
How much the government spends isn’t nearly as important as what it spend that money on, says Andy Fillmore.
The federal budget announced this week includes $5 billion over the next five years towards environmental improvements in municipal infrastructure. In the wake of that commitment, the Liberal MP for Halifax is bringing forward his first private member’s bill to prioritize infrastructure funding based on sustainability.
Fillmore’s bill asks the Canadian government to analyze the potential greenhouse gas emissions of any federally funded infrastructure projects over $500,000 and prioritize those that help reduce climate change impact.
The former manager of urban design with HRM hopes it will encourage better environmental investment in Canadian cities by getting local governments thinking about sustainability impacts before approving projects.
“We took some heat in the campaign for not coming out with a [greenhouse gas reduction] target right away,” says Fillmore. “You can announce a target, but without a plan, without your partners to get there, put any target you want out there—no one’s going to achieve it.”
Mark Butler, policy director for the Ecology Action Centre, is optimistic about Fillmore’s proposal, despite being leery that any government requirements could lead to more paperwork than progress.
“I think it’s definitely worth raising, and if it’s applied appropriately I think it’ll help to ensure we don’t fund the stuff that’s contrary to our climate change targets,” Butler says. “The intent is a good one, the message is a right one and generally the government should always fund stuff that’s consistent with its overall program.”
The federal government plans to spend an extra $60 billion on infrastructure over the next decade—nearly double what was being spent by the former Harper government—but the majority of that money won’t arrive until after the next election.
The Liberals have committed nearly $12 billion in the next five years to infrastructure spending on water and wastewater systems, public transit and social projects like affordable housing. Whatever portion of those funds end up in HRM will be sorely needed. Twenty percent of Halifax’s households currently need low-income housing in a municipality where only four percent of housing qualifies as non-market. Halifax’s water and sewage system also needs millions of dollars to improve capacity and reverse an “incredible deficit” of deferred maintenance, says Fillmore.
“We’re at risk of handing our kids cities that are ready to collapse.”
Municipalities will also receive $518 million from the federal government over the next five years to be spent on climate change mitigation. A second phase of infrastructure funding geared towards transforming Canada into a low-carbon economy will arrive after 2020.
All of that spending contributes to a nearly $30 billion deficit that’s drawn criticism from opposition and some in the business community. But Fillmore isn’t too worried about how the private sector will react to his private member’s bill.
“There may be some furrowed brows at the beginning of this,” Fillmore says, “but for the most part the people applying for this infrastructure money are municipalities, and municipalities have a responsibility to lead on the climate file.”
Andy Fillmore on…
Construction impacting small businesses
“This city is learning a lot right now about being a growth city. I don’t think anyone living really, of working age, remembers us being a growth city. So this is all new. Remember, there was a whole generation of working Haligonians that never saw a crane on the sky…We’re just learning how to crawl here out of our two or three decades of stagnation. Some unfortunate moments in that learning, and I hope that the development industry and the municipality are always learning how to do it better next time.”
Downtown office vacancies
“We allowed way too much office space to be built in the business parks…I’m afraid our city still has some catching up to do with that…certainly one thing you can do is stop approving them. That’s a good starting point.”
The Cogswell Interchange redevelopment
“This has the potential to lead North America, maybe even the world in an incredible, green, urban precinct that could be entirely off the grid…There are a lot of Canadian cities that experienced wonderful urban growth from the late 80s, a 20-year period ending in 2005, basically. Halifax basically sat that period of urban densification out, because of our problematic development policies and the tension between heritage and growth. That’s why we have so much sprawl…We couldn’t go de-sprawling Cogswell until we revived the patient down here.”
The Nova Centre
“I’m hugely pleased with the way the design changed two years ago, as a result of the public process to get that ballroom out of the bedrock and into the sky. Just in the last couple of weeks, one of the parts I was most worried about, the space on Grafton Street—the proportions of that corridor are vast. So I don’t think we have to worry about that being a tunnel or feeling unpleasant in there…I wish that more care had been taken on construction impact mitigation..Broadly speaking, when this is all behind us and that building is built, for sure what we’re seeing is there’s still a market for large conventions in the world…Once the wounds heal, I think we’ll be better off.”
Densification
“That old dream of the one-acre lot, the picket fence, the one or two cars in the garage and a lawn to mow, that’s a shrinking dream. That’s a dream of fewer and fewer people. The reason is millennials are entering the workforce. Their sense of success is very different than their parents was…Immigration’s absolutely critical to keep this trend going, and every time I see a crane downtown my heart lifts because I know the units being built there are not one-acre units that are being built in a forest or a farm that have to be serviced by infrastructure and has to be maintained at a cost that the taxes we raise from those areas will never pay for it.”
The Ivany Report
“There are people that are working hard to fulfill it in earnest, and there are people who are trying to use it to leverage a different perspective which isn’t really that helpful.”
Nova Scotia’s Liberal government
“I don’t envy the decisions the provincial government have had to make. They have an almost untenable financial situation to contend with…I see this provincial government working hard to try and fulfill the promises of the One Nova Scotia report. It’s just a very difficult place to be right now, in provincial government.”
This article appears in Mar 24-30, 2016.


A lot that he says makes a lot of sense. Can see why he got elected
Who are these unhelpful individuals with different perspectives? How dare they. What is this a democracy or something?
No followup questions to his various statements?
Poseur
Tons Cranky; it was an hour-long interview. A lot of that was around sustainable development, but since we touched on other topics I wanted to include Fillmore’s abridged comments on those things (good and bad). Also, a straight Q&A would have been somewhere around 5,000 words and unreadable.
so Andy wants people in condos and apartments and supports densification, pathetic. A house, car, garage, is a way of life for many Canadians. This is Canada Andy, not London. We got more land than we know what do do with, vacant lots. It is a way of life many of us want. We do not want to be forced into tall buildings packed like caged animals. Just lost a lots of respect for you Andy. Canada is more than just cities, crime, pollution, traffic, and stress.
Sorry Andy, but the logical inference from your comment is that Londoners live like caged animals. Surely you didn’t mean that?
As far as Andy’s comments about Business Parks. Business wants business parks to get away from the grid lock of the downtown. I would sooner travel to Burnside or Bayers Lake any day than to travel downtown, take a chance of a car accident, getting a parking ticket, being charged a fortune for parking, getting harassed by pan handlers, etc etc etc. An acquaintance who has been in business for many years decided to leave the downtown for all the reasons i listed above. When making his decision, he asked his staff their opinion. All of them welcomed the idea of getting the “hell out” of the downtown. I thank the past brains of this city for creating Burnside and allowing offices and other retail entities to grow there. Now we need a few more Business Parks. Competition is what is needed, allow Business Parks to compete with the downtown, other business parks, other regions. Had we not amalgamated back in 1996, Dartmouth would be competing with Halifax , Bedford, and the county like Sackville and the forces of competition would keep rents, taxes in check. Now, like Andy’s comments, we got bureaucrats trying to force this downtown attitude which is not in the best interest of the city. Disappointed in Andy’s comments so far.
Go read a report just published in the Chronicle Herald..”The Chronicle Herald
A survey by CIBC shows 86 per cent of millennials view home ownership as important”. So a bank report says 86 percent of millennials say the opposite of what Any has written above. Why are politicians pushing this densification issue, why force people into condos and apartments. Why take away the right to home ownership. People need control of the housing, build equity, provide a home for their children. A home that is a physical house, not a cement structure owned by a wealth developer who drives expensive cars, lives in a mansion, travels to resorts and lives like a king. Let the people choose where and how they live. Why is this densification issue being forced on us ? What is going on behind the scenes.
Well if the Liberal deficit promise/prediction in the election clearly illustrates, the need to be better informed is something Fillmore and Libs should take more seriously. That said, I’m not sure how much more delay I’m willing to stomach. Successive Liberal and Conservative Govs have been at this for going on 16 years. The imperative with this issue commands that we take bolder action. We know how to reduce our GHG emissions. It’s time we implemented.
“…I know the units being built there are not one-acre units that are being built in a forest or a farm that have to be serviced by infrastructure and has to be maintained at a cost that the taxes we raise from those areas will never pay for it.”
=======================
People who live outside the city can’t afford to live in one of the new condos. Affordable housing in the core is therefore a high priority IMO. Let’s not treat the people who can’t afford a mortgage in the city core like they don’t deserve municipal infrastructure.
Who is talking about taking away the right to home ownership, and forcing people to live downtown in a condo? Surely you don’t believe these things. Did that CH article distinguish between condo and home ownership Andy? Just because you don’t want anything to do with downtown doesn’t mean the rest of Halifax/Canada doesn’t.
It’s not the one-acre lots that are the problem, its urban / commuter sprawl. Living off the land that a one-acre lot provides is absolutely the way go. Why aren’t banks / government allowing for people to grow their own food and fuels such as ethanol, and supply themselves with solar and wind power? Sustainable, modern development comes in many forms, it isn’t simply shiny new downtown condos. Think outside the box Andy.
Where does Andy live ?
Andy had ZERO contributors to his campaign
Ed Vella,
Self-sufficient rural homesteading is great, but A: There isn’t nearly the space for large numbers of people to live that way without deforesting additional land, and B: Most people who live on rural acreages are not self-sufficient rural homesteaders, they’re just living in a big ol’ house on a big ol’ plot o’ land, in an area where you can’t so much as pick up a litre of milk without a vehicle. And those homes are serviced by roads and other infrastructure that are enormously more costly (due to low population density) than those serving urban areas of higher density.
No one is attacking rural living or trying to take away people’s right to their homes. Bbut we DO need to urbanize and densify, and multi-unit buildings in the central part of the city are an important part of that. There will always be those single-family houses, so what Fillmore says isn’t about eliminating that choice. If anything, it’s adding choices we traditionally haven’t had much of in this city, or in most parts of this country for that matter.
Good to hear, Jacob, but it would have been nice to read some elaboration on some of his sound bites.
Anyway, has Nova Scotia taken classes in Urbanize Your World 101 at Memorial University in Newfoundland or something?
Quickest link I could find: http://www.cbc.ca/history/EPISCONTENTSE1EP…
Point taken, Cranky.
Ran into this same issue with yesterday’s Doyle Block piece, too. Danny Chedrawe isn’t one for concise answers. Originally that was a Q&A (as were initial plans for this piece), but it was way too long and far too one-sided in that form.
This is also one of those cases where a sidebar element in print doesn’t work as well online (where it’s weighted equally with the actual story). I run into that problem often, too.
Anyway, appreciate the discussion.