Ottawa Citizen

WHAT’S IN A NAME?

- Financial Post dhasselbac­k@nationalpo­st.com Twitter.com/vonhasselb­ach

Is the Canada Infrastruc­ture Bank actually a bank? Don’t bank on it, analysts tell Drew Hasselback.

The new Canada Infrastruc­ture Bank is going to be a lot of things, but the one thing it won’t actually be is a bank.

This is more than a persnicket­y point of legal semantics. With the government last week taking some steps to move the CIB off the drawing board and into reality, there’s a greater need to understand just what the so-called bank will do.

To be sure, a lot of private sector observers generally welcome the institutio­n, which the federal government says will help bring private sector and pension fund capital into major infrastruc­ture projects. It’s just that some think calling it a bank is confusing.

“Just by descriptio­n, I don’t even know that it’s a bank. I don’t think it’s going to be collecting deposits or providing deposit insurance,” said Lou Serafini, president and chief executive of Fengate Capital Management Ltd. “I actually think it should consider a new name. It seems like we’re stuck on the name as opposed to what this agency or Crown corporatio­n is supposed to execute on.”

The federal government has made two important moves to put the planned bank into action. The first was this past week’s announceme­nt that CIB’s headquarte­rs will be in Toronto, the country’s financial capital. The second, also this week, was the launch of the search for the CIB’s initial chairman, board and chief executive.

The outcome of that talent hunt will address a key question over the CIB’s future role. The federal government says the CIB will be a Crown corporatio­n that operates at “arm’s-length” from the government. But with $35 billion of federal government capital going into the institutio­n, you can imagine that some might question how long the government’s arms are going to be.

Mark Romoff, president and chief executive of the Canadian Council for Public-Private Partnershi­ps, said private investors will use the compositio­n of the CIB’s first board and senior management ranks as a means to gauge how independen­t the bank will be from the government.

“First and foremost, the recruitmen­t of a first-class chair, board directors, and CEO will be very important elements in all of this,” Romoff said.

“I think what you’ll find is that as the bank is up and running and projects begin to get dealt with, the government will step back and give the chair and the CEO the runway they need to ensure that their projects are considered for the right reason. So I’m optimistic that it will be successful.”

The government’s legislatio­n, when passed into law, will create a Crown corporatio­n called the Canada Infrastruc­ture Bank or CIB. The corporatio­n’s statutory mission is to help bring private sector and pension fund investment into Canadian infrastruc­ture projects that are backed by multiple levels of government, including the feds.

The legislatio­n says the bank will invest in infrastruc­ture projects using “innovative” financial tools. The CIB will also accept proposals for new projects from developers. It will collect and share data on projects that should help investors make better decisions on future projects. And it will serve as a “centre of expertise” for government­s and investors seeking advice on projects.

Projects must meet at least three criteria to involve the CIB, according to the legislatio­n.

Projects must be located “in Canada or partly in Canada.” The “partly” contemplat­es something like a bridge or border crossing. Projects must be “in the public interest,” perhaps because they foster economic growth or contribute to the sustainabi­lity of infrastruc­ture.

A third criteria is a little more concrete and a lot more controvers­ial: The projects must be revenuegen­erating.

This narrows the focus to projects that are commercial­ly viable enough to attract capital from private sector investors and pension funds. Yet that likely means things like road tolls and other user fees that Canadians aren’t used to and might not like.

“They’re going to be looking much more toward user-fee supported infrastruc­ture,” said Matti Siemiatyck­i, an associate professor of geography and planning at the University of Toronto. “When you think about Canadian infrastruc­ture, and particular­ly municipal infrastruc­ture, many of the facilities that we rely and depend on don’t generate user fees that can cover their full operating costs, let alone their capital and constructi­on costs.”

Siemiatyck­i said the CIB should be a “centre of excellence” that can evaluate big, multi-billion dollar projects of national significan­ce. It would give private sector investors the confidence they need to see that Canada properly co-ordinates projects among various levels of government, and backs the projects that make the most financial sense for private sector investors and pension funds. He thinks the CIB should be called something like the Canadian Infrastruc­ture Investment Agency.

“The issue is how you evaluate projects, and pick which ones are the priorities, and which ones are going to be the most successful and deliver the best value. I think that is a technical job that requires specific expertise,” Siemiatyck­i said.

So why is the government calling the CIB a bank? In short, because it can.

Canada’s Bank Act says businesses can’t use the word “bank” in their names unless they’re licensed by the federal government or have special permission from both Canada’s banking regulator, the Office of the Superinten­dent of Financial Institutio­ns, and the minister of finance.

Yet there is one notable exception. The federal government, or more specifical­ly, the Crown, has the right to set up companies and call them banks. That’s what’s happening with the CIB.

“It is a specific offence under the Bank Act for anyone who is not a bank to use the words ‘bank,’ ‘banker’ or ‘banking ’ to indicate or describe a business in Canada, unless you are the Crown,” said Stephen Clark, chair of the financial institutio­ns practice at national business law firm Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP.

It seems like we’re stuck on the name as opposed to what this agency or Crown corporatio­n is supposed to execute on.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada