Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
Symbol of the Government of Canada

ARCHIVED - Transport Canada


Warning This page has been archived.

Archived Content

Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.

Table 9: Details on Transfer Payment Program (TPPs)

In 2007-2008, Transport Canada administered the following Transfer Payment  Programs (TPP) in excess of $5 million:


1) Name of Transfer Payment Program: Grant to the Province of British Columbia in respect of the provision of ferry and coastal freight and passenger services.
2) Start Date: 1977 3) End Date: ongoing
4) Description: The Province of British Columbia assumes the entire responsibility for the operation of ferry and coastal freight and passenger services.
5) Strategic Outcome: An efficient transportation system that contributes to Canada’s economic growth and trade objectives.
6) Results Achieved: The ferry service was maintained allowing the transportation of coastal freight and passenger.
  ($ thousands)

7) Actual Spending 2005-06

8) Actual Spending
2006–07

9) Planned Spending 2007–08

110) Total Authorities
2007–08

11) Actual Spending
2007–08

12) 
Variance(s) Between 9
and 11

13) Program Activity (PA) Policies, Programs and Infrastructure in support of a market-based framework 
14) Total Grants

24,890 

25,309

25,909

25,856

25,856

53

14) Total Contributions            
14) Total Other Types of TPs            
15) Total PA

24,890 

25,309

25,909

25,856

25,856

53


16) Comment(s) on Variance(s): Planned spending based on estimate of BC consumer price index.  Final spending reflects actual consumer price index.

17) Significant Evaluation Findings and URL(s) to Last Evaluation(s):

The evaluation completed in 2005 found that the grant agreement in its current form is somewhat contrary to the National Marine Policy. There is no constitutional obligation for the federal government to support the service provided. There would be a justification if there was a clear definition of a remote community and if the grant were directed specifically towards ferry routes serving these communities. Since the terms of the agreement are not open for amendment, the cost of the grant has not been reduced as mandated by the National Marine Policy. Also, BC Ferries required the grant in the past when it was a Crown corporation. As an independent, regulated, and self-financing company, BC Ferries is viewed as more efficient and business-like by many of its stakeholders. It is too early to determine whether this will continue under BC Ferries new management structure. Interview data suggests that if the federal grant were withdrawn, there could be negative impacts, particularly on the northern communities in BC. Finally, by providing the grant, TC is achieving positive outcomes with minimal administration costs and little risk of negative outcomes as responsibility for West Coast ferry services lies with others.

http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/des/reports/2005/bcpfs/menu.htm


18) Significant Audit Findings and URL(s) to Last Audit(s):

Transport Canada did not conduct an internal audit of this contribution program in 2007-08. TC will determine whether an internal audit will be conducted, based on its risk-based audit planning process.Copies of audit reports approved by the department’s Audit and Review Committee may be found at: http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/aas/menu.htm



1) Name of Transfer Payment Program: Grade Crossing Improvement Contribution Program (approved under Railway Safety Act)
2) Start Date: 1989 3) End Date: ongoing
4) Description: Payments made to railway companies, municipalities to improve the safety at public road/railway grade crossings.
5) Strategic Outcomes: A safe and secure transportation system that contributes to Canada’s social development and security objectives.
6) Results Achieved: Since 1989, over $100 million has been spent by Transport Canada to fund improvements at public road/railway grade crossings (approximately 80 sites per year).  It is conservatively estimated that the program is responsible for 53% of the reduction in collisions at grade crossings.
  ($ thousands) 7) Actual Spending 2005-06 8) Actual Spending 2006–07 9) Planned Spending 2007–08 10) Total Authorities
2007–08
11) Actual Spending 2007–08 12) Variance(s) Between 9
and 11
13) Program Activity (PA) Policies, Rulemaking, Monitoring and Outreach in support of a safe and secure transportation system
14) Total Grants

200 

140

300

155

155

145

14) Total Contributions

11,045 

3,505

7,145

7,290

7,280

(135)

14) Total Other Types of TPs            
15) Total PA

12,245 

3,645

7,445

7,445

7,435

10


16) Comment(s) on Variance(s): Variances between planned and actual spending are due to cash flow adjustments to accommodate pressures in the Departmental G and C Vote.

17) Significant Evaluation Findings and URL(s) to Last Evaluation(s):

A 2005 Departmental Evaluation Services study found that the program is consistent with the federal government’s priorities and contributes to TC’s strategic outcome of a safe and secure transportation system.  There is an ongoing need for the program and there is little likelihood that provinces will play a larger role in Grade Crossing Improvement Contribution Program (GCIP).  It also found that GCIP has been successful in reducing the risk of accidents at grade crossings.  Over the evaluation period, GCIP has contributed significantly to the decline of collisions at grade crossings.  It is conservatively estimated that the program is responsible for 53% of the reduction in collisions at grade crossings. 

http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/des/reports/2005/gcip/menu.htm

In 2006, TBS approval was obtained to renew and extend the program from 2006-07 to 2010-11. The renewal documentation includes a formal Results-based Management and Accountability Framework (RMAF) and a Risk-Based Audit Framework (RBAF).

The next formal program evaluation in the format outlined in the RMAF will be conducted at the end of the five year program renewal period.


18) Significant Audit Findings and URL(s) to Last Audit(s):  Not applicable


1) Name of Transfer Payment Program: Marine Security Contribution Program
2) Start Date: December 1 st, 2004 3) End Date: November 30, 2009
4) Description:

Financial assistance to aid in the speedy implementation of security measures and to help offset the costs of operators who would not have the financial capacity to cover security costs without significantly affecting operating costs.

5) Strategic Outcomes:

A safe and secure transportation system that contributes to Canada’s social development and security objectives.

6) Results Achieved:

Transport Canada provided financial contributions for the implementation of a number of security enhancements.  Transport Canada Regional Inspectors conducted follow-up inspections to verify that funded projects were completed according to submissions. By the end of 2007-08 approximately $108.6 M in funding had been approved for selected marine security enhancement projects.

  ($ thousands) 7) Actual Spending 2005-06 8) Actual Spending 2006–07 9) Planned Spending 2007–08 10) Total Authorities
2007–08
11) Actual Spending 2007–08 12) Variance(s) Between 9 and 11
13) Program Activity (PA) Policies, Rulemaking, Monitoring and Outreach in support of a safe and secure transportation system
14) Total Grants            
14) Total Contributions

17,403 

12,559

47,563

35,410

30,806

16,757

14) Total Other Types of TPs            
15) Total PA

17,403 

12,559

47,563

35,410

30,806

16,757


16) Comment(s) on Variance(s): The variance is due to the planned G and C level in 2007-08 that included corporate temporary allocation ($16.8 million) in anticipation of the requirement, which was subsequently distributed to other higher departmental priorities.

17) Significant Evaluation Findings and URL(s) to Last Evaluation(s):

The evaluation, completed in 2006, found that Transport Canada’s Marine Security initiatives are aligned with the Department’s strategic outcomes as well as the Government of Canada’s National Security Policy.  There is also a continuing need for the majority of Transport Canada’s Marine Security initiatives.  Specifically, the evaluation found that the Marine Security Contribution Program has increased stakeholder ability to address security vulnerabilities in order to comply with MTSR security requirements.  The program has also contributed to enhanced stakeholder acceptance and confidence in the security of the Canadian marine transportation system.  This initiative has contributed to increased stakeholder ability to integrate security with business and travel needs.  As a whole, Transport Canada is achieving positive outcomes for its investments in Marine Security initiatives.  The Marine Security program results in cost-savings through risk mitigation and harm reduction. The results of the evaluation may be found at the following site: http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/des/reports/menu.htm

18) Significant Audit Findings and URL(s) to Last Audit(s): An audit of the Marine Security Contribution Program is currently underway.   Copies of audit reports approved by the department’s Audit and Review Committee may be found at: http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/aas/audit/menu.htm .


1) Name of Transfer Payment Program: Contribution for ferry and coastal passenger and freight services
2) Start Date: 1941 3) End Date: ongoing
4) Description: Operating funding for two regional passenger and vehicle ferry services, CTMA Traversier Ltee and Northumberland Ferry Ltd.
5) Strategic Outcome: An efficient transportation system that contributes to Canada’s economic growth and trade objectives.
6) Results Achieved: The services met the demand and provided transportation of freight and people from the islands to the mainland.
($ thousands) 7) Actual Spending 2005-06 8) Actual Spending 2006–07 9) Planned Spending 2007–08 10) Total Authorities 2007–08 11) Actual Spending 2007–08 12) 
Variance(s) Between 9 and 11
13) Program Activity (PA) Policies, Programs and Infrastructure in support of a market-based framework 
14) Total Grants            
14) Total Contributions

9,355 

11,493

8,649

13,358

13,345

(4,696)

14) Total Other Types of   TPs            
15) Total PA

9,355 

11,493

8,649

13,358

13,345

(4,696)


16) Comment(s) on Variance(s): Mainly due to decrease in traffic and increase in operating and capital expenses considering enhanced safety and regulatory requirements, and fuel price increase.

17) Significant Evaluation Findings and URL(s) to Last Evaluation(s):

The evaluation, completed in 2004, found that while the CTMA service from Cap-aux-Meules, Iles-de-la-Madeleine, Quebec to Souris, Prince Edward Island (PEI) remains relevant since it supports the mandate of Transport Canada and serves a remote community. The Northumberland Ferries service between Wood Islands, PEI and Caribou, Nova Scotia does not directly support TC’s mandate and strategic objectives and there is no constitutional obligation to maintain the ferry service.  Both ferry services were found to provide quality, efficient and affordable services responding to user needs and both contribute to the tourism industry in their local area.

http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/des/reports/menu.htm

18) Significant Audit Findings and URL(s) to Last Audit(s):

Audits of the Contribution for ferry and coastal passenger and freight services (CTMA Traversier Ltee and Northumberland ferry Ltd.) were completed in 2004.  Copies of the audit reports can be found at: http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/aas/audit/2003/1577-03-030/menu.htm   (CTMA Traversier)

http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/aas/audit/2003/1577-03-030B/menu.htm (Northumberland Ferry) 



1) Name of Transfer Payment Program:

Strategic Highway Infrastructure Program – Highway Component

Strategic Highway Infrastructure Program – Border Crossing Transportation Initiative

Strategic Highway Infrastructure Program – Transportation Planning/Modal Integration (TPMI) Initiative

Strategic Highway Infrastructure Program – Intelligent Transportation Systems Initiative

2) Start Date: March 29 th, 2001 3) End Date:

SHIP Highway Component has been extended until March 31, 2009.  Contribution agreement’s extensions were approved by the Minister of Transport for some provinces in order to complete their projects.

SHIP Border Crossing Transportation Initiative has been extended until    March 31, 2009.

SHIP Transportation Planning and Modal Integration (TPMI) Initiative has been extended until March 31, 2009.

SHIP Intelligent Transportation Systems Initiative has been extended until March 31, 2009.

4) Description:

SHIP Highway Component: Provide federal funding under cost-shared contribution agreements with provincial and territorial governments for highway improvement projects to address the needs of Canada’s National Highway System.

SHIP Border Crossing Transportation Initiative and TPMI Initiative: Provide federal funding under cost-shared contribution agreements with provincial, territorial, municipal governments and other partners to improve the access to land border crossings, mobility, modal integration and transportation efficiency. 

SHIP Intelligent Transportation Systems Initiative: Provide federal funding under cost-shared contribution agreements with provincial, territorial, municipal governments and other partners to enable the undertaking of the deployment of intelligent transportation systems.

5) Strategic Outcomes: An efficient transportation system that contributes to Canada’s economic growth and trade objectives.
6) Results Achieved:

Highways:  9 projects were completed in New Brunswick, British Columbia (2), Alberta (1), Manitoba (1), Ontario (3), and Nova Scotia (1) in 2007-08.  These projects will improve safety and traffic flow on highways that are part of the National Highway System.

Border Crossing Transportation Initiative: The Highway 1 project on Vancouver Island in British Columbia was completed.  This project contributed to the enhancement of safety and efficiency of Vancouver Island highway system.

Intelligent Transportation Systems Initiative: The objective is to enhance the reliability and overall operating performance of the transportation system. In support of this objective, agreements have been concluded for deployment and integration projects. 31 ITS projects were completed, including the installation of over 40 new environmental sensor stations and the upgrade of 36 existing stations, the implementation of remote vehicle inspection stations for commercial vehicles, the completion of a feasibility and design study for a multi-agency centralized transportation management centre.

  ($ thousands) 7) Actual Spending 2005-06 8) Actual Spending
2006–07
9) Planned Spending 2007–08 10) Total Authorities
2007–08
11) Actual Spending
2007–08
12) 
Variance(s) Between 9 and 11
13) Program Activity (PA) Policies, Programs and Infrastructure in support of a market-based framework 
14) Total Grants            
14) Total Contributions

155,834 

80,407

24,057

39,576

19,755

4,302

14) Total Other Types of   TPs            
15) Total PA

155,834 

80,407

24,057

39,576

19,755

4,302

16) Comment(s) on Variance(s):

17) Significant Evaluation Findings and URL(s) to Last Evaluation(s):

An evaluation of all SHIP components was undertaken in 2006-07.  The evaluation found that SHIP was consistent with federal government priorities and with TC's strategic outcomes and priorities,  that there was an ongoing need/demand for infrastructure funding provided by SHIP and that there was a necessary role for the federal government in the SHIP program.  The evaluation found indications that the SHIP program is contributing to improvement of the national highway system, but could not determine the extent of the contribution.  It was too early in the program to determine the extent to which the program had contributed to improved trade and economic development and a reduction in GHG emissions.  While generally the program was efficient and cost-effective, the evaluation found that there was potential for overlap between SHIP and other infrastructure programs and also made recommendations to improve performance measurement.  The results of the evaluation may be found at the following site: http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/des/reports/menu.htm

18) Significant Audit Findings and URL(s) to Last Audit(s):

Transport Canada (TC) did not conduct an internal audit of this contribution program in 2007-08.  TC will determine whether an internal audit will be conducted, based on its risk-based audit planning process.  Copies of audit reports approved by the department’s Audit and Review Committee may be found at: http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/aas/audit/menu.htm



1) Name of Transfer Payment Program: Outaouais Road Development Agreement
2) Start Date: January 7, 1972 3) End Date: No sunset clause
4) Description: Contributions to the Province of Quebec related to the Outaouais Roads Agreement toward highway improvements are made to enhance overall efficiency and promote safety while encouraging regional and industrial development and tourism.
5) Strategic Outcomes: An efficient transportation system that contributes to Canada’s economic growth and trade objectives.
6) Results Achieved: Construction has started on the extension of Highway 5 that prolongs the divided highway (Phase 1); studies are underway to assessment further extension of this highway (Phase 2 and 3).  The McConnell-Laramée project in Gatineau is now complete with the opening of the Boulevard des Allumetières.  Both of these projects are contributing to enhance the safety and the efficiency of the Outaouais road network.
  ($ thousands) 7) Actual Spending 2005-06 8) Actual Spending
2006–07
9) Planned Spending 2007–08 10) Total Authorities
2007–08
11) Actual Spending
2007–08
12) Variance(s) Between 9 and 11
13) Program Activity (PA)  Policies, Programs and Infrastructure in support of a market-based framework
14) Total Grants            
14) Total Contributions

14,344 

14,596

18,232

18,999

18,998

(766)

14) Total Other Types of   TPs            
15) Total PA

14,344 

14,596

18,232

18,999

18,998

(766)

16) Comment(s) on Variance(s):  The Outaouais Road Agreement is a cost sharing agreement between the federal government and the province of Quebec where the federal government funds up to 50% of eligible costs on infrastructure projects covered under this agreement.  There is no funding ceiling to this agreement; therefore, it is possible that actual expenditures can exceed planned expenditures.  TC ensures that the expenditures cover only eligible costs as well as only up to 50% of the total costs.
 
17) Significant Evaluation Findings and URL(s) to Last Evaluation(s):

The evaluation, completed in 2005, found that the Outaouais Road Agreement (ORA) projects completed to date are only indirectly aligned with TC’s mandate for the national transportation system and that the ORA objectives are more closely aligned with the National Capital Commission’s mandate.  Although TC has the expertise to manage ORA projects, the evaluation found that its continued role as program manager is not the best fit, as the ORA program is not well aligned with TC’s mandate.  However, the ORA program has contributed to an improvement in the road system in the Outaouais if one accepts the assumption that project completion results in improvements.  It should be noted that concerns regarding the departmental mandate have been addressed through the creation of a Transport, Infrastructure and Communities Portfolio which brings under one Minister all infrastructure programs and the National Capital Commission.

http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/des/reports/2005/ora/menu.htm

18) Significant Audit Findings and URL(s) to Last Audit(s):

Transport Canada (TC) did not conduct an internal audit of this contribution program in 2007-08.  TC will determine whether an internal audit will be conducted, based on its risk-based audit planning process.  Copies of audit reports approved by the department’s Audit and Review Committee may be found at: http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/aas/menu.htm



1) Name of Transfer Payment Program: Airports Capital Assistance Program
2) Start Date: April 1, 1995 3) End Date: March 31, 2010
4) Description: Airports Capital Assistance Program (ACAP) assists eligible applicants in financing capital projects related to safety, asset protection and operating cost reduction. 
5) Strategic Outcomes:  An efficient transportation system that contributes to Canada’s economic growth and trade objectives.
6) Results Achieved: In 2007-08, ACAP has assisted 31 airports by financing 33 projects, all of which contributed to airside-safety.  Announcements under the program totalled over $43.5 million.
  ($ thousands) 7) Actual Spending 2005-06 8) Actual Spending
2006–07
9) Planned Spending 2007–08 10) Total Authorities
2007–08
11) Actual Spending
2007–08
12) Variance(s) Between 9 and 11
13) Program Activity (PA) Policies, Programs and Infrastructure in support of a market-based framework
14) Total Grants            
14) Total Contributions

35,400 

36,277

38,000

38,000

32,306

5,694

14) Total Other Types of   TPs            
15) Total PA

35,400 

36,277

38,000

38,000

32,306

5,694


16) Comment(s) on Variance(s): The current ACAP funding envelope is $190M over five years (April 2005 to March 2010), an average of $38M per year. As large year-to-year variances are not uncommon in major capital programs, TC sought and obtained TB’s approval to have a program ceiling of $190M over five fiscal years rather than an annual ceiling of $38M.  This has given the department more flexibility to maximize the funding available for the program, i.e. the department can reprofile funds to future years.  As an example, in 2007-08, delays in fire truck acquisition projects resulted in G&C lapses; however, the funds were reprofiled to 2008-09 to match delivery of these pieces of safety equipment.

17) Significant Evaluation Findings and URL(s) to Last Evaluation(s):

The evaluation in 2004 found that ACAP is in line with the current objectives of TC and of the Government of Canada, that most airports are not able to self-finance projects funded by ACAP and that there are no other sources of funding available for these projects. Also, ACAP met its objectives as it contributes to safety, asset protection and reduction of operating costs at funded airports. ACAP also contributes to the maintenance of a feeder airport system. The applicant and project eligibility criteria were appropriate. Some improvements to decision-making processes, particularly with respect to timeliness, are warranted. 

Another evaluation of the program began in the spring of 2008 and should be completed in 2009.

http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/des/reports/2004/acap/menu.htm  


18) Significant Audit Findings and URL(s) to Last Audit(s):

Transport Canada (TC) did not conduct an internal audit of this contribution program in 2007-08.  Audits of selected projects were conducted in 2006-07.  Copies of audit reports approved by the department’s Audit and Review Committee may be found at: http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/aas/menu.htm



1) Name of Transfer Payment Program: Contribution Program for operating, capital and start-up funding requirement for Regional and Remote Passenger Rail Services
2) Start Date: June 1, 2004 3) End Date: March 31, 2010
4) Description: Provide operating funding for the regional and remote passenger rail services not provided by VIA Rail, for capital and start-up costs for regional and remote passenger rail services, and to address potential costs of transferring regional services. 
5) Strategic Outcome: An efficient transportation system that contributes to Canada’s economic growth and trade objectives.
6) Results Achieved: Continuation of safe, reliable and sustainable services.  Two new First Nations railways were created and took-over the services in their area.
  ($ thousands) 7) Actual Spending 2005-06 8) Actual Spending
2006–07
9) Planned Spending 2007–08 10) Total Authorities
2007–08
11) Actual Spending
2007–08
12) Variance(s) Between 9 and 11
13) Program Activity (PA) Policies, Programs and Infrastructure in support of a market-based framework
14) Total Grants            
14) Total Contributions

25,292 

13,080

8,100

12,670

12,437

(4,337)

14) Total Other Types of   TPs            
15) Total PA

25,292 

13,080

8,100

12,670

12,437

(4,337)


16) Comment(s) on Variance(s): The variance is a result of timing differences between the project approval and the inclusion of the funding in Annual Reference Level Update and Supplementary Estimates.

17) Significant Evaluation Findings and URL(s) to Last Evaluation(s):

The evaluation, completed in 2004, found that the services provided by the Quebec North Shore and Labrador Railway and the Algoma Central Railway funded by this program meet the remote access justification as a rationale for federal government financial contributions.  However, the Ontario Northland Transportation Commission service does not.  The evaluation also found that all three services have good safety records and passengers are generally satisfied with the services provided.


18) Significant Audit Findings and URL(s) to Last Audit(s):

Transport Canada completed an audit of this contribution program in 2003.   The report can be found at the following link: http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/aas/audit/2003/1577-03-007/menu.htm



1) Name of Transfer Payment Program: Northumberland Strait Crossing subsidy payment (Statutory)
2) Start Date: April 1, 1997 3) End Date: April 1, 2032
4) Description: Subsidy payments are made to bridge operator to honour constitutional obligations to provide a transportation link between Prince Edward Island and the mainland.
5) Strategic Outcomes: An efficient transportation system that contributes to Canada’s economic growth and trade objectives.
6) Results Achieved: Subsidy payments have been made to the bridge operator and an efficient year-round transportation service was offered.
  ($ thousands) 7) Actual Spending 2005-06 8) Actual -Spending
2006–07
9) Planned Spending 2007–08 10) Total Authorities
2007–08
11) Actual Spending
2007–08
12)
Variance(s) Between 9 and 11
13) Program Activity (PA) Policies, Programs and Infrastructure in support of a market-based framework
14) Total Grants            
14) Total Contributions            
14) Total Other Types of   TPs (Statutory)

52,790 

54,265

55,276

54,897

54,897

379

15) Total PA

52,790 

54,265

55,276

54,897

54,897

379


16) Comment(s) on Variance(s): Nil.

17) Significant Evaluation Findings and URL(s) to Last Evaluation(s):

Evaluation not required.


18) Significant Audit Findings and URL(s) to Last Audit(s):

In 2007-08, TC conducted a follow-up internal audit, from audit carried out in 2001, of TC’s responsibilities governing the operations of the operation of the Bridge by the Northumberland Strait Crossing.  Overall, TC has effectively discharged its responsibilities as federal custodian of the Confederation Bridge and complied with the financial conditions surrounding the payment of the annual subsidy to Northumberland Strait Crossing and the approval of the toll rates and the toll structure.  Copies of the audit reports approved by the department’s Audit Review Committee may be found at:

http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/aas/audit/menu.htm



1) Name of Transfer Payment Program: Urban Transportation Showcase Program (UTSP)
2) Start Date: June 21, 2001 3) End Date: March 31, 2009
4) Description: To test and measure the impacts of strategies to reduce urban Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions from urban passenger transportation, so as to lay a foundation for the adoption of effective, integrated GHG reduction strategies in urban centres across Canada.
5) Strategic Outcomes: An environmentally responsible transportation system that contributes to Canada’s sustainable development objectives.
6) Results Achieved:

Implemented showcase demonstration in 8 municipalities across Canada.  As of the end of 2007/08, there were three showcase municipalities that have finished their projects (Halifax, Greater Toronto and Hamilton and Whitehorse) and four projects that are ongoing (Region of Waterloo, Vancouver, Winnipeg and Gatineau-Montreal).  Completed showcase municipalities report that projects are reaching their objectives to change travel behaviour, foster replication, and innovate in the delivering of urban transportation infrastructure and services.  All proponents cite the presence of the program as a critical factor in implementing the projects.  The program’s Information Network supports various learning events that focus on case studies and best practices from Canadian projects and initiatives:

  • Developed 12 case studies and issue papers that highlight sustainable transportation practices and issues;
  • Supported two awards programs: The Transportation Association of Canada's Sustainable Urban Transportation Award and The Federation of Canadian Municipalities' Sustainable Transportation Award;
  • Sponsored the first national Transportation Demand Management Summit by the Association for Commuter Transportation of Canada.

Over eleven hundred stakeholders attended the sessions & workshops supported by the UTSP, which foster knowledge sharing and professional development.  The Information Network has established a comprehensive network for the dissemination of information on successful GHG reduction stretegies, including tools and resources for practioners and decision-makers, such as the Urban Transportation Emissions Calculator. 

For further information on the program including the most recent Annual Review please visit:

http://www.tc.gc.ca/utsp/

  ($ thousands) 7) Actual Spending 2005-06 8) Actual Spending
2006–07
9) Planned Spending 2007–08 10) Total Authorities
2007–08
11) Actual Spending
2007–08
12) Variance(s) Between 9 and 11
13) Program Activity (PA) Policies and Programs in support of sustainable transportation
14) Total Grants            
14) Total Contributions

6,986 

3,841

9,712

9,712

6,687

3,025

14) Total Other Types of  TPs            
15) Total PA

6,986 

3,841

9,712

9,712

6,687

3,025

16) Comment(s) on Variance(s):

Due to various project and construction delays, total planned spending as forecasted in 2007-08 was not attained.


17) Significant Evaluation Findings and URL(s) to Last Evaluation(s):

An evaluation of this program is scheduled for 2008-09.


18) Significant Audit Findings and URL(s) to Last Audit(s):

Transport Canada (TC) did not conduct an internal audit of this contribution program in 2007-08.  TC will determine whether an internal audit will be conducted, based on its risk-based audit planning process.  Copies of audit reports approved by the department’s Audit and Review Committee may be found at:

http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/aas/audit/menu.htm



1) Name of Transfer Payment Program: Payment to the Canadian Wheat Board for the acquisition and leasing of hopper cars for the transportation of grain in Western Canada
2) Start Date: March 1981 3) End Date: July 2006
4) Description: Reimburse Canadian Wheat Board for leasing of hopper cars for transfer of Canadian grain to export position.
5) Strategic Outcome: An efficient transportation system that contributes to Canada’s economic growth and trade objectives.
6) Results Achieved: The Canadian Wheat Board leased cars have been in continuous use transporting western Canadian grain from the Prairies to points of export and to Board customers in Canada.
  ($ thousands) 7) Actual Spending 2005-06 8) Actual Spending
2006–07
9) Planned Spending 2007–08 10) Total Authorities
2007–08
11) Actual Spending
2007–08
12) Variance(s) Between 9 and 11
13) Program Activity (PA) Policies, Programs and Infrastructure in support of a market-based framework 
14) Total Grants            
14) Total Contributions

12,309

12,007 

-

1,189

1,132

(1,132)

14) Total Other Types of   TPs            
15) Total PA

12,309

12,007

-

1,189

1,132

(1,132)


16) Comment(s) on Variance(s): Actual spending is less than planned spending due to alternative use revenue for rail cars, favourable exchange rates for lease payments made in U.S. dollars, and the sunsetting of one of the leases.

17) Significant Evaluation Findings and URL(s) to Last Evaluation(s):

The evaluation in 2005 found that the program aligned with federal priorities of regional disparity, increasing trade and promotion of social and economic development.  With the removal of the Crow Rate, the federal government role is no longer necessary.  The federal role was necessary when a shortfall in railway capacity to transport grain existed and was expected to increase, as neither the provinces nor the railways could meet demand for investment in the grain transportation system.  It found that the cars ensured the railways could meet commitments to transport grain and the grain shippers could meet peak sales requirements.  The cars increased grain-shipping efficiency and likely contributed to increased sales to overseas markets.  The evaluation also found that the lease of the 2,000 hopper cars was not the most cost-effective option available to the department and the Government of Canada chose this option despite alternate advice.

http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/des/reports/2006/hoppercars/menu.htm

18) Significant Audit Findings and URL(s) to Last Audit(s):
Transport Canada completed audits of the Payment to the Canadian Wheat Board for the acquisition and leasing of hopper cars for the transportation of grain in Western Canada in 2001, 2003 and 2006.

<http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/aas/audit/2001/1577-01-005c/menu.htm>



1) Name of Transfer Payment Program: Port Divestiture Fund
2) Start Date: April 1 st, 1996 3) End Date: March 31 st, 2012
4) Description: Facilitate the divestiture process by providing a new owner with the resources to take over the port.
5) Strategic Outcomes: An efficient transportation system that contributes to Canada’s economic growth and trade objectives.
6) Results Achieved: In the period of April 1, 2007 - March 31, 2008, Transport Canada divested 3 ports.  Port divestiture negotiations with local interests are ongoing.
  ($ thousands) 7) Actual Spending 2005-06 8) Actual Spending
2006–07
9) Planned Spending 2007–08 10) Total Authorities
2007–08
11) Actual Spending
2007–08
12) Variance(s) Between 9 and 11
13) Program Activity (PA) Policies, Programs and Infrastructure in support of a market-based framework 
14) Total Grants            
14) Total Contributions

58,665 

513 

0

34,500

16,004

(16,004)

14) Total Other Types of   TPs            
15) Total PA

58,665 

513 

0

34,500

16,004

(16,004)


16) Comment(s) on Variance(s): Divestitures were slower than expected in 2007-2008.

17) Significant Evaluation Findings and URL(s) to Last Evaluation(s):

An evaluation of the Port Divestiture Program was completed in October of 2007. The evaluation found that the program is aligned with federal government and departmental policies and priorities. It also found that it is unlikely that 100% divestiture of regional/local ports will occur. Finally, the report mentioned that there was a lack of data for evaluation, and that in order for future evaluations to occur, this gap of information would have to be bridged. It also recommended that the Guidelines and Directives for Port Divestiturebe revised.

http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/des/reports/2007/port/menu.htm


18) Significant Audit Findings and URL(s) to Last Audit(s):

An internal audit will be performed in the coming year.  Copies of audit reports approved by the department’s Audit and Review Committee may be found at:

http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/aas/audit/menu.htm



1) Name of Transfer Payment Program: Transit Secure (formerly Passenger Rail and Urban Transit Security Contribution Program)
2) Start Date: June 22, 2006 3) End Date: March 31, 2009
4) Description: The Program is designed to enhance the security of Canada’s passenger rail and urban transit system by providing incentives to operators of passenger rail and urban transit services to implement new and enhanced security measures rapidly.
5) Strategic Outcomes:A safe and secure transportation system that contributes to Canada’s social development and security objectives.
6) Results Achieved:
  • Passenger Rail and urban transit security in Canada is enhanced with respect to prevention, detection, response and recovery from terrorist attacks;
  • Operators take up guidelines, technical advice and best practices for security enhancements as made available through the program; and
  • Public confidence in the passenger rail and urban transit sector is increased
  ($ thousands) 7) Actual Spending 2005-06 8) Actual Spending
2006–07
9) Planned Spending 2007–08 10) Total Authorities
2007–08
11) Actual Spending
2007–08
12) Variance(s) Between 9 and 11
13) Program Activity (PA) Policies, Rulemaking, Monitoring and Outreach in support of a safe and secure transportation system
14) Total Grants            
14) Total Contributions

-

-

67,400

67,400

8,077

59,323

14) Total Other Types of   TPs            
15) Total PA

-

-

67,400

67,400

8,077

59,323


16) Comment(s) on Variance(s):  The program has reprofiled funds in each of the last two fiscal years (the first two of its existence). The internal organization was not fully operational for the first year of the program due to staffing delays and turnover. In addition, the negotiation of contribution agreements proved more time-consuming than anticipated. For example some operators were required to seek provincial endorsement or approval of funding before proceeding, thereby adding to the time required to negotiate agreements, Finally, program recipients had very little time to get projects operational and were stretched between applying to the program and project implementation.

17) Significant Evaluation Findings and URL(s) to Last Evaluation(s): No evaluation is planned.

18) Significant Audit Findings and URL(s) to Last Audit(s):  An audit of the Rail and Urban Transit Security Contribution Program will commence in 2008-09.   Copies of audit reports approved by the department’s Audit and Review Committee may be found at: http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/aas/audit/menu.htm


1) Name of Transfer Payment Program: Asia-Pacific Gateway and Corridor Transportation Infrastructure Fund
2) Start Date: October 19, 2006 3) End Date: March 31, 2014
4) Description: Contributions to assist in the establishment of the best integrated multimodal transportation network facilitating global supply chains between Asia and North America. Contributions will target transportation infrastructure investments to address near term capacity problems and build strategically for the future
5) Strategic Outcomes:An efficient transportation system that contributes to Canada’s economic growth and trade objectives.
6) Results Achieved: Project work started on the Pitt River Bridge and Mary Hill Bypass in British Columbia in 2006-07, and in 2007-08 construction commenced on the Simon Fraser Bridge in Prince George and the Rail-Road Grade Separation in Smithers, B.C.  South Fraser Perimeter Road, Delta Port Connector projects commenced multi-year environmental assessments and the Robert Banks Rail Corridor undertook an analysis and established a management board.  Once these projects are completed, the expected result will be to improve the transportation corridors by enhancing safety and security measures; reducing congestion and facilitating the transportation of goods and people.
  ($ thousands) 7) Actual Spending 2005-06 8) Actual Spending
2006–07
9) Planned Spending 2007–08 10) Total Authorities
2007–08
11) Actual Spending
2007–08
12) Variance(s) Between 9 and 11
13) Program Activity (PA) Policies, Programs and Infrastructure in support of a market-based framework
14) Total Grants            
14) Total Contributions

-

8,400

43,800

43,800

40,403

3,397

14) Total Other Types of   TPs            
15) Total PA

-

8,400

43,800

43,800

40,403

3,397

16) Comment(s) on Variance(s):

17) Significant Evaluation Findings and URL(s) to Last Evaluation(s):

An evaluation is planned for 2010-11.


18) Significant Audit Findings and URL(s) to Last Audit(s):

TC did not conduct an internal audit of this contribution program in 2007-08.  TC will determine whether an internal audit will be conducted, based on its risk-based audit planning process.  Copies of audit reports approved by the department’s Audit and Review Committee may be found at: http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/aas/audit/menu.htm



1) Name of Transfer Payment Program:  ecoTRANSPORT Strategy
2) Start Date: March 29, 2007 3) End Date:  March 31, 2011
4) Description: The ecoTRANSPORT Strategy involves a series of initiatives designed to reduce the amount of fuel consumed, improve transportation efficiency and introduce cleaner transportation technologies.  Launched as part of the Government’s Environmental Agenda, this strategy features the ecoMOBILITY program; the ecoTECHNOLOGY for Vehicles Program and the ecoENERGY for Personal Vehicles Program; and the ecoFREIGHT program.  The ecoAUTO Rebate Program was introduced separately but is complementary to the programs for personal vehicles. 
  • The ecoMOBILITY program is a $10 million initiative that seeks to work with municipalities to help cut urban-passenger transportation emissions by encouraging commuters to choose public transit or other sustainable transportation options. Working with cities across Canada, this initiative will help develop programs, services and products that improve sustainable transportation options in urban areas.
  • The ecoTECHNOLOGY for Vehicles Program includes in-depth testing and showcasing of advanced technologies vehicles in order to raise awareness and foster important new partnerships with the automotive industry and encourage the introduction of a broader range of environmental technologies in Canada.  The ecoENERGY for Personal Vehicles Program, delivered by NRCan will provide fuel consumption information and decision-making tools to encourage consumers to purchase fuel-efficient vehicles that are currently available in the market.  Together these two programs have a combined funding of $36 million.
  • The ecoFREIGHT program, with $61 million in funding, features new steps to reduce the environmental and health effects of freight transportation through technology and will be delivered by Transport Canada and Natural Resources Canada (NRCan). These steps include addressing regulatory barriers, reducing fuel use and emissions, establishing a Freight Technology Demonstration Fund, providing cost-shared funding for the purchase and installation of proven technologies, building industry partnerships, and supporting up to four pilot projects to demonstrate the installation and use of shore-based power for marine vessels in Canadian ports.
  • The ecoAUTO Rebate Program, announced in Budget 2007 as a two-year initiative of $160M and receiving additional funding for a total of $262.7, is a program to provide performance-based rebates to consumers who purchase fuel-efficient vehicles. It requires eligible vehicles to meet a performance standard or fuel consumption rating.  This is intended as an interim measure to increase consumer purchases of more efficient advanced technology vehicles before the new fuel-efficiency standards take effect with model year 2011.
5) Strategic Outcomes: An environmentally responsible transportation system that contributes to Canada’s sustainable development objectives.
6) Results Achieved:
  • ecoAUTO:  For 6 months of operations in 2007-2008 (October 1 to March 31), over 75,000 applications were received, 66,000 applications were processed and over $71M in rebate payments was disbursed to 61,000 Canadians who purchased fuel-efficient vehicles.  Positive effects can also be seen in the automobile industry, as some manufactures have redesigned their most recent model year vehicles to improve fuel efficiency to meet the fuel consumption thresholds of ecoAUTO.  This has resulted in an increase from 21 to 32 vehicles configurations available in Canada, which qualify under the Program.
  • ecoTechnology for vehicles:  In 2007-08, the eTV program began the procurement process to acquire the next generation of vehicles and technologies for testing and evaluation.  Efforts also focussed on establishing a solid strategic approach to evaluating promising environmental technologies and enhancing program knowledge of cutting-edge technological developments.The eTV technical team completed a global environmental scan of all emerging technologies and developed protocols for testing and evaluation. The outcome of these activities was a comprehensive strategic plan for the eTV program to acquire, test, evaluate and report on an array of advanced technologies over the coming year.   In addition, the program published a series of informative technical articles for the eTV website. Over 3,000 visitors per month accessed the eTV website in 2007-08.  The program showcased vehicles and technologies at over 22 events across the country, ranging from major Canadian international auto shows (in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver) to consumer lifestyle or environmental shows, providing over 25,000 Canadians with information on advanced environmental technology for vehicles.
  • ecoMobility:  In 2007-08, the contribution program for ecoMOBILITY was designed and launched.  Consultations with key stakeholder groups on program implementation were concluded and the Applicant’s Guide for the contribution program was prepared.  In February 2008, a request for proposals (RFP) was issued by Transport Canada for transportation demand management projects.
  • ecoFREIGHT:  Two of the ecoFREIGHT programs (Freight Technology Demonstration Fund and the Freight Technology Incentives Program) were successfully launched in 2007-08 with their first funding rounds resulting in 23 total projects being selected under both programs.  The funding will support the demonstration and testing of technologies that have the potential to reduce emissions as well as the cost-shared installation of proven technologies that reduce emissions.
  ($ thousands) 7) Actual Spending 2005-06 8) Actual Spending
2006–07
9) Planned Spending 2007–08 10) Total Authorities
2007–08
11) Actual Spending
2007–08
12) Variance(s) Between 9 and 11
13) Program Activity (PA) Policies and Programs in support of sustainable transportation
14) Total Grants

-

146,900 

71,342 

(71,342) 

14) Total Contributions            
14) Total Other Types of   TPs            
15) Total PA

-

146,900 

71,342 

(71,342) 

16) Comment(s) on Variance(s): After several months of Program implementation and an analysis of more current production information from manufacturers, Transport Canada (TC) requested that $74.9 million in Grants be re-profiled from 2007-08 to 2008-09.
17) Significant Evaluation Findings and URL(s) to Last Evaluation(s): An evaluation is planned for 2009-10.
18) Significant Audit Findings and URL(s) to Last Audit(s):

TC will determine whether an internal audit will be conducted, based on its risk-based audit planning process.  Copies of audit reports approved by the department’s Audit and Review Committee may be found at:  http://www.tc.gc.ca/corporate-services/aas/audit/menu.htm