Questions and responses 45th Parliament, 1st session May 26, 2025, to present

With regard to the Canada Infrastructure Bank: (a) since its establishment in 2017, what proportion of the Canada Infrastructure Bank’s total lending portfolio has gone to projects that involve foreign contractors, sub-contractors, suppliers or shipyards; (b) what are the projects in (a) and with which foreign entities did each project engage; (c) what criteria are used by the Canada Infrastructure Bank to determine the “Value to Canada” score for project eligibility; (d) for how many and which projects in (a) did the Canada Infrastructure Bank know, prior to signing the loan agreement, that foreign contractors were involved; (e) since 2020, (i) how many Canada Infrastructure Bank-funded or financed projects have undergone review for national security or supply-chain vulnerabilities at any stage of the project, including pre-financial close or post-financial close, (ii) what are those projects, (iii) what were the outcomes of those reviews; and (f) what due-diligence processes does the government use to verify that foreign-built infrastructure financed by the Canada Infrastructure Bank complies with Canadian labour, environmental and human rights standards?

With regard to the Canada Infrastructure Bank since January 1, 2018: (a) what is the total number of project applications received by the Canada Infrastructure Bank, broken down by year; (b) for each application referenced in (a), what was the (i) project name and description, (ii) province or territory, (iii) sector, (iv) estimated project value at the time of the application, (v) date of the initial application submission, (vi) date of the final funding decision, (vii) current status of the project; (c) what is the average and median length of time, in days, between (i) application submission and initial review, (ii) initial review and conditional approval, (iii) conditional approval and final financial close, broken down by year; (d) how many applications experienced delays exceeding (i) six months, (ii) one year, (iii) two years, beyond the timelines originally communicated to applicants, broken down by year and sector; (e) what were the primary reasons for the delays identified in (d), including, but not limited to, internal review processes, changes in project requirements, financing negotiations, regulatory issues, or federal policy changes; (f) for projects that experienced delays, what was the cumulative increase in estimated project costs attributable to inflation, supply chain disruptions, labour cost increases, or other economic factors occurring after the original project cost estimates were submitted; (g) what mechanisms, if any, does the Bank have in place to compensate or adjust funding arrangements for applicants facing increased project costs resulting from Canada Infrastructure Bank-related delays; (h) how many applicants have formally requested compensation, funding adjustments, or renegotiation of financial terms due to cost increases associated with delays, and, for each request, what was the outcome, broken down by year; (i) what is the total additional funding approved by the Canada Infrastructure Bank to account for cost increases stemming from delayed approvals, broken down by type of funding, year and project sector; and (j) if no adjustment mechanisms exist, why not, and what steps, if any, is the government taking to address the financial impacts of Canada Infrastructure Bank delays on project proponents?

With regard to the Canada Infrastructure Bank and the Minister of Housing and Infrastructure’s statutory responsibility to ensure it operates in the public interest, since January 2025: (a) what formal clarification, guidance, or instructions has the minister issued to the Canada Infrastructure Bank regarding transparency and disclosure of loan terms, including interest rates, repayment structures, and risk-sharing provisions, and on what dates were such directions issued or communicated; (b) what mechanisms exist within the minister’s office or the department to review, assess, or monitor individual Canada Infrastructure Bank investments, and how are those mechanisms applied in practice, including the timing and scope of any review process; (c) what information is provided to the minister or his office regarding individual Canada Infrastructure Bank investments prior to approval, including briefings, summaries, risk assessments, or investment memos, and at what stage in the approval process is such information typically received; (d) does the minister receive information on whether Canada Infrastructure Bank loans are at, above, or below market rate, and, if so, what level of detail is provided and when; (e) what mechanisms are in place to ensure ministerial oversight in identifying and addressing potential real or perceived conflicts of interest involving individuals connected to Canada Infrastructure Bank-financed projects, including when such assessments are conducted and how the results are recorded and communicated to the minister; (f) what are the details of all communications between the minister or his office and the Canada Infrastructure Bank regarding specific investments prior to public announcements, including the nature, timing, and purpose of such communications; (g) how many times, since his appointment as minister in May 2025, has the minister communicated with the Chief Executive Officer of the Canada Infrastructure Bank, including in-person meetings, virtual meetings, telephone calls, emails, text messages, or any other form of direct or indirect communication, and for each instance, what is the date, mode of communication, list of participants, and the subject matter discussed; (h) what direction, if any, has the minister provided to the Canada Infrastructure Bank regarding the assessment of domestic economic benefits, including the use of Canadian suppliers and supply chains, and when were such directions issued; (i) what requirements exist for the Canada Infrastructure Bank to demonstrate that private sector financing was actively sought prior to federal participation, and how is this verified, including what information is provided to the minister on this point; (j) what oversight does the minister exercise to ensure that Canada Infrastructure Bank financing does not displace private capital, and what analysis, if any, is provided to the minister on this issue, including timing and conclusions; (k) what systems are in place to track lobbying activity related to Canada Infrastructure Bank investments and report such activity to the minister or his office, and what information is routinely provided, including timing and format; and (l) how does the minister define his statutory responsibility under the Canada Infrastructure Bank Act to ensure that the Bank operates in the public interest, and what specific direction, guidance, or criteria have been issued by the minister or the department to clarify how that responsibility is exercised in practice, particularly in relation to individual investment decisions and the application of confidentiality provisions?

With regard to projects financed or co-financed by the Canada Infrastructure Bank since 2017: (a) what are the details of all projects which involved foreign-based entities as proponents, contractors, sub-contractors, suppliers, or shipyards, including, for each, the (i) project name, (ii) location, (iii) amount of Canada Infrastructure Bank financing, (iv) project description, (v) summary of involvement from foreign-based entities; (b) for each project identified in (a), what foreign-based entities were involved and was the Canada Infrastructure Bank aware of the foreign involvement prior to signing the financing agreement, and, if so, how was that awareness documented; (c) which individual projects were subject at any stage, including pre- or post-financial close, to any review, assessment, or evaluation of national security, supply-chain vulnerabilities, or strategic risk, and for each such project, at what stage did the review occur, which federal department, agency, or ministerial office conducted the review, was the Canada Infrastructure Bank formally notified, and what were the outcomes, findings, or recommendations; and (d) what formal processes and policies does the government use to identify, assess, and manage risks related to foreign involvement in Canada Infrastructure Bank projects and to national security and supply-chain vulnerabilities, and how do these processes ensure oversight even where no formal notification is provided to the Canada Infrastructure Bank?

With regard to Budget 2025’s expansion of federal support for digital and artificial intelligence infrastructure, including the broadened mandate and increased capitalization of the Canada Infrastructure Bank for artificial intelligence and related digital investments: (a) what analysis has been conducted by the government regarding this policy shift, including (i) the rationale for redefining “infrastructure” in Budget 2025 to include artificial intelligence, cloud computing, and digital systems within the Canada Infrastructure Bank’s mandate, (ii) the justification for advancing this shift through budgetary and administrative measures rather than explicit legislative amendment and parliamentary debate, (iii) the basis on which artificial intelligence systems, cloud platforms, and digital assets are being treated as “infrastructure” for federal financing purposes, (iv) the expected long-term fiscal exposure, contingent liabilities, and risk transfer to taxpayers arising from this expansion; (b) what governance, oversight, and accountability frameworks currently apply to artificial intelligence-related investments made or facilitated through the Canada Infrastructure Bank and associated federal digital governance bodies, and, if no dedicated framework exists, why such investments are proceeding without a tailored governance regime comparable to other high-risk or system-critical domains; (c) what measures are in place to ensure transparency, parliamentary oversight, and auditability of contracts, systems, data infrastructure, and public-private partnerships funded or enabled under this expanded mandate; (d) which private sector entities, institutional investors, infrastructure funds, cloud providers, artificial intelligence firms, data centre operators, technology vendors, provincial entities, Crown corporations, foreign state-owned enterprises, or other partners have been engaged or are under consideration for participation in projects under this expanded mandate and, for each, (i) what is the entity name, (ii) what is the nature and stage of engagement, (iii) have any agreements, procurement processes, investments, or approvals been executed or are under consideration, (iv) what is the estimated value of any proposed federal support, financing, guarantees, or risk-sharing arrangements, (v) a summary of due diligence conducted or planned, including with respect to national security, competition, privacy, data sovereignty, and conflicts of interest; and (e) what measures are in place to ensure that compute capacity, training data, model access, and associated digital infrastructure financed through federal mechanisms remain subject to Canadian legal, audit, and sovereignty requirements?

With regard to any actual, planned, proposed or exploratory involvement of Brookfield Asset Management, Brookfield Infrastructure Partners or any of their subsidiaries or affiliates in projects financed, co-financed, guaranteed, supported or otherwise facilitated by the Canada Infrastructure Bank or the Government of Canada, since 2017: (a) what past, current or pending Canada Infrastructure Bank investments have involved Brookfield or any Brookfield-controlled entity, including, for each investment, (i) the name and location of the project, (ii) the total project cost, (iii) the amount of Canada Infrastructure Bank financing, (iv) the form of financing (for example, loan, equity, guarantee, revenue agreement, or other), (v) the role played by Brookfield or its subsidiaries, (vi) the contractual or ownership structure of the project, (vii) all due-diligence steps undertaken prior to approval, (viii) the date on which the project was approved; (b) has the government or the Canada Infrastructure Bank had any discussions, meetings, correspondence, memoranda or briefings since January 1, 2022, relating to potential collaboration with Brookfield on digital infrastructure, artificial intelligence infrastructure, cloud or compute infrastructure or any other project category added to the Canada Infrastructure Bank mandate in budget 2025, and, if so, what are the details of each communication, including (i) the date, (ii) the participating officials, (iii) the subject matter discussed, (iv) a summary of the briefing materials or decks exchanged, (v) any recorded outcomes or next steps; (c) has the government or the Canada Infrastructure Bank evaluated Brookfield as a potential delivery partner for artificial intelligence compute infrastructure, sovereign cloud capacity, national analytics systems or any other digital infrastructure projects referenced in budget 2025, and, if so, what were the findings; (d) has the government ever considered or evaluated a structure similar to the “Maple Fund” proposal reported publicly in September 2024, and, if so, (i) which departments or Crown corporations were involved, (ii) which pension funds were consulted, (iii) what due diligence or policy analysis was conducted, (iv) were any aspects of that model incorporated into the strategic financing framework announced in budget 2025; and (e) what safeguards, if any, has the government implemented to ensure that the expanded Canada Infrastructure Bank mandate for digital and artificial intelligence infrastructure does not result in undue influence, concentration of control or preferential positioning for any single private entity or asset manager, including Brookfield?

With regard to the $206.4 million loan provided by the Canada Infrastructure Bank to the Mersey River Wind project: (a) what are the details of all communications between the Canada Infrastructure Bank (including its executives, board members, and staff) and (i) any minister, (ii) any minister’s office, (iii) any federal department or agency, (iv) any federal Member of Parliament, in relation to the project, including, for each, the dates, participants, and subject matter of such communications; (b) what are the details of all communications that occurred between the Canada Infrastructure Bank and (i) Slate Asset Management, (ii) Roswall Development Inc., (iii) Renewall, (iv) any related project entities, (v) any registered lobbyists acting on behalf of the foregoing, including, for each, the dates, participants, and subject matter of such communications; (c) what due diligence was conducted by the Canada Infrastructure Bank in relation to the project, including (i) Know Your Client and integrity checks, (ii) conflict of interest assessments, (iii) Politically Exposed Person analyses, (iv) risk classification and mitigation measures, (v) any identification or assessment of political affiliations, connections, or prior public office of project principals and directors, and, for each, what were the results or findings, when were they conducted, and what conclusions were drawn; (d) what are the details of all data and analyses considered by the Canada Infrastructure Bank Investment Committee and Board of Directors in approving the loan, including (i) financial models, (ii) credit risk assessments, (iii) project viability, including projected revenues and pricing, (iv) alternative financing options, (v) other sources of public funding, (vi) applicable subsidies or tax measures, (vii) domestic economic or supply chain impacts; (e) what are the key terms of the loan agreement, including (i) the interest rate and the methodology used to determine it, (ii) the repayment schedule and term, (iii) any security and guarantees, (iv) any concessionary elements or risk-sharing provisions; (f) when and how did the Canada Infrastructure Bank become aware of any political affiliations, connections, or prior public roles of individuals involved in the project, and what considerations were given to potential political sensitivities or reputational risks; (g) what assessment was made by the Canada Infrastructure Bank regarding (i) the project’s ability to secure private sector financing prior to receiving public funding, (ii) whether the project could proceed without public financing, (iii) whether the financing displaced or supplemented private capital, and, for each, what were the results or findings, when were these assessments conducted, and what conclusions were reached; (h) what assessment was made of the project’s financial viability, including (i) projected electricity pricing, (ii) expected revenues, (iii) the capacity factor, (iv) sensitivity to interest rates or changes in financing terms, and, for each, what were the results or findings, when were these assessments conducted, and what conclusions or determinations were reached; (i) what assessment was made of the total level of public funding provided to the project, including federal tax credits, accelerated capital cost allowance, and other federal or provincial programs, and how was this total support factored into the financing decision, including any conclusions reached; and (j) what assessment was made of the domestic economic benefit of the project, including (i) the proportion of spending directed to Canadian versus foreign suppliers, (ii) any requirements or conditions related to Canadian content or domestic procurement, and, for each assessment, what were the results or findings, when were these assessments conducted, and what conclusions or determinations were reached?