Evidence of meeting #71 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was work.
A video is available from Parliament.
5 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
The federal government has included a condition in its previous Building Canada agreement with Nova Scotia that protected workers and taxpayers with open competition. Is that not so?
5 p.m.
Director, Federal and Ontario, Progressive Contractors Association of Canada
That is my understanding. As I said before, the federal government places all kinds of conditions on transfers of money. That's what the Canada Health Act is for. I would hope the federal government is in the business of placing certain conditions on fundamental rights and freedoms. This is another fundamental right and freedom that needs some addressing.
5 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Thank you very much.
Now, we'll go to Mr. Sullivan. You have five minutes.
5 p.m.
NDP
Mike Sullivan NDP York South—Weston, ON
Thanks, again.
One of the concerns you have is that public entities not be permitted to bid on public contracts. I'll give you an example where that happened, where public entities were actually expressly forbidden.
This federal government decided it was time to build a rail system between Union Station and Pearson airport. The previous Liberal government was the one that came up with the idea. It was to cost $200 million and was going to be entirely a private sector thing. The TTC and GO Transit were prohibited from even thinking about it. It had to be the private sector. So we had a competition in which there was one bidder competing against himself. Ultimately that bidder was awarded the contract, and the TTC and GO were not permitted to. Is that an open competition?
5:05 p.m.
President, Canadian Construction Association
Well, our position would be that the public entity has the right to compete in that open competition. The problem has been, though, that there isn't any competition. There is no tender. They just decide they're going to do that work. We have a situation now where some public entities are not just doing their own work, but are seeking to be pre-qualified and bid on work in other provinces.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Mike Sullivan NDP York South—Weston, ON
So your issue isn't with whether or not the public entity can do the work, but that it be an open competition—
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Mike Sullivan NDP York South—Weston, ON
—between that public entity and other...which is what should have happened in the previous Liberal government's position. In fact what ended up happening was that the competitor backed away eventually, after five or six years, and left it to GO to do, and we're now reaping the benefits of that.
In terms of non-union situations, we were made aware last time of the situation in building the Canada Line in Vancouver, which was done primarily with.... Some of it was done with temporary foreign workers from Costa Rica, who were paid $3.57 an hour. The employer, the private sector contractor, was later found to have violated the law, and owes tens of thousands of dollars to those individuals. Is that something that, by going non-union, is going to save the taxpayers money, somehow, by paying people so little they can't afford to live?
5:05 p.m.
Director, Federal and Ontario, Progressive Contractors Association of Canada
I'm not entirely sure I'm qualified to speak to that. I don't know that he is, because neither of us are non-union. I represent unionized contractors, and he represents a union. So I'm not sure what to tell you on that.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Mike Sullivan NDP York South—Weston, ON
Mr. Atkinson, then, you do represent contractors who are in a union.
5:05 p.m.
President, Canadian Construction Association
Yes.
There are two questions. One is whether non-union construction workers can live up to the same standards and comply with the same labour conditions, etc. as unionized workers. Absolutely. Law-abiding contractors do so. No matter what their union affiliation is, law-abiding contractors obey the law.
As far as temporary foreign workers go, if that individual did violate the terms and conditions of the LMO, then absolutely, throw the full weight of the law against them. That's absolutely a situation that should not continue.
Our industry, quite frankly, has used the temporary foreign worker program only because the permanent entry program up until recently didn't work for us at all. We've streamed most of those workers into becoming permanent residents and permanent parts of our workforce; and indeed, we would never want to have a situation in which we were paying them any less than what we were paying Canadian citizens or permanent residents.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Mike Sullivan NDP York South—Weston, ON
Are you saying you are now streaming temporary foreign workers into permanent residency?
5:05 p.m.
NDP
5:05 p.m.
President, Canadian Construction Association
The Canadian experience class was created just for that purpose.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Mike Sullivan NDP York South—Weston, ON
Okay.
With regard to the notion of red tape and green tape—and that's the first time I've heard of green tape, and I must say I had to chuckle when I heard it—does that mean somehow that environmental restrictions are some form of red tape turned green?
5:05 p.m.
President, Canadian Construction Association
No, it's bureaucracy under the guise of environmental protection. It's not environmental assessment; it's simply jurisdictional fiefdom building and uncertain law.
What we want is a situation in which a truly vigorous environmental assessment is done once and with certainty, so that after the green light goes on, we do not get the amber light or red light stopping a project, delaying a project, or causing that project to go away. It's the certainty of the process. When we talk about green tape, we're talking not about environmental protection but about the unfortunate bureaucracy that arises. It has nothing whatsoever to do with environmental assessment.
5:05 p.m.
NDP
Mike Sullivan NDP York South—Weston, ON
Do you believe that a contractor should be permitted to change their construction methods in order to speed things up even if they are in opposition to the environmental assessment that they were given?
5:05 p.m.
President, Canadian Construction Association
No. Again, if you have an environmental plan and there are environmental conditions you have to meet, that's just like meeting any condition on a contract. That's what you are legally obligated to meet.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Your time is up, Mr. Sullivan.
Mr. Daniel, go ahead for five minutes.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Joe Daniel Conservative Don Valley East, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, witnesses, for being here.
The suggestion from my colleagues across the way is that it is riskier to actually give projects to people like you. I wonder if you can talk about that a little more. What's your track record in term of projects that you've taken on in which your members have run out of money partway through, have had gross overruns, have not completed the job on time, etc.? Can each of you talk to that?
5:10 p.m.
Director, Federal and Ontario, Progressive Contractors Association of Canada
I'm not familiar with any examples like that. We built the Port Mann Bridge. We built the Pitt River Bridge. We built 40% of the oil sands. We've built 40 water treatment plants in Ontario. We built the Centre Island airport on time and on budget. We know how to do this stuff. We do it well. We simply want the right to bid on work regardless of our workers' union affiliation.