Small towns need permanent help

A healthy, advanced, and safe public infrastructure is essential for economic development and to raising the quality of life for individuals and families. That is why I tabled a motion this week that would see the federal government assist small rural communities throughout Canada with developing, repairing, and upgrading their core public infrastructure.
The motion itself, numbered M-433 in the House of Commons, reads as follows; “That, in the opinion of the House, the government should consider working with all levels of government to establish a long-term Rural Infrastructure Fund spanning a period of 20 years to assist rural municipalities with populations of ten thousand residents or less, in their efforts to develop, repair and upgrade core public infrastructure.” It was drafted after consulting many local leaders throughout Thunder Bay – Rainy River and Northern Ontario and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) among others. Everyone seems to agree that there is a funding shortfall for infrastructure in Canada, but also that small rural communities are at a particular disadvantage when it comes to raising money from property taxes because their populations are smaller and more spread out than urban centres.
The very foundations of Canada’s core infrastructure were first forged in the early 1800’s, prior to the country’s confederation. Both the Lachine and Welland Canals were completed during this time to simplify travel by water and enhance key trade routes. As time progressed, communities began to pave roads, build bridges, establish water systems, and electrify their cities. Not only did this newfound infrastructure improve the quality of everyday life, but it served as the nexus between towns and future provinces, which strengthened the economy and spurred job growth. This development would reach its apex following the Second World War, during what was considered the Golden Age of Infrastructure.
Today, we see a picture of Canada’s core infrastructure that is altogether different; much of which is nearing the end of its service life and in great need of repair. According to the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM), an injection of over $90 billion is required for new roads across the country, and that is not including funds needed to repair that which already exists. For example, a 2012 study done on 118 Canadian municipalities more than 52% of all roads were deemed to be in fair to very poor conditions. How did we reach this stage of deterioration?
While it could easily be attributed to the fallout of the end of the post-war economic boom, there a number of forces responsible. As development for infrastructure peaked in the 1970’s, the federal government gradually placed its efforts elsewhere. That did not only mean a reduction of federal funds towards core infrastructure, but also a shedding of more responsibility to the provinces and municipalities. Presently, more than 60% of Canada’s infrastructure is under municipal jurisdiction, according to the FCM. With property taxes being the primary method for municipalities to generate revenue (outside of applying for federal or provincial grant money) costly infrastructure revitalization projects are often put on hold due to insufficient funds. This presents a considerable problem for small rural municipalities, who in dealing with long stretches of road and bridges in particular, must confront the issue of repairing larger infrastructure with even lesser funding.
In tabling M-433 I sought to address this issue. It is centered on rural municipalities with ten thousand residents or less because the revenue problem is particularly acute for them. My concern with existing infrastructure programs is that they are often three-way partnerships between the federal, provincial, and municipal levels of governments. So what happens when a municipality is unable to participate because it simply does not have the matching funds? Occasionally, the other levels of government “find” extra money to help out, but this arrangement is neither predictable nor sustainable. We need to remedy this if our small rural communities are to be healthy and prosperous places to live and do business tomorrow, next year, and a decade from now. It is also key for towns like Atikokan and Fort Frances among others who have significant forestry and mining projects under development. We need a safe and efficient way to get these products to market, and something positive for the residents of the communities that are host to these operations.
With the Building Canada Fund (which has a small communities component) set to expire in the next year the need for a new Rural Infrastructure Fund for small communities is great and increasing. The longer we wait to implement an accessible fund for small rural municipalities the costlier these revitalization projects will be. Core infrastructure is the bedrock of a growing economy and higher quality of life, but this is especially true for small and rural communities.