Evidence of meeting #76 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 union.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Dennis Perrin  Director, Prairies, Christian Labour Association of Canada
Robert Blakely  Director, Canadian Affairs, Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO
Harvey Miller  Executive Director, Merit Contractors Association
Clyde Sigurdson  Treasurer, Merit Contractors Association, and President, Ken Palson Enterprises Ltd.

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Larry Miller

Your time has expired, Mr. Toet.

Mr. Aubin, you have five minutes.

4:45 p.m.

Director, Canadian Affairs, Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO

Robert Blakely

Mr. Chair, just before Mr. Aubin asks his question, may I—

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Larry Miller

No, we'll move on. You'll probably get a chance there.

You have to understand, Mr. Blakely, that it's supposed to be that the time allotted for each member of the committee includes the question and the answer.

4:45 p.m.

Director, Canadian Affairs, Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO

Robert Blakely

All right.

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Larry Miller

I'm sure you'll get a chance to get it in there.

4:45 p.m.

Director, Canadian Affairs, Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO

Robert Blakely

Thank you.

4:45 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Larry Miller

Mr. Aubin.

June 6th, 2013 / 4:45 p.m.

NDP

Robert Aubin NDP Trois-Rivières, QC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My thanks to our guests for participating in our meeting.

How competition can make infrastructure dollars go further—that is the topic of our present study. I admit that I have a problem with this title, because I feel that the only question we have been asking since the beginning of the debate is whether we should favour open or closed tendering.

Yet practically 100% of the witnesses who have appeared before the committee since the beginning of the study have the same opinion on this issue. I fully understand that position and I keep it in mind. However, I would like to hear the other side of the story and I am well aware that it won't be you who will tell it to me.

Can we agree that all the elected members at the various government levels, whether it be the municipal, provincial or federal level, must have the same concern to get the most out of every taxpayer dollar? Can we quickly have the consensus, yes or no? I am keen to find out, because once we have the consensus on this, we will be able to hear from municipal and provincial representatives who will tell me why they need to have the closed tendering process.

Mr. Blakely, do you have any thoughts on that?

4:45 p.m.

Director, Canadian Affairs, Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO

Robert Blakely

Well, I do, in fact. You know, the closed bidding process sometimes is used by an owner to facilitate other goals that the entity is going to have: to secure a workforce, to make certain there is training, and to make certain that the work is executed safely.

The piledriver contractor in Winnipeg who was referred to had to bid for the work. Chances are he did not bid the work at three times the rate, because the municipality would not have accepted that particular bid and would have gone on a re-tender. If he bid the work at a reasonable rate and came in with a request to be paid three times for the same work.... Sometimes that is going to be frowned on. It may be that they drove three times the number of piles because it's a floodway drilled in silty soil.

The idea of building something like the floodway to protect the community and having it done right strikes me as a pretty laudable goal for the City of Winnipeg and the Province of Manitoba to have.

4:45 p.m.

NDP

Robert Aubin NDP Trois-Rivières, QC

Thank you, Mr. Blakely.

I would like to ask you another question.

We are often told that open tendering should be mandatory whenever the federal government invests in an infrastructure project, for example. In actual fact, I see that, although the federal government is often a financial partner in most infrastructure projects, it is not the only investor.

Does that imply that the federal government should have overriding authority in requiring the provinces and municipalities to have an open tendering process under penalty of withdrawing its share of the funding in a tripartite project?

4:50 p.m.

Director, Canadian Affairs, Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO

Robert Blakely

Who did you ask that question of, please?

4:50 p.m.

NDP

Robert Aubin NDP Trois-Rivières, QC

My question is for the three of you.

4:50 p.m.

Director, Canadian Affairs, Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO

Robert Blakely

If the Government of Canada were to say to Hamilton, we will not fund your infrastructure because some of your employees certified with the carpenters union and got a collective agreement as a result, I would say that would be grossly inappropriate.

4:50 p.m.

NDP

Robert Aubin NDP Trois-Rivières, QC

Thank you.

Mr. Perrin, what do you think?

4:50 p.m.

Director, Prairies, Christian Labour Association of Canada

Dennis Perrin

We would suggest that as a government you ought to be very concerned about these kinds of processes when federal money is allocated. From the numbers we've looked at, as far as we can tell, with the Red River Floodway expansion project as well as the east side road project, those two together received approximately $324 million from federal coffers.

At the end of the day, whether you put stricter bidding restrictions in front of them, I'm not exactly sure about that, but you do have a very keen interest in it. If I'm a shareholder in a large company, I care about the way in which business is conducted within that company. I have a stake in it. Whether you go as far as you're suggesting, I don't know the answer to that. But without doubt it is a very significant item of interest to this committee and this government.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Larry Miller

Thank you.

We now move to Mr. Holder for five minutes.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Ed Holder Conservative London West, ON

Thank you, Chair.

I would agree with Ms. Chow on one point in that it's always better to see the whites of their eyes. Mr. Blakely, thank you for participating in this fashion as well. I'd certainly like to thank all our guests for being here.

Mr. Blakely, to start with you, I appreciate that you have an organization and an agenda. We all have agendas, and I understand that. Every witness whom we have has something to protect. But I get the distinct impression in listening to your testimony that you feel that organized labour or unions are the only ones that can do the job right. Tell me I've misunderstood.

4:50 p.m.

Director, Canadian Affairs, Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO

Robert Blakely

Oh, no. A significant number of excellent contractors are non-union, or are in alternate unions. Union contractors aren't the only ones who can do the job right.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Ed Holder Conservative London West, ON

So you're not making a distinction between.... As long as someone is qualified, and I've heard that from every one of the witnesses we have had since we started this whole study, but if I've heard you correctly, you're not saying that non-union labour is not qualified to do a job.

4:50 p.m.

Director, Canadian Affairs, Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO

Robert Blakely

I'll answer your negative with a negative. They're not unqualified. Union, non-union, alternate union, contractors do great jobs.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Ed Holder Conservative London West, ON

Fair enough.

4:50 p.m.

Director, Canadian Affairs, Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO

Robert Blakely

There are some union, some non-union, and some alternate union contractors whom I wouldn't let in my yard to sweep up.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Ed Holder Conservative London West, ON

Got it. I'm not even going to go down the road to suggest there are union folks who don't do good work that you wouldn't have in your backyard. That wouldn't be a fair thing to say.

So let me ask....

4:50 p.m.

Director, Canadian Affairs, Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO

Robert Blakely

Like everybody else, 2% are bad.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Ed Holder Conservative London West, ON

Sir, my turn to talk, please.

I know you're trying to get all your testimony in, and I respect that.

Here's what I'm trying to understand. Every witness that we've had to this point who has supported what I will call the open-shop concept has never said they mind competing against organized labour. By the way, to be fair, so I could bring in our other guests, Mr. Perrin, is that a fair comment?