Finance Committee on Nov. 18th, 2014

[Mostafa Askari]

Relative to what they would have...that's right.

[Nathan Cullen, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Right, and this is by a law enacted by the Conservatives themselves. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you, Mr. Cullen.

We will move to Mr. Van Kesteren, please, for seven minutes.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thanks to all of you for coming here this morning. We certainly are indebted to you for your information and everything that you bring forward to the table.

It's not part of the study, but you roused my curiosity, Ms. Zatylny. You mentioned something about the efficiency of Canadian ports. Did I get that right? What did you say we were ranked at?

[Wendy Zatylny]

I was citing a World Bank study on global transportation supply chain efficiencies that ranked us 14th out of 155 countries. That in itself is not too bad, but the report notes that it's not the absolute ranking. Rather, it's the quintile within which each country is included. From that perspective, Canada really should be in the top 10, not in the next quintile down alongside Luxembourg.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

The top 10? Okay. Which are the top-ranking countries? Do you know the top three?

[Wendy Zatylny]

They are China, Hong Kong, and after that my memory fails me, but we can get you that information.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

Is the Netherlands number three?

[Wendy Zatylny]

I suspect so, yes.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

Just as a little sidebar, I'm curious about this. I went to the Netherlands a few years ago. We had a tour of the Rotterdam facilities there. They were quite impressive. We were taken by boat through the whole thing by the director, and one of the things that struck me was that through the course of the conversation he said that the authority is independent. It is actually a part of the City of Amsterdam, but other than the very fancy gate they put up to stop the flood waters from coming in, the government has relinquished all authority to the port authority—completely. The statement he made was rather interesting. He said, “We have to produce a profit or heads will roll.”

I thought about an article I read on the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority. The mayor was suggesting that they didn't want to see tankers coming in or they didn't want to ship tankers out. Is this something that's been discussed at the higher levels, that we should maybe just hand over the ports to the cities and let them gain the benefits of a well-run organization, while at the same time they have a vested interest, then, in how that operation runs?

[Wendy Zatylny]

I certainly can't comment on what has been discussed at higher levels. What I can say is that each port authority is very much embedded in and linked to the community within which it operates, to the extent that there is a municipal representative on each port authority board. There is a very tight link, and therefore the community itself has a vested interest, yes, but also a voice in the decisions that the port authority is making as to how the port will be developing and what the impacts will be on the community.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

The next question I want to ask, probably more out of personal interest, is this. Do you feel that the authorization from the top down is helpful, or is it a hindrance to moving forward to being more productive and more efficient in that sense? Is the system that we have in place here in Canada something that you feel is good? Are there areas where you could see improvement, and what would they be?

[Wendy Zatylny]

The overall system I believe is extremely effective. Part of what tells me that is particularly the comments I've received when I've gone down to do some work in Washington. At one point we met with the retired secretary of transport, whose initial words to me were that up in Canada here, we have it all figured out with respect to ports. That was actually pretty encouraging.

I believe with regard to the port authorities, the system that both retains federal access to strategic properties while still empowering the port authorities to operate them in a commercial mandate, in a highly competitive and dynamic environment, is one that actually balances the best of both worlds. That being said, within that there are still administrative challenges we are working on that need to be smoothed out to help enhance the competitiveness of the Canada port authorities. Among them, for example, we need to address issues of how quickly port authorities can have their letters patent amended so that they can acquire additional lands in a commercial timeframe rather than a slower process. Sometimes it takes up to two years right now to get letters patent amended such that a port can acquire lands.

So a number of administrative challenges need to be addressed.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

In terms of bureaucracy and movements like eradicating red tape, those initiatives by the government are helpful to make those things happen. Would you agree?

[Wendy Zatylny]

Those would be extremely helpful.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

Okay, good. Thank you.

Ms. Biss, I love the name of your organization: Canada Without Poverty. I looked on your web page. How do you suggest—I've only one minute, so try to make it quick—we get rid of poverty? I didn't see that on your web page.

[Michèle Biss]

That's an excellent question. Thank you so much for the opportunity to answer that.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

You have one minute to explain how we do that.

[Michèle Biss]

Oh, my goodness.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Michèle Biss]

Well, I will say two things very quickly. The first thing is that I think it's very important that the voices of people living in poverty are represented on the federal scene.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

I want specific ideas—i.e., this is what we need to do.

[Michèle Biss]

My first one, then, would be to ensure that people living in poverty have a voice in the development of policy. My second would be the development of a federal anti-poverty plan.

[Dave Van Kesteren, Conservative, Chatham-Kent—Essex, ON]

We did a great study on income inequality. It was an all-party report. Did you read that?

[Michèle Biss]

I certainly might have. It might not be fresh in my mind, though.