170 kilometres an hour, and all of a sudden we stop. We wait 10 minutes for the CN train to pass. I don’t know why. Can we go slower, arrive at a distance and wait less time? I find it exciting that we can travel at 170 kilometres an hour and disappointing that we have to wait in the middle of a field for 10 minutes.
Mr. Imbleau: I’m glad to hear you’re happy with the new experience.
Senator Gignac: The staff is great in general.
Mr. Imbleau: In terms of service and trains, we try to run trains to optimize them. Sometimes we find out at the last minute that we have to pull over because of cargo traffic. We are dependent on cargo traffic, which means that yes, sometimes the experience can be 160 kilometres an hour and sometimes we have to stop.
Senator Gignac: How is the schedule designed? We used to have a train that left Ottawa at 6:50 a.m.; now we don’t. It’s at 5:50 or 5:55 a.m., which makes a big difference, maybe not for students, but certainly for parliamentarians. How was the schedule designed? It starts very early in the morning, it ends fairly early in the day, and there are no trains in the evening.
Mr. Delisle: We review the travel times on an ongoing basis and according to demand, so it’s all evolving.
Senator Dalphond: A train used to run late in the evening, but that’s no longer the case.
Mr. Delisle: We’re trying to adjust our schedules according to demand. It’s something we monitor. We’re trying to provide passengers with the best possible service.
Senator Dalphond: Mr. Imbleau was telling us earlier that you will continue to provide the service you currently provide, which is to operate on the North Shore. You’re on the South Shore, so does that mean the Montreal-Quebec City train will also continue on the South Shore?
Mr. Imbleau: Saint-Lambert, Saint-Hyacinthe, Drummondville and Charny will remain. The idea is to add a very different service offering with far fewer stops, faster over a long distance, with dedicated tracks to avoid the issues we just talked about. It would be a train in line with European standards, but in Europe they also have more parallel trains, so that’s how we are increasing the service offering for users.
Senator Dalphond: VIA Rail’s budget this year is lower than last year’s. How are you going to manage? After all, it’s $400 million less.
Mr. Delisle: The operating budget remains the same, so it’s quite comparable. The following year, there will be a certain reduction. As we mentioned, the arrival of the new trains means that we should have received all our trains by the middle of next year; that’s why there is a decrease in funding requests.
The Chair: Thank you very much. I just want to remind you that if we continue in this way, the people from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, the Canada Council for the Arts and Canadian Heritage will become train experts and will always ask to testify at the same time as VIA Rail. I just wanted to point that out.
[English]
Senator Loffreda: Let’s change it up — although I would love a high-speed train. I do not know why we do not have them in Canada yet.
My question is for Canadian Heritage. Canada’s reputation as a global exporter of Canadian talent is second to none. Our authors, playwrights, singers, digital creators, painters and more are acclaimed in all corners of the world. The economic contribution of the cultural sector to our gross domestic product is valued at $62 billion. However, what I am most interested in is the value of our creative exports. According to your departmental plan, Canada’s creative industries were successful in global markets to the tune of $19.4 billion in 2020-21. That is the latest data you had at the time of your plan’s release. Do you know if Statistics Canada has released data for 2022? We’re now in 2024. I would assume that there may be some data.
I appreciate this data is published by StatCan, but can you speak to us about how this data is collected? How does Canadian Heritage evaluate the value of creative exports, and what work are you doing to help reach your $20-billion target?
Joëlle Montminy, Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Cultural Affairs, Canadian Heritage: Thank you. We have our Creative Export Strategy that has been in place since 2018. Since 2018, we have invested $125 million for the first five years, and then the strategy was renewed for another three years. This is a shared responsibility with Global Affairs Canada where we also use their services from the trade commission. Since 2018, we have helped 3,000 businesses and organizations across Canada in all of the major creative sectors with export activities.
A couple of things I wish to say first is that we do have data that shows that, of course, export is needed for the cultural industries to remain viable. As you know, many of the cultural industries that we support are in a market failure position, so without government support and also export efforts, many of them would not be viable.
Right now, our exporting firms are — there is a lot of untapped potential with respect to the creative sector. This is why we wanted to have an export strategy to enhance the results that we can see. I am not sure that I have the exact same numbers as you do. I might have to get back to you.
Senator Loffreda: Do you have the 2023 numbers from StatCan? In your departmental plan, I have the 2022 numbers.
Anyway, I am certain it is to the tune of $20 billion because your target is $20 billion. I was curious: For Canadians, how do you evaluate the value of creative exports, and how will you reach your target of $20 billion?
Ms. Montminy: Our new strategy has many different components. This is, again, a subset of broader efforts that we share with our colleagues from Global Affairs and the Trade Commissioner Service. On our strategy, I can only measure the impact of what we are doing in our own strategy.
Today, these are the types of activities that we do under our strategy: We provide funding to organizations in terms of an export program. We support export-ready companies and also the Export Development Stream. We focus on trade missions and amplification events, so we go around the world and take companies and create business-to-business, or B2B, opportunities for them.
We also have the Creative Export Navigator Service. Again, we use the Trade Commissioner Service.
What we do is we have measurements for all of these activities. For instance, recently we participated in a trade mission in Japan that resulted in over 100 B2B meetings. Following the meeting, we have companies who have two surveys — immediately after and six months later — and we follow up as long as we can in order to see the results of their trade, and then we compile these numbers.
For instance, an amplification event we supported recently was the Game Developers Conference in 2024. We had almost 1,000 B2B meetings, and it resulted in $3.6 million to $4.7 million in terms of response. This is a small investment, and it generates tremendous results for our presence in some of these things.
We also have an export contribution program. I mentioned the two different streams. For the contribution agreements, the companies that receive funding directly from us have to report to us — we could be funding, for instance, their export plan. Then in the submission, they have to describe to us what they will be doing, and then they have to report over the course of a number of years regarding where they are in the export.
We have multiple sources of data points that we compile in order to measure the success of our investment in terms of that particular strategy.
Senator Loffreda: Thank you.
Senator MacAdam: My question is for Mr. Delisle.
In your corporation’s strategic plan, you committed to generating savings equivalent to 15% of your operating deficit. I wonder what figure you are using for calculating the savings. I noticed for the year ended December 31, 2023, there was a net comprehensive loss of $40.8 million. Is that correct?
[Translation]
Mr. Delisle: The 15% figure comes from our 2025 to 2030 strategic plan. Our current objective is to reduce our deficit by 15% by 2030. You’re right, as of today, we haven’t reached that target, but the objective is to get there within the next five years.
[English]
Senator MacAdam: Okay. How much savings are you looking to achieve in total?
[Translation]
Mr. Delisle: Over these five years, for the 15%, the objective is to achieve around $80 million in deficit reduction.
[English]
Senator MacAdam: Can you speak to some of the ways that you hope to achieve that reduction?
[Translation]
Mr. Delisle: Yes, of course. The aim is to modernize the trains and the booking system, as we have already done. We also want to maximize the use of new technologies. So there are a lot of aspects that we are taking into account to try and achieve these objectives.
[English]
Senator MacAdam: You mentioned in your opening remarks that there was an in-depth review being done on VIA Rail. I’m wondering if you can elaborate on that. Who is doing that review? When do you expect to have it done? Do you have some more information on that?
[Translation]
Mr. Delisle: Last year, we began reviewing processes and certain operational aspects. We have identified opportunities that we will implement over the course of 2024 and 2025. We are working on these aspects at the moment.
[English]
Senator MacAdam: It is an internal review? There were no consultants hired to do this review?
[Translation]
Mr. Delisle: Yes, we hired an external consultant last year to support us and carry out this exercise.
[English]
Senator MacAdam: I wish to change focus because I’m interested in your sustainability initiatives.
In your 2030 plan, you committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 50% compared to 2005. Can you provide an update on your key emissions reduction initiatives and your energy efficiency initiatives within the fleet? How are you measuring those outcomes?
[Translation]
Mr. Delisle: On this question, we will be able to provide you with a little more detail on the plan we have implemented by 2025 and 2030.
[English]
Senator MacAdam: Can you provide the information in writing to the committee?
[Translation]
Mr. Delisle: Yes, we can provide you with more details over the next few days.
[English]
Senator MacAdam: Thank you.
Senator Kingston: I will ask my questions to CBC/Radio-Canada.
First of all, I would like to go back to the $42 million of additional funding announced in Budget 2024. You talked about it in your opening remarks, but I would like you to go over again what that is going to do and how that will be spent.
Ms. Najm: Thank you, senator, for the question. We did seek an additional $42 million in Budget 2024 that we are hoping to get in Supplementary Estimates (B). This is money that we will use to reverse some of the cuts to independent productions that were made as a part of our reduction strategy and also to save jobs from further elimination.
Senator Kingston: I will move to my favourite topic, which is New Brunswick.
In New Brunswick, we have the services of both CBC New Brunswick and ICI Nouveau-Brunswick, Radio-Canada. I have been looking at your plan. You have talked about a couple of things that I want you to expand on. It talks about reflecting the different needs and circumstances of each official language community, including the particular needs and circumstances of English and French linguistic minorities and striving to have equivalent quality in English and French.
This is somewhat of an observation on my part. I live in a blended family, and I do watch Radio-Canada every day that I am home. It seems to me that the quality of this production is actually a lot nicer than when we watch CBC New Brunswick. How do you fund those two entities within our very small province?
Ms. Najm: Thank you for the question.
I do not have that level of detail in terms of funding in New Brunswick specifically. I would be more than happy to bring that forward to the committee.
In general, the Main Estimates are used to provide services to Canadians across the country. We have an English network. We have French networks. We have many different television stations and radio stations across the country. I do not have the breakdown of the costs associated by location. I would be happy to provide that.
Senator Kingston: If I could follow up with that, New Brunswick, of course, is the only officially bilingual province in Canada. Very often, the news is more or less the same in French and English when they are talking about New Brunswick. Usually it matches up quite well, but often it doesn’t. I wonder what level of communication there is between Radio-Canada and the CBC in terms of how they present the news to Canadians and, in particular, to a place like New Brunswick.
Ms. Najm: Quite honestly, I am not best suited to answer that question. I would love to return to the committee with the answer.
Senator Kingston: I wanted to also ask about prioritizing or enhancing services to both the CBC and Radio-Canada. In your corporate plan, you talk about engaging more deeply with Canadians in under-represented and underserved communities, launching things like CBC Corner which is a digital space developed for public libraries that brings together the wide variety of CBC and Radio-Canada program offerings. Again, I look at what you are doing in the digital space in terms of serving less urban areas in both French and English.
Ms. Najm: My colleague Shaun Poulter has joined and maybe will be able to respond.
Shaun Poulter, Executive Director, Strategy, Public Affairs and Government Relations, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation: Hi, senator. Thank you.
If I understand correctly, are you talking about how we engage with communities outside of urban areas to ensure that we are reflecting their needs?
Senator Kingston: Yes. Particularly, it seems you are doing some things in the digital spaces and public libraries to try to enhance the offerings.
Mr. Poulter: Yes. Actually, the Co-Lab library partnership program is a really important one for us. Essentially, the way that works is our Co-Lab people are working with libraries across the country to seek partnership agreements. For each community that has a library, we’re reaching out to them. If they are interested in partnering with us, it is a question of them deciding what they want in their library.
For some of them, they want to see a presence. They want to have a local radio show sometimes hosted in the library. For some of them, it is more about things like training: teaching young people how to do a podcast. It is really up to the library and the community to decide what it is that they want. We try to provide that with the local employees whom we have in the area. It is a great way for us to try to reach people who often do not necessarily engage with the programming on the radio, television or internet.
Senator Kingston: Fredericton has an awesome library. If you were to reach out to them, I think they would probably take you up on that.
Mr. Poulter: I think they probably have, but I will follow up on that for sure.
Senator Kingston: Okay, thank you.
Senator Ross: My question is for the Canada Council for the Arts. I noticed on your website that you have your grants organized into six different categories. How are the recipients selected? I understand they have some type of peer selection. How are those groups selected? Do you have information on the geographic spread of how the grants are distributed? I, too, like to talk about New Brunswick.
I am also interested in those who apply. Do you find that you have a lot of people year after year, or are there new and unique applicants who receive grants annually? It’s all of the questions at once, sorry.
Ms. Chawla: That is perfect. Thank you for the questions. I will start with the first one that you spoke about: our six granting programs and how artists and organizations are selected. We do follow a peer assessment process. It is a standard process for many granting agencies — not just in the arts — in Canada and across the world. It is a little bit like the gold standard of how to make selections based on artistic merit and on the relevance of your project. The way it works is that an artist or organization would look to our portal, which is a granting portal, and essentially answer a number of questions to determine the kind of activity they are doing. Are you doing a creation activity? Do you want to write a book? Do you want to go on a tour with your music group? It asks a number of questions and will direct you to the type of funding that’s available.
The role of the Canada Council program officers is to put together peer assessment committees that represent the type of artistic expertise. If you’re looking, for instance, at a competition of touring, people who have expertise in touring will gather. We will make selections based on very rigorous representations. You need representation from an artistic perspective, representing different types of art or touring of small companies, big companies or international touring.
Then we would look at things like gender, official languages, diversity and regional representation. We ensure that on every committee, we have balance. It will not necessarily happen at every competition, but, over the year, there is representation from all parts of the country in different art forms, representing a diversity of experience.
To your question about geographic reach, that is a very critical preoccupation that we have. We want to ensure that anybody who applies to the Canada Council, regardless of where they live, has the same chance of success. I’m very happy to say that we do have very even success rates across the country. Should you apply from New Brunswick or from Saskatchewan or from the Northwest Territories, generally people have the same chances of success.
We are spending a lot of effort looking at what we call the distribution of the funding. We are making linkages between the number of applications we receive and the success rates and how much money is going into certain provinces.
I spent the last year travelling to every single province in this country. The territories are my next goal. We work very closely with our funding counterparts. I was just in New Brunswick last week. I was in P.E.I. and Nova Scotia and, just a few months before that, in Newfoundland and Labrador to look at the exact question of how the ecosystem works. How do we work with the arts councils of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, as well as with the ministries of culture, to ensure that all artists and organizations have a fair chance of receiving funding?
Your last point was about renewal. Yes, every year, we’re very happy that there’s renewal in our programs. We have at least, generally, 20% of new recipients every year. That’s a strong signal that the arts sector is in renewal, and there’s space for newcomers. We’re also funding the ones, like big institutions and organizations, that have been here for a long time. I really appreciate the question.
Senator Ross: What percentage of applications get funded?
Ms. Chawla: Our success rate at this stage is about 23%, which is a lower success rate than we’ve seen in the past. At the height of the pandemic, when we had all sorts of emergency funding available to the arts community, the success rates were quite healthy in the 40% range.
Post-pandemic, we’ve seen a huge need from the arts sector for all sorts of reasons. I mentioned them in my opening remarks. We had tripling, for instance, in our grants to individual programs. The volume of applications has tripled — not just the number of applications but also the amounts requested — because of all the issues that have happened in the last few years around precarity.
Again, we’re working with other funders to really understand how we can have the most impact in the fairest way possible. That is a big issue facing the arts right now. We’re not unique at the Canada Council. This trend of more applications, higher volume, higher requests and lowering success rates is happening in every province, territory and internationally as well. There is something happening with the arts sector in terms of a moment in time where this transformation toward long-term sustainability is top of mind. It’s something we talk about every day, to be honest. Thank you so much for that question.
Senator Pate: I will sort of pick up where Senator Ross left off. Under your leadership, one of the goals of the Canada Council is building a more sustainable future for the arts in Canada, as you’ve mentioned. Many artists are self-employed or work within the gig economy. They disproportionately experience economic insecurity, including as a result of working grant to grant or working under precarious, short-term contracts without access to benefits or securities like Employment Insurance, which come along with employment in other sectors.
Recognizing the detrimental impact of income insecurity on their ability to create art, you’re probably aware that over 3,000 artists and 30 arts organizations representing 75,000 members signed an open letter from the arts community in support of guaranteed livable basic income.
I’m curious what steps the council takes to monitor how income security of artists affects the arts in Canada. Do you have any findings you can share, if you do monitor that? Also, what strategies or concrete steps have been implemented to respond to the income insecurity that is experienced and arises for far too many artists?
Ms. Chawla: Thank you for the excellent question. Again, it is a very high preoccupation.
The Canada Council is the only funder at the national level to fund artists. We hear a strong desire from the artistic community for the Canada Council to play an advocacy role around that question of precarity.
We’re very careful. Of course, a grant from the Canada Council cannot possibly address the entire system in which an artist works, so we do try to use our advocacy and influence to talk about the data we’re collecting. We are able to collect some data around precarity from the grant applications we receive. We do a lot of data collection from the project funding that we allocate.
Last year, in 2023, we hosted something called the Arts Funding Forum. We invited funders from across the country, from the municipal level, the provincial level, the territorial level and some international guests. One of the panels discussed exactly this issue: the precarity of artists and how you make a living as an artist in this country.
Very interesting research emerged from this: Yes, universal basic income is a solution. We’ve seen this in Ireland. We’re doing a lot of international data gathering and conversations.
One fascinating conversation was around other systems at play that could give an artist all sorts of opportunities. It was fascinating. Mr. Imbleau spoke about the example of an artist who wanted to travel or a musician who wanted to make their way to another city. I was thinking, hmm, what if there were a system by which if you were an artist, you could get a discount on travel? What if, as an artist, you could get a discount on child care? What if, as an artist, you could actually have affordable housing or studio space?
It’s this idea of working with others in the sector to put a system in place. In a world where you’re a poet, everyone knows you’re not making a living as a poet, unless you happen to be the star of the world.
We are looking at those questions from all sorts of angles. We are really playing that advocacy role to demonstrate not only the impact of funding on an artist’s career, but we’re also asking what this country’s systems can do to better support viable careers in the arts. Thank you so much for that question.
Senator Pate: To the CBC, your 2024-2027 National Indigenous Strategy shows a stated commitment to tracking the progress made with respect to the Calls to Action of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Calls for Justice of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls. I’m curious where, concretely, you’re seeing these moving.
In particular, one of the Calls to Action regarding media includes increasing Indigenous people’s access to jobs, leadership positions and professional development opportunities within the organization. I’m hoping you can please speak to — or at least send us information about — that Call to Action in particular but also, overall, how you’re moving through the Calls to Action and the Calls for Justice and how you evaluate that progress.
Mr. Poulter: There are key performance indicators attached to that. We’d be happy to provide you with specific numbers, but I can tell you that one of the priorities has been to increase Indigenous hiring. It is one of our objectives, and we have been making progress. It’s slow, but we have been making progress, and we’re encouraged to do that.
Ms. Najm: I would also like to add that we have a National Indigenous Strategy, and we’re reporting on that strategy through our quarterly financial reports. It is one of the priorities for the corporation, and we are tracking it and happy to report progress through that process.
Senator Pate: Beyond financial data, if you could also provide material about how else you’re evaluating that progress, that would be very helpful.
Ms. Najm: We would be happy to.
Senator Pate: Thank you.
[Translation]
The Chair: Before moving on to the second round of questions, I have a question for the Arts Council. I looked at your budget over the last few years. You had higher amounts between 2016 and 2021 — there was still a good increase. Between 2021 and now, you have almost the same amount, despite inflation — excluding COVID — which is still significant. Has this resulted in less support for organizations or in smaller grants for applicants? Or have you been able to reduce your operating costs to gain efficiencies and keep the same amount of money going to the sector?
Ms. Chawla: We are back to our pre-pandemic budgets. We are subject to the budget reduction exercise. So there has been a minimal reduction, but we have been able to maintain our grant budgets in general. There may be minimal cuts, but we’ll do everything we can to avoid making any cuts to our grant programs. We’re still very worried, as demand is rising. This means that, although we’re not making cuts to the grant budgets, the fact that we’ve received three times as many applications and that each application has increased means that we’ve been able to pay out much less money. Success rates have really dropped at the Arts Council. Articles have appeared about this in the newspapers over the past year.
As far as core grants are concerned — grants for operations and for organizations — our message is one of stability. Given the situation that many arts organizations are going through, we don’t expect them to do many new things or new productions. We’re sending out the message that we’re listening; we understand the issues that exist in the sector and we’re going to support organizations through this transition, trying to provide as much stability as possible.
We are now entering the next core grant cycle, which normally lasts four years. For the past four years, the organizations have enjoyed a degree of stability. When we had the emergency funds at the time of the pandemic, we were able to help them by providing grants for projects. Now we’re starting a new cycle. We don’t have any more money, but we’re trying to maintain the grant budgets, as we know that organizations are dependent on these funds.
The Chair: I believe you mentioned earlier a 27% success rate.
Ms. Chawla: It’s about 23% for projects.
The Chair: To give us an idea of the variation, what was the success rate four years ago?
Ms. Chawla: It was a lot higher. I have the success rates. I could actually ask my colleague Ms. Johnson, who is Director General of Arts Granting Programs; she knows the success rates for each year better than I do.
However, I can confirm that there has been a decrease; the success rate used to be a little over 40%. Last year was the worst — we were at 13% in our project grants. This year we’re back up to around 23% or 24%. Ms. Johnson has the details and she can share them with you.
Lise Ann Johnson, Acting Director General, Arts Granting Programs, Canada Council for the Arts: Thank you. Last year, so in 2023–2024, the success rate was 25% for project grants. In 2022–2023, the success rate was 44%, and in 2021–2022, it was 51%. So the success rate has really dropped.
The Chair: What is the 13%?
Ms. Johnson: One of our grant programs that supports artistic creation, production and research, has the highest volume and its success rate was just 17%.
The Chair: When you define a success rate, it’s the level of —
Ms. Johnson: It’s the number.
The Chair: It’s the number only; it’s not necessarily based on the amount. So, if $10,000 is requested and $5,000 is received, do you consider that a success, even if it’s 50% of the request?
Ms. Johnson: The success rate I shared with you is actually the number of applicants who received a grant. The success rate is not connected to the amount, but rather to the number of applicants.
The Chair: Is this an amount that corresponds to the request that is being made, or has it been reduced?
Ms. Johnson: It’s the number of people.
Ms. Chawla: If the applicant asks for $10,000, we always try to give the amount requested, since we want the projects to be successful.
The Chair: You can’t make half a play or half a set.
Ms. Chawla: Exactly. So we’re trying to provide the necessary resources to make the project a success.
The Chair: I understand, thank you. We will now move on to the second round of questions.
[English]
Senator Marshall: My question is for Ms. Chawla. I mentioned at the beginning of the session that I would have a question for you.
You mentioned in your opening remarks about the artwork that’s in their possession, and I saw the number 17,000 pieces. Is there a dollar amount attached to those? I imagine that some of those pieces are very valuable. Is it indicated on the government’s financial statements as an asset?
Ms. Chawla: I can tell you the dollar amount. I’ll ask my colleague Eva Jacobs, our CFO, to tell you about the accounting. The collection is appraised at $74 million.
Senator Marshall: $74 million.
Ms. Chawla: Yes.
Senator Marshall: I was really interested in how you control those pieces to ensure that you still own them and they’re not hanging in somebody else’s home or business. If there are 17,000, that’s quite a number of pieces of artwork to keep track of. I’m interested mostly in that part.
Ms. Chawla: Absolutely. The collection is housed on St. Laurent Boulevard. If anyone would like to visit the collection — I’ll give a pitch here — we’d love to host you.
We have 17,000 works of art, and almost 25% is out. They are being rented out. Every single piece is tracked and entered into a database. When we rent the artworks, we have a contract with the organizations. We don’t rent to individuals. We rent to government, lawyers and hospitals — known institutions. We have a formal contract. We have professional staff who actually bring the artwork, install it and then do regular maintenance and checkups. We have ongoing communications with our clients to make sure that everything is very well safeguarded.
Senator Marshall: You must misplace or lose some pieces if you have 17,000 pieces. When would you discover that there is something misplaced or something lost? Have you had that experience? I’d like to know how often you do have that experience.
Ms. Chawla: Last year, I was not made aware of any lost artworks. It has happened that sometimes something might be damaged.
To go back to your question, yes, we do have the 17,000 artworks. They’re all tracked and in a database, but when the artwork is out, and it’s in public spaces, this is called a “working collection,” meaning we have very close relationships with the people who rent the art. As soon as something might happen, there’s a communication, but there are also checkups.
The art consultants regularly check in with all of the clients. We do renewals, so when we do the renewal process, there’s an inspection to make sure all the artwork is there. I can absolutely follow up to find out specifically if any artworks have been lost and what was the process. We’d be very happy to.
Senator Marshall: Thank you very much.
The Chair: Senator Fridhandler is not a member of the committee, but he’s a senator, so he can ask a question.
Senator Fridhandler: Welcome. For the Canada Council for the Arts, I guess we’ve moved entirely away from railways and over to art, which is something near and dear to my heart.
The arts and culture sector suffered immensely through the pandemic in terms of returning to pre-pandemic levels, but not unlike the media sector in all shapes and forms, it has not only the pandemic implication, but people have also found other ways to spend their dollars and be entertained.
You spoke about supplemental funding that was managed by your agency post-pandemic. Did that just kick the can down the road on inevitable failures, or did it reinvigorate some organizations? Do you know any statistics on the impact of that funding? If you could, please comment on whether you still need more for the same reason.
Ms. Chawla: Thank you so much for that question. I’ll ask my colleague Lise Ann Johnson to join me at the table to supplement anything I will share.
As I mentioned in my remarks, what we’ve seen is a big change in how the arts sector is managing post-pandemic. Some of the issues that have emerged are changes to, for instance, subscription models. Many people may know that many performing arts organizations operated with something called a subscription model. You would sign on, and you would have the next 10 shows. I’m using that as an example. That, for instance, is no longer how those patterns work.
Some of the things that happened we saw coming. What happened with the pandemic is it accelerated it to a point where organizations thought they still had another 5 years or 10 years to start rebuilding new audiences, to look at questions of infrastructure and to look at diversification of programming. Because of the pandemic and the rapidity of how everything changed, people don’t necessarily want to leave their homes and navigate traffic and pay for parking and pay higher dollars to see a show. Trying to get back those audiences is very much something that arts organizations are grappling with.
There have been some successes, absolutely. Some organizations took advantage, for instance, of the funding that we gave for digital transformation, and they were able to expand their audiences to international audiences. There are some orchestras, for instance, who did collaborations with conductors in different countries, and, all of a sudden, they found new markets in countries outside of Canada.
The vast majority of organizations, however, are struggling. It’s not because they don’t have the creativity and innovation. It’s because they don’t have the time to put in place all the requirements for this new transformation.
To your question, yes, there is a pretty urgent need to invest in the arts in this moment in time in order to give those organizations — in the next few years — the capacity to build their new markets, to diversify their audiences, to look at new partnerships and to reimagine how they’re delivering this amazing Canadian talent that we have in ways that new audiences and older audiences will want to reconnect.
Every time we hear a story from an arts organization that they had this moment where a new play was discovered, we hear the qualitative impacts, and we’re doing a lot of work on the quantitative impacts. What is the impact of every dollar that the Canada Council for the Arts can invest in an arts organization?
I’ll let Lise Ann Johnson speak about some of the most recent data we were able to collect around the economic impact of investing in the arts, which we’ve been able to demonstrate.
[Translation]
The Chair: As we’re running out of time, could you send us the answer in writing, please?
Ms. Chawla: Of course, with pleasure.
[English]
We will send you a written response with that information.
Senator Fridhandler: As a supplementary question, have you tracked the impact and the effectiveness of the special pandemic funding? How many organizations, nevertheless, collapsed at the end of it? I’d be interested to see the impact of that funding and whether it was effective or not.
Ms. Chawla: Absolutely. We can provide that information.
Senator Fridhandler: On one other topic, again for the Canada Council for the Arts, you talked about how your granting is done through peer review. I’m going to suggest to you, though, that organizations — maybe not so much individuals — that have been funded historically get extra protection. And you’re reluctant, when your peer review occurs, to not start with a tabula rasa on each organization. Maybe it’s because you’re concerned about sustainability, but the equity in that and not looking — so agencies or organizations that have been funded historically get to maintain their positions more than new entrants or organizations that received funding only at a certain level, and they don’t get to move so easily because you protect the historic.
Could you comment on that?
Ms. Chawla: We are always looking at how to bring movement into the core funding program and how we bring in new to core.
With the doubling of the budget of the Canada Council for the Arts, we were able to bring a significant number of new organizations into core funding. We also have mechanisms to exit organizations that are no longer meeting their mandate.
I’d be happy to provide a more detailed response to this question in writing, as I understand that we’re trying to keep on time.
Thank you so much for that question.
Senator Fridhandler: Thank you. I appreciate that.
[Translation]
Senator Forest: My question is also for the Council for the Arts. In the current context, arts and culture are essential ingredients for vital and attractive communities. It’s a major challenge, given the context in which our organizations and businesses are looking for skilled labour, and having cultural and artistic vitality is fundamental.
Do your criteria promote an equitable distribution, all things considered, for all of Quebec’s regions, so that we can take advantage of the cultural locomotive — to make a connection with our railroad friends — that is the Council for the Arts?
Ms. Chawla: Thank you for the question. I would say that, yes, in Quebec, the distribution of Council for the Arts funding is very equitable. Of course, we always do a more in-depth analysis in the regions. So when we look at the province as a whole, and Canada as a whole, I’d say that Quebec is the province that receives the most support from the Canada Council for the Arts, even though there’s always room for improvement when we look at the data by province. We look at Indigenous arts, official language minority communities and diversity. We always look at things from this angle to see how we can improve, and we work in collaboration with other funders.
Senator Forest: Do you have relationships with municipalities? We know that this is fundamental, and that everything happens at the municipal level.
Ms. Chawla: Absolutely. I’m in touch with almost all the major municipalities. In fact, next week I’m meeting with people from the Conseil des arts de Montréal and the Conseil des arts et des lettres du Québec, as we see the role of the Conseil des arts as part of a funding ecosystem, so it’s essential that we be in touch with them.
The Chair: You’ll have to meet with Rimouski and Saint-Eustache.
Ms. Chawla: I am open to all conversations.
Senator Gignac: Before going to CBC/Radio-Canada, I want to take a minute to close out the conversation with VIA Rail. I agree with my colleague Senator Dalphond that the customer experience has changed a lot between Quebec City and Montreal. That makes all the difference. Mr. Imbleau, I want to thank you for your public service, your leadership and your talent for teaching. I heard about your conference yesterday in Trois-Rivières, where you explained that yes, it changes everything, but that it will also lead to a reduction in the carbon footprint and the cost of living. People in Trois-Rivières will no longer need to spend a night in Montreal or Quebec City; they’ll be able to make a return trip the same day. Keep it up, and use social networks, as I don’t think you’re using them enough. You could use them more.
Mr. Imbleau: The message has been passed on to the vice-president, who is in the back.
Senator Gignac: Ms. Najm, my question will be a bit spicy this evening. Honestly, it’s more for the CEO than for you, so a written answer might suffice. I won’t be offended.
In January, you faced $125 million in cuts that affected 600 employees. You were asked to make sacrifices. What sacrifices were the CBC/Radio-Canada executives asked to make? We know that 600 employees were laid off. What sacrifices were made in terms of bonuses? Were executives affected by these cuts?
Second, four months later, the Minister of Finance gave back $42 million after cutting $125 million. I’m curious about one thing, given that you signed a collective agreement. Have the sacrifices required of employees changed, or have they stayed the same with all the cuts? Where do things stand?
You have about one minute. A written answer would also be fine.
Ms. Najm: Thank you for both questions.
[English]
On the subject of sacrifices of management, performance pay is part of compensation for over 1,200 non-unionized employees within the company. It is based upon performance indicators tied to our strategic plan. It is a defined structure and process of accountability that performance pay is based upon.
Our board approved the payment of performance pay based upon the fulfillment of our obligations. That is how I will answer. If you would like more information, I would be more than happy to provide it in writing.
Senator Gignac: It is just regarding the fact that you received $42 million additionally, suddenly, after the $125 million in cuts. Did that have any impact on the employees because they signed a bargaining settlement just months before with a lot of sacrifice? Thank you — if you can complete it with a written response.
Ms. Najm: We are careful in how we do our financial planning. Every year, we look at our appropriation space and projected revenues. We reassess the need for these reductions on an annual basis. We are committed to balancing our budget. The additional one-time funding is greatly appreciated to help us work through those strategies.
Senator Gignac: Thank you.
[Translation]
The Chair: Will you be adding to your answer in writing? Good.
[English]
Senator Smith: My questions are for Mr. Delisle or Mr. Imbleau; perhaps you could tag team.
[Translation]
In VIA’s plan, you anticipate a 251% increase in ridership by 2026. Can you tell me about your current passenger forecasts for 2025, following the end of COVID, and the number of people you anticipate? What will generate the biggest revenue gains? Is it Montreal-Quebec or Montreal-Toronto? Can you provide a revenue update?
Mr. Imbleau, it’s hard to have a company of the present and the future such as VIA Rail. How will you strike a balance between your approach and Mr. Delisle’s approach to management in order to maintain that equilibrium in your company?
Mr. Delisle: I’ll start with the first question. To put things in perspective for the current year, we’re expecting a ridership of about five million passengers to date.
In terms of revenue, the corridor is still the most promising section, of course. A route such as Montreal-Toronto remains highly profitable. The corridor still generates the highest ridership.
[English]
Mr. Imbleau: Today, there are 4 million passengers in the corridor. With the rapid train between Quebec and Toronto, we think that we will have between 25 million to 30 million passengers. It creates a revenue stream to ensure that both services remain in place; they will be complementary with one another. If you travel long-distance, it is expected that passengers will use the rapid train, and if you commute between the smaller communities, you will keep the existing services.
It is not unusual to have a new fast train and keep the existing services. We will try to optimize both down the road.
[Translation]
Senator Smith: Are you talking about 25 million passengers this year or in 2026?
[English]
Mr. Imbleau: When the rapid train gets into service, we think we will have between 25 million to 30 million passengers using the services in the corridor.
[Translation]
Senator Dalphond: My question is for CBC/Radio-Canada, not VIA Rail, even though I was tempted.
In one possible scenario, if the scope and mandate of CBC/Radio-Canada’s English section were scaled back significantly, would this affect the budget of the French section? In other words, do both sections currently share common services? If one section were to disappear or shrink considerably, would this affect the other section?
Ms. Najm: Thank you for the question.
[English]
The short answer is “yes.”
[Translation]
Senator Dalphond: Do you have a rough idea of the amounts involved?
Mr. Poulter: It’s hard to say exactly, senator. As Ms. Najm explained, Radio-Canada can’t exist without CBC. Across Canada, we share facilities and resources. This can certainly have a big impact.
Senator Dalphond: You can’t assess this now?
Mr. Poulter: No.
Senator Dalphond: Are we talking about a few million or several hundred million dollars, without getting too specific?
Mr. Poulter: It’s two things. There’s the amount, of course, but there’s also the level of service, especially for official language minority communities across Canada.
Senator Dalphond: You can’t tell us about the efficiencies that result in some services being shared between the two. I understand that the headquarters and the board of directors serve both. However, at some point, efficiencies are needed. Can you measure the loss of efficiencies? Haven’t you done this in a plan up until now?
Mr. Poulter: Yes. That’s true.
The Chair: I don’t think that this plan will happen just yet.
Senator Dalphond: An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
[English]
Senator Loffreda: My question is for Canadian Heritage again.
With the advent of social media, both misinformation and disinformation have become a major concern. On the question of disinformation, can you provide our committee with an update on the Digital Citizen Initiative? I note in your departmental plan that in response to a program evaluation in 2022-23, the government committed to conducting a yearly review of government-wide efforts related to disinformation, as well as to revise its internal governance committee and clarify existing roles and responsibilities by June 2024. Has this exercise taken place yet?
Ms. Montminy: Thank you.
Yes, the Digital Citizen Initiative has been in place since 2019. Since then, we have invested $31 million in 142 projects to better understand and build resilience to disinformation and other forms of harmful content. This has been a successful program. We have been able to fund different initiatives, whether it is through research or civil society. It has been widespread.
I am looking at my notes in French.
I do not have the results of the evaluation. It would have been done recently, but I can come back to you as soon as this information is available.
[Translation]
Senator Loffreda: Are you worried about this too?
Ms. Montminy: Worried?
Senator Loffreda: About misinformation.
Ms. Montminy: Absolutely. Right now, misinformation is a phenomenon —
Senator Loffreda: Is this part of your strategy?
Ms. Montminy: Absolutely.
Senator Loffreda: I suppose that it accounts for a big part of your future budget?
Ms. Montminy: The amounts invested to date are relatively small, given the scale of the issue. However, we intend to continue working on this issue.
Other departments are also working on this issue from different angles. At Canadian Heritage, our role has been to help civil society and organizations become more resilient when it comes to identifying the misinformation found everywhere, especially online. We want to prepare people to identify the correct sources of information, to conduct research and to share that research so that it can make an impact on society. With artificial intelligence, it will be difficult to fully tackle misinformation. Other initiatives focus on transparency, for example.
The Chair: Thank you, Ms. Montminy.
Senator Loffreda: Thank you for your efforts.
[English]
Senator MacAdam: I have a question for the Canada Council for the Arts. According to the Canada Council for the Arts website, the latest annual report was for 2022-23, while the most recent quarterly financial report was from June 30, 2024. I am just wondering when the next annual report will be published.
Ms. Chawla: Thank you for the question. The annual report is ready. Similar to the other answer, we are waiting for the minister to table it in the House of Commons. We have to follow the procedures where the minister would table our annual report.
Senator MacAdam: Do you know when that might be? Do you have an estimate?
Mr. Dendooven: Yes. I believe early October is the deadline for the annual report.
Senator MacAdam: So soon. Okay. Thank you.
Senator Kingston: I would like to say to CBC/Radio-Canada that the questioning that Senator Dalphond was on was quite closely related to some of the things I was talking about in terms of New Brunswick and the two entities, if you will.
My question is for Mr. Imbleau. The first time that I was on a train, it was between Ottawa and Moncton, New Brunswick, over 60 years ago, because my grandfather had a pass and worked for CN. I have been absolutely fascinated by fast trains ever since I was in France and went from Avignon to Paris on the fast train.
I am asking how this might benefit a place like Atlantic Canada. If I am going to get anywhere in the world, I have to go to either Montreal or Toronto. It seems to me that I would have an extra choice if I could fly to Montreal and take a fast train to Toronto, for instance, if I had to in order to connect with others. It would save a little bit of carbon along the way.
Are you planning to have it close to airports to serve the rest of Canada who also use that corridor for other reasons?
Mr. Imbleau: Thank you for the question. You just described how important this will be not only for the corridor, but also for people outside of the corridor — for tourism and for workers.
Yes, on being connected to the local system and being connected to the airport, it may not be directly, but it has to be seamless so that we attract investors, workers and tourism. We really offer to connect the backbone to the other system. That is why most of the airports have come out and supported the project by saying, “We want a fast train,” and that will increase the ridership and the usage of the airports, mainly for long-haul flights as well as freeing capacity for short-haul flights. It is how it is done in Europe today.
Senator Ross: This question is for you, Mr. Delisle. The ocean route is noted to be due for modernization. Your corporate plan says that it is running a $15‑million deficit as of 2022. Are there any plans for additional service for that region? In particular, again, I am interested in New Brunswick. It takes me 23 hours if I were to go from Moncton to Ottawa. It is not as fast as what I would like to think.
Also, I have a question about what you are doing for risk mitigation for natural disasters — we have talked a lot in the Senate about the potential flooding of the Chignecto Isthmus, and I wonder if you could address that.
[Translation]
Mr. Delisle: For the Chignecto Isthmus, my colleague, Denis Lavoie, could come to the table.
[English]
Denis Lavoie, General Counsel, VIA Rail Canada: Good evening. Thank you. Could you repeat the question because I did not hear the question at the back?
Senator Ross: Yes. I am asking about the ocean route. It is due for modernization, according to your plans, and it is running a $15-million deficit as of 2022. What are the plans for that region and, in particular, the New Brunswick piece of that?
Mr. Lavoie: On the infrastructure side, first of all, it is important to understand that we do not own the infrastructure. It is owned by the freight company CN. We are working closely with CN to always improve the capacity, the frequency and the types of services that we can offer.
Senator Ross: No specific plans?
Mr. Lavoie: I will just add this: For what we call the Long-Distance, Regional and Remote services, or LDR, we just received funding in the federal Budget 2024 to acquire a brand new fleet to serve the ocean, which is from Montreal to Halifax, and the Canadian from Toronto to Vancouver. We are waiting for the final authorization from the Treasury Board to launch the procurement for this important initiative for VIA.
Senator Ross: Thank you.
Mr. Delisle: I think your other question was related to the risk, so I think —
Senator Ross: Yes, the risk mitigation that is happening with regard to natural disasters such as the potential flooding of the Chignecto Isthmus.
Mr. Lavoie: Again, on the 12,000 kilometres of track that we operate on across the country from Vancouver to Halifax, we only own 3% of the infrastructure, and that is mainly in the corridor between Montreal and Ottawa. For the rest of the country, the infrastructure is owned by the freight companies, and we deal with them. We are in constant discussion with CN and CP. For example, we had a big disaster a couple of weeks ago in Jasper with the fires, so we were in constant discussion with the communities and CN.
[Translation]
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Lavoie.
[English]
Senator Pate: I know that we are over time. I would like to ask a question of Canadian Heritage. In 2022-23, your department committed to investing exactly $237,631,544 of your spending to implement programming to address missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls, or MMIWG. I’m interested in three things: How much was spent on developing and implementing programs, which programs have been established and what is the status of those programs? If I could get that information, that would be great, and it’d probably be in writing.
The Chair: Senator Pate, we can receive that by written response. Yes? Okay.
[Translation]
This concludes our meeting. The beautiful thing is that our friends from the train have become experts in arts and culture. This has been productive.
I would like to remind the people who made commitments to send us responses that you have until Wednesday, October 16, 2024, to do so.
Before adjourning, I want to remind the senators that our next meeting will take place on October 8 at 9 a.m. to continue our study of Bill S-233. I think that Senator Pate will be pleased.
Before closing, I want to thank everyone, all the participants, and especially our support team, who gave us some time today. It’s much appreciated.
(The committee adjourned.)