Democracy Gone Astray

Democracy, being a human construct, needs to be thought of as directionality rather than an object. As such, to understand it requires not so much a description of existing structures and/or other related phenomena but a declaration of intentionality.
This blog aims at creating labeled lists of published infringements of such intentionality, of points in time where democracy strays from its intended directionality. In addition to outright infringements, this blog also collects important contemporary information and/or discussions that impact our socio-political landscape.

All the posts here were published in the electronic media – main-stream as well as fringe, and maintain links to the original texts.

[NOTE: Due to changes I haven't caught on time in the blogging software, all of the 'Original Article' links were nullified between September 11, 2012 and December 11, 2012. My apologies.]

Wednesday, February 26, 2014

Cities say they weren’t consulted on new federal infrastructure funding rules

OTTAWA — Cities seeking fresh federal government infrastructure dollars may have some unexpected strings attached, based on new criteria unveiled Thursday by Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

The lobby group representing Canadian cities, the Federation of the Canadian Municipalities, said the new criteria came as a surprise and has prompted concerns the government would reduce access to some funds for local roads, as well as imposing new caps on the amount of federal money – from a multibillion dollar infrastructure fund — that could be used for each project.

The new $14 billion Building Canada Fund, spread out over 10 years, is slated to be launched on April 1 to replace an expiring infrastructure fund launched in 2007.

While the cities were previously allowed to use more than one source of federal funding, on top of a 33 per cent contribution from a federal infrastructure fund for projects, the new criteria would cap the total federal contribution at 33 per cent of a project’s cost.

“We’re happy about the long-term predictable money,” said Claude Dauphin, president of the federation. “We have 45 days to find solutions to these important concerns.”

The government had introduced the new plan in its 2013 budget, explaining that it was adding new money and improving an existing gas tax revenue sharing fund by opening it up to new projects such as roads and recreational facilities. But these types of projects will no longer be eligible for money from the Building Canada Fund.

Other changes unveiled by Harper on Thursday revealed that a Crown corporation, PPP Canada, could decide whether a project should proceed as a public-private partnership. Cities that decline to take that approach, following a recommendation by the Crown corporation, would lose federal funding.

The previous fund, announced in 2007, required multiple agreements with each province and territory, but a portion of  the new $14 billion fund announced in the 2013 budget, is being offered to provinces over the next 10 years without any agreements.

Harper didn’t specifically mention the new conditions that were posted on a federal website at the time of his announcement, but he noted that his government’s funding for infrastructure has been unprecedented, boosting job creation through 43,000 projects across the country.

“Very early on in our government’s mandate, we made the development and improvement of our country’s infrastructure one of the pillars of our economic policy,” Harper said Thursday in Gormley, Ont. “I’m delighted to announce that the framework of our new Building Canada plan is complete and as a result, provinces, territories and municipalities will now have unprecedented access to predictable, sustainable, infrastructure funds, for a decade.”

Although the government has consulted municipalities about the new fund, the cities were taken aback by the new restrictions.

“There are definitely elements of today’s plan that haven’t been discussed in any detail with FCM and that are at odds with our recommendations, and we’ve outlined our initial concerns to the government and will be expecting them to work with us to address those issues,” Dauphin said.

NDP infrastructure critic Olivia Chow said the federal government could be stronger if it wasn’t so afraid to work with others.

“For them to just charge out, to impose their so-called criteria …  means that it allows the government to play politics with taxpayers money and that’s not acceptable,” said Chow.

Original Article
Source: canada.com/
Author:  MIKE DE SOUZA

No comments:

Post a Comment