The case for strategic infrastructure investment and the link to stronger economic performance and productivity is well documented. However, since the 1950s and 1960s when the majority of Canada’s infrastructure was built, governments have invested and reserved less funding for replacement and infrastructure growth needs.

From investment levels around 6 per cent of GDP in the 1960s to several decades of less than 3 per cent and since 2006 to just over 3 per cent, there remains an infrastructure gap that requires back-filling, as reported by the Canada West Foundation (2013). Assuming, of course, that Canada wants to compete at a high level in the global economy.

The evidence is stacking up:

• Mind the Gap: Finding Money to Upgrade Canada’s Aging Infrastructure, TD Bank Financial Group, 2004
• Lessons from the Recession and Financial Crisis, Conference Board of Canada, 2010
• Public Infrastructure Underinvestment: The Risk to Canada’s Economic Growth, Residential and Civil Construction Alliance of Ontario, 2010
• Canadian Infrastructure Report Card, Federation of Canadian Municipalities et al., 2010
• Top 10 Barriers to Competitiveness, Canadian Chamber of Commerce, 2012-2014,
• At the Intersection: The Case for Sustained and Strategic Public Infrastructure, Canada West Foundation, 2013

The good news is there appears to be an increased awareness level at all three Canadian government levels that: mining existing infrastructure is no longer viable given it is near the end of its life cycle; it is morally wrong to pass on significant liabilities to future generations; and that investing in strategic infrastructure actually has a positive influence on GDP and results in increased productivity. Canada is middle of the pack when compared to OECD and BRIC Nations (derived by Canada West Foundation, 2013).

The 2008 financial crisis prompted the federal government to add $6 billion for economic stimulus, and the Alberta provincial government made a policy decision to borrow funds for capital infrastructure investments to take advantage of (lower) cyclical construction costs and historically low interest rates. The New Building Canada Plan, released mid-2014, also includes $14 billion over 10 years for new major economic projects.

Further, the Province of Alberta, through Alberta Municipal Affairs, recently partnered with Consulting Engineers of Alberta (CEA) to fund an Asset Management (AM) Pilot Project to meet two primary goals: to develop an AM Tool Kit that can be used by Alberta municipalities to assist in the development of an AM system for their horizontal and vertical infrastructure consistent with the municipality’s Tangible Capital Asset (TCA) Policy and with the horizontal and vertical assets that are identified in their TCA Register; and to develop an AM system for each of the Town of Elk Point and the Village of Boyle who agreed to participate in the project using the developed toolkit. Ultimately, CEA hopes to influence provincial funding policy to favour municipalities who have a strong understanding of their assets from an inventory, condition, capacity, and upgrading and expansion requirements for their infrastructure to meet future physical and fiscal requirements.

The Alberta Association of Municipal Districts and Counties (AAMDC) is also currently developing resources and materials for its membership on the topic of AM planning and policy for practical application by municipalities. The intent is to provide smaller, rural or remote municipalities with the development and implementation of AM plans for their respective communities.

These initiatives, additional funding to stimulate the Canadian economy during downturns, and AM initiatives to more responsibly manage infrastructure are a step in the right direction but further and less reactionary financial commitments need to be made in order for Canada to achieve its long-term economic potential. The Association of Consulting Engineering Companies (Canada) recommends that dedicated infrastructure investment by all three levels of government should total 6 per cent of GDP.

A very recent scenario, and an example of the vulnerability in Western Canada, is the direct link between the price of oil, the province’s revenue generation and by extension (historically) the lack of strategic infrastructure investments. Lower revenues, typically result in even lower investments in critical infrastructure, whether renewal of existing infrastructure or building new infrastructure to meet population growth needs. The Canadian Press, 2015, reported in early January that Alberta’s forecasted budget swung from a $1.5 billion surplus to a $500 million deficit based on reduced oil prices. The budget also forecasts capital projects debt to reach more than $11 billion.

The question is, will the Alberta provincial government continue to invest in strategic infrastructure or will it revert to the status quo, mining what is already there? A similar question could be asked of the federal government should the Canadian economy stall. While policy and decision makers at all three levels of government will ultimately make the decision on infrastructure investments, it is incumbent on the professional practitioners, associations, contractors, and businesses that understand infrastructure stand up, share knowledge, and be heard.

Matt Brassard, P.Eng., is a principal at Urban Systems Ltd. He has over 12 years of consulting experience with a focus on municipal infrastructure projects. Matt led the Urban Systems office in Edmonton from 2009-2014 and is the current president of the Consulting Engineers of Alberta.