Evidence of meeting #86 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was c-33.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Serge Bijimine  Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy, Department of Transport
Christopher Hall  President and Chief Executive Officer, Shipping Federation of Canada
Wade Sobkowich  Executive Director, Western Grain Elevator Association
Clerk of the Committee  Ms. Carine Grand-Jean

8:25 p.m.

Conservative

Mark Strahl Conservative Chilliwack—Hope, BC

I want to allow the minister to respond, but I think Mr. Badawey's characterization of the questions I asked as “bitching” is extremely unparliamentary and not worthy of someone in his position. I think you should have called him out on it and I'd ask you to do that now.

8:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke

I'm going to ask all members to be diligent in the words they're using.

8:25 p.m.

Liberal

Vance Badawey Liberal Niagara Centre, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Strahl. Actually, I wasn't pointing you out, and I'm sorry you took it that way. It must have been the conscience you had.

However, I was actually speaking with—

8:25 p.m.

Conservative

Mark Strahl Conservative Chilliwack—Hope, BC

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.

8:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke

Go ahead, Mr. Strahl.

8:25 p.m.

Conservative

Mark Strahl Conservative Chilliwack—Hope, BC

If you want to have order in this committee, I suggest you bring Mr. Badawey to order. If he wants to disrespect me, that's fine, but when he disrespects you, I think you should call him to order. This is an outrageous display by a parliamentary secretary.

8:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke

I'm going to, once again, ask that all members act diligently and choose their words wisely, especially when we have a minister present.

8:25 p.m.

Liberal

Vance Badawey Liberal Niagara Centre, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Again, my comment was really characterizing the entire session, not one individual. With that, I'll move on.

I guess the direction I'm taking with this discussion and line of questioning is simply whether you see, Minister, as we move forward with this bill, that it can lead, as I mentioned to one witness a meeting ago, to the establishment, again, of integrating a transportation strategy, integrating transportation logistics throughout the country—and binationally, quite frankly—and with that, from the testimony we heard, to in fact take that testimony, learn from it, and, yes, present amendments. That's my question.

I guess my point to the committee members is this: Let's do our job. If you have problems or challenges—I won't call it bitching this time—with this bill, then let's simply do our job, come back with amendments and present them to the minister. The expectation from all of us will be that, hopefully, changes may be made, but But let's be more proactive to actually propose those amendments versus sitting here and complaining about everything about the bill. That's the job of this committee. Let's do our job.

I'll go back to the question, Minister.

8:25 p.m.

Liberal

Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC

Yes. I think the vision behind this bill, and you said it, Mr. Badawey, is that we have to think of this as one system—one system that is integrated, one system that shares data, shares information and understands that it depends on the other. If one part is weak, the whole system is weak.

You're absolutely right in the sense that we have to see what we do with those lessons, not only on Bill C-33 but on Bill C-52 and others—

8:25 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke

Thank you.

8:25 p.m.

Liberal

Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC

That's it.

8:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke

Perfect. Thank you very much, Minister.

8:30 p.m.

Liberal

Pablo Rodriguez Liberal Honoré-Mercier, QC

Time flies when you're having fun.

8:30 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke

Thank you, Mr. Badawey.

Minister, on behalf of all members of this committee, I thank you once again for being with us this evening, especially at this late hour.

I would like to thank all the associate ministers for their presence as well.

Colleagues, I will suspend for two minutes as we prepare for the next round of witnesses.

We are suspended.

8:35 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke

I call this meeting back to order.

Colleagues, appearing before us for the second half of today's meeting, we have, from the Shipping Federation of Canada, Mr. Christopher Hall, president and chief executive officer, who's joining us in person. Welcome, sir.

Joining us online, we have Mr. Wade Sobkowich, who is the executive director of the Western Grain Elevator Association. I want to welcome you too, sir.

We'll start with opening remarks by Mr. Hall.

I'll turn it over to you, and you have five minutes, sir.

8:35 p.m.

Christopher Hall President and Chief Executive Officer, Shipping Federation of Canada

Thank you. It's a real pleasure to be here this evening.

The Shipping Federation of Canada is a national association that represents the owners, operators and agents of the ocean ships that carry Canada's imports and exports to and from world markets.

We support the government's efforts to modernize Canada's marine transportation system, not only through Bill C-33, but also through several other legislative initiatives, including the marine sections of Bill C-52, and the amendments to the Canada Shipping Act and the Marine Liability Act, which came into effect this June.

When viewed in conjunction with the recommendations of the national supply chain task force, these initiatives represent the most extensive transformation of Canada's marine transportation system in the last 25 years, and one that is long overdue, given the shocks, disruptions and challenges the system has experienced since then.

As it relates to the Canada Marine Act, we note that Bill C-33 provides updated language regarding the act's purpose, which now extends to managing marine infrastructure and services in a manner that maintains resiliency and safeguards national security, and for managing traffic, including moorings and anchorages, in order to promote supply chain efficiency.

We view the references to “resiliency” and “national security” as important additions that reflect the increasingly unpredictable nature of the environment in which our supply chains operate and the need for greater flexibility in responding to those challenges.

Although we also support giving ports explicit authority to manage marine traffic, we would caution that this represents a very small piece in a much larger puzzle of solving efficiency challenges at ports such as Vancouver. Indeed, these challenges cannot be resolved without considering the broader context in which ships operate, and where factors such as rail and road infrastructure deficits, labour availability, labour stability, productivity challenges and rail performance issues, to name a few, all play a major role.

Bill C-33 also gives the minister new regulatory authority to compel users and port authorities to share information and data in support of marine traffic management. This represents an important first step in developing a national supply chain data and digitization strategy, as per the recommendations of the national supply chain task force.

However, if this strategy is to be successful, it will be important to ensure that data-sharing commitments by stakeholders are based on incentives rather than penalties and that the strategy's primary focus is on connecting existing digital platforms rather than building new ones.

In addition, government departments and agencies, particularly CBSA, must also be prepared to join the digitization effort, ideally by migrating to a maritime, single-window reporting model for collecting data from supply chain stakeholders.

Finally, although we will not be making specific comments on the amendments that pertain to the governance and reporting requirements of the CPAs, we believe that these amendments will require additional scrutiny and consultation if they are to gain the level of buy-in from stakeholders that will be necessary for their successful implementation.

Turning now to the proposed amendments to the Marine Transportation Security Act, we were pleased to see the addition of the new “Purpose” section, which articulates the act's overall objectives. However, we have concerns regarding the very broad criteria under which the minister may impose security-related measures, which essentially extends to any circumstance that creates the need to “deal with threats and reduce direct and indirect risks”.

Although we support the minister's enhanced ability to act quickly in response to threats or risks to the marine transportation system, the lack of specificity and details as to what qualifies as a threat or a risk makes it difficult to ascertain what constitutes a legitimate need for immediate action. This is important, because these broadly construed criteria serve as the trigger for the minister's ability to exercise the continuum of powers at his or her disposal under the act, which include not only the ability to make regulations, but also to issue interim orders, directions to vessels and emergency directions, which are outside of the normal regulatory process and the normal checks and balances that are accorded to it.

Finally, as it relates to the Customs Act, we note that Bill C-33 proposes amendments regarding the time and manner in which goods are to be made available for examination and the need for goods to be examined in a secure area, etc.

This raises serious concerns as to whether CBSA has the necessary facilities, infrastructure and personnel for conducting cargo examinations, and whether it has the necessary funding to address the significant deficits that currently exist in these areas.

This is a major and ongoing issue of concern in the marine mode, as it has been our experience that CBSA's current lack of resources not only impedes the efficient examination and movement of cargo but also hinders the development of new shipping services and market opportunities at ports across Canada.

This concludes my comments. Thank you very much. I'll take your questions.

8:40 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke

Thank you very much, Mr. Hall.

Next we'll go to Mr. Sobkowich.

Mr. Sobkowich, the floor is yours. You have five minutes for your opening remarks, sir.

8:40 p.m.

Wade Sobkowich Executive Director, Western Grain Elevator Association

Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.

The Western Grain Elevator Association is a national association of grain companies. We handle in excess of 90% of Canada's bulk grain shipments. Today, I'll highlight our views and observations on Bill C-33 in the context of the grain supply chain.

Alongside the lead-up to Bill C-33, as was pointed out in the earlier session, the supply chain task force report was tabled in October of 2022.

The task force report refers extensively to Canada's competitiveness and prosperity, the need to create a competitive transportation system and the need to address the power imbalance between transportation service providers and shippers. It rightly positions shippers and exporters as drivers of the national economy and places the needs of those who produce and sell Canada's resources as paramount.

It's the WGEA's observation that the spirit of Bill C-33 is in stark contrast to that of the task force report. We have some examples.

The first area of inconsistency is port governance. The federal government has the objective of increasing the volume of Canadian agricultural exports and is investing in infrastructure projects that help increase the flow of goods. At the same time, in the last 11 years, grain farmers in western Canada have grown nine of the largest crops on record, mostly through innovation. This is a good news story for Canada.

We have, however, seen past decisions by port authorities that were not in the grain sector's best interest. This led to our organization's advocating for changes to port governance to provide more representation for tenants and the provincial economies where the product has originated.

I feel like we're losing focus and sight on the fact that ports are there for the national economy, first and foremost.

Instead, Bill C-33 does the exact opposite. It increases representation from local municipalities and the provinces in which the ports are located. It raises a real concern for us that port operations are going to be governed by local issues rather than the national interest.

The second suite of concerns has to do with vessel management. With a growing crop, we face the challenge of evolving the supply chain to move more product each year. This is not a situation of trying to find ways to do more with less. In practical terms, we need to find a way to have more vessels ready to load in the port of Vancouver, not less. It's Canada's largest working port designed for commerce, and it has to be—first and foremost—viewed through that lens.

Bill C-33 will enable the creation of a regulated system to restrict the presence of vessels in Canada's ports. A natural consequence of increasing trade is an increase in vessel activity. As a country, it doesn't work to have conflicting objectives of growing exports but reducing the presence of vessels to move exported product.

A major contributor to increased days at anchor is the ongoing challenge for the railways to deliver enough trains on time and in the appropriate sequence. Some of those things are outside the railway's control and some of them are within, but Bill C-33 only addresses the symptoms of vessel numbers and vessel wait times while ignoring the root cause of inadequate, unpredictable and often poorly executed rail service.

I heard the minister speak earlier and say that the bill addresses end-to-end supply chain issues and needs to be looked at in the fullness of the supply chain, but we don't see that in the bill. If the government intends on passing legislation to help supply chains, it really has to look primarily at railcar supply from the railways versus railcar demand from exporters, on a week-to-week basis, and introduce legislation that provides discipline that matches railcar supply with demand. Vessels wait for railcars to arrive. That's why they're waiting in Vancouver. It's not because of poor management by grain exporters.

Demand for Canada's exports must be set by customers, not by the railways. Bill C-33 not only ignores this root cause but will regulate vessel activity to match limitations already in place due to the rail environment. Instead of liberating supply chains to operate commercially, we see this as restricting vessel activity to match the restrictions already in place in the rail sector.

The third suite of areas has to do with appeals and dispute resolution.

Bill C-33 falls short in establishing dispute resolution processes that are typical of legislation where a similar imbalance of power exists, as we find between ports and their tenants. It should include a straightforward means for tenants to appeal unfair or unreasonable decisions of a port authority. There are mechanisms in other sectors where the same scenario exists, but they're not there for the marine sector.

In addition, Bill C-33 should address the obvious conflicts of interest that arise in a port's dual role as a developer and a regulator. This is a topic on which the bill is silent.

I just have a few more comments. The fourth area—

8:45 p.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke

Unfortunately, we're already about 10 seconds over, Mr. Sobkowich. I'll have to cut you off there, but we have a copy of your remarks, and we'll make sure that those get included in your witness testimony for today.

We'll go right away to our line of questioning, and for that I'll turn the floor over to Mr. Muys.

You have six minutes, sir.

8:45 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Muys Conservative Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to both witnesses.

Mr. Sobkowich, you said that the spirit of Bill C-33 does not align with the the national supply chain task force, which is certainly a comment that we've been making as well, particularly given the urgency of the recommendations of that supply chain task force.

You heard the testimony. The minister said, when I asked, that the efficiency of supply chains and accountability were the two things that Bill C-33 delivered.

How would you react to that?

8:50 p.m.

Executive Director, Western Grain Elevator Association

Wade Sobkowich

We don't see that in this bill. What we see is legislation that intends on addressing symptoms rather than root causes.

We have, for many years, been advocating for improvements to the Canada Transportation Act to create an environment where you have more of a balance between railways and shippers. When grain companies put on sales programs, they need to get the railcars in order to get the grain from the country elevator system to port terminals to load those vessels. Not only do they need to have enough capacity, but they need to have the trains move in the right sequence. Otherwise, what we end up having to do is berth a vessel and load it partially, but we don't have the rest of the grain that was supposed to arrive, so we have to send it back to anchor and bring in the next vessel to load, perhaps, canola, because that's the train that came in.

That's a big part of the reason we have too many vessel movements and vessels staying too long. It has to do with railcar supply, and it has to do with sequencing of trains. There's nothing in this bill that addresses those.

8:50 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Muys Conservative Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON

Right. You talked about that because—and I was going to ask—railcars are part of the problem with supply chains, and you've identified that.

What does Bill C-33 do to remedy that? There's very little in Bill C-33 on rail. In fact, there's one little part about railway safety, and it's not even very robust at that.

I know you were cut off earlier. I don't know if there are other comments you want to make with regard to the integration of rail and the ports and how that's affecting supply chains.

8:50 p.m.

Executive Director, Western Grain Elevator Association

Wade Sobkowich

Thanks for that.

I wanted to talk about blockades and work stoppages. The one positive note we have about the bill is the proposed amendment to section 107, which gives the minister the power to direct a port to stop unsafe activities. That relates, we think, to blockades. That does have some merit, but, for the grain supply chain, strikes, lockouts and work stoppages are also a significant issue, so we wanted to flag that as well, because a blockade has as big an impact on the supply chain as a work stoppage, and we've seen too many of those in recent years.

8:50 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Muys Conservative Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON

We had a witness on Monday who said that, in their view, there was no material impact on supply chains from Bill C-33.

Would you agree with that? Do you want to speak a little bit about that?

8:50 p.m.

Executive Director, Western Grain Elevator Association

Wade Sobkowich

I wouldn't agree with that. The impact is that we're replacing a.... When grain terminals receive grain from railcars, we don't necessarily know which train is showing up when, so they need to be nimble in their ability to manage vessel traffic in order to get those trains unloaded and get those vessels loaded and out as early as possible.

Export terminals pay significant demurrage charges to the vessel companies. If the vessel stays longer, they pay contract extension penalties to their customers. They could default on a contract, so there's a high level of incentive for grain exporters to get those vessels in and out as quickly as possible. In the absence of measures to put disciplines on the ability to receive enough trains in the right sequence, they need to compensate for that by having flexibility on the vessel management side. What this will do is replace that with a regulated system for managing vessels, which we don't think is going to be helpful.