Finance Committee on June 4th, 2026

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Crowfoot, AB]

Okay. Thanks.

There's bloated public service, intrusion into areas of provincial jurisdiction and excessive regulation. What about corporate welfare and the government's industrial policy?

[Renaud Brossard]

I'm glad you asked. I come from a province that tried to master industrial policy as a way to promote economic growth. When we look at what was promised to be a sovereign wealth fund, I can't help but see another Investissement Québec, but this one with supposedly some participation from taxpayers.

I can tell you that if subsidies were a good tool for economic development, we'd know it in Quebec. Quebec would be the most wealthy province in the nation. Unfortunately, that is simply not the case. If Quebec has had growth in recent years, it is thanks to the genius of its entrepreneurs. It's the same with Canada, by the way. It is not thanks to government subsidies and industrial policy.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Crowfoot, AB]

Okay. Thanks.

To go back to your projection of a $117-billion deficit by 2035, can you talk about some of the consequences of this kind of deficit? We're eventually going to be on a treadmill that we can't get off if we don't do something soon. I don't want to anticipate your answer, but is that a concern that you have?

[Renaud Brossard]

It is certainly a concern that we have. The current federal deficit is $65 billion. If we keep spending the way we're spending, it will be $117 billion in 2035. Part of that is that every time we spend more than what our revenues bring in, that goes into debt. Unfortunately, debt is a very expensive thing. It means we have more interest payments to pay.

We found that the net debt in Canada would go up from about $1.5 trillion right now to about $2.4 trillion in 2035 if nothing changes. That means more interest payments on the debt, more taxpayers' money going only to service that debt and less money available for services or to cut Canadians' taxes.

[Pat Kelly, Conservative, Calgary Crowfoot, AB]

You will note that we're already where the cost of debt service exceeds health transfers, national defence and virtually every other government program, other than OAS, I think. Do you have any comment on that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Be very quick.

[Renaud Brossard]

It's actually one of the areas where we're seeing significant cost pressure towards 2035. Three things are going to grow massively. These are military spending, transfers to seniors and then interest payments on the debt. These are some of the cost drivers that—

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Thank you very much, Mr. Brossard.

Thank you, Mr. Kelly.

We'll continue now with Mr. Turnbull for five minutes.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Thanks, Chair.

Thanks to all the witnesses for being here today.

This is a very important conversation. I know that the spring economic update implementation act has lots in it that's interesting. I'm particularly focused on all of the infrastructure, housing and defence capabilities we're building across the country.

I come from the Durham region, just outside of Toronto, where we've announced a major project of the first of four small modular reactors at Darlington. It's great news, because it comes with 18,000 construction jobs. I really value the work of our tradespeople. At one time, I was a stonemason. I was never Red Seal certified, but I did that for nine years to put myself through university. I really value the hard work of the men and women across the country who will help us build up the country in ways that we really need right now. The government has really made this a priority.

We've heard from members opposite in opposition parties who don't like it when governments are in situations where we need to stimulate investment in the economy and we need to add certainty when there is this cloud of uncertainty that's not within our control. We've chosen to do what the International Monetary Fund has actually recommended, which is that Canada use its fiscal capacity to stimulate growth strategically in industries where we have a strategic advantage and where we know it aligns with what the general public wants to see. Then there are the jobs it creates—the livelihoods, the careers, the good-paying jobs, the good-paying union jobs.

I want to ask Mr. Olsen from LiUNA about the labour mobility tax deduction and the major investments in skilled trades that are in the spring economic update and that I think are so valuable. I have Durham College in my riding as well. They have a skilled trades innovation centre and a training centre. They just added 650 new spots for skilled trades trainees. I'm very proud of our region and proud to see many more young people get opportunities in the skilled trades.

Mr. Olsen, maybe I'll hand it to you for some comments.

[Eric Olsen]

Thank you very much.

Whether these projects are private sector or public sector, it really doesn't matter. These projects will require thousands and thousands of tradespeople to build them. In the public sphere, there's always talk of a shortage of skilled labour. We can see this coming. People my age are aging out of the work, so we do need to train. We need to get as many apprentices on these jobs as possible. Our position is that project labour agreements with built-in standards for the number of apprentices, the number of indigenous people and under-represented groups, etc., will help get that skilled labour up to the point where we need it.

You mentioned your experience. I have lots of experience working on these projects. Prior to this job I'm in now, I was 10 years working in camps on major projects. The turnover rate and the number of people required to build these is monstrous. You're a 4,000-person camp, and you might have 6,000 or 8,000 people working on each project.

It's really important—the amount of money that has been put forward for training. It's helping all of our building trades expand their training capability and fulfill the mandate of building this country.

[Ryan Turnbull, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Thank you, sir. I really appreciate that response.

Do you think we got it right in terms of the design and the way we structured the apprenticeship grants, the hiring incentive for SMEs and then the completion bonus? When I think back to when I was a young person doing stonemasonry, if I had the opportunity to have a bit of a wage bump, train on the job and take an apprenticeship, I might have actually gone through the Red Seal certification process.

Can you speak to whether you think we got that right?

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

I apologize. We don't have time for a response.

Thank you.

We'll continue with Madame DeBellefeuille.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry—Soulanges—Huntingdon, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Ms. Levasseur, I'd like to address you briefly. I have two and a half minutes to tell you that I'm a little concerned about the change in the Canadian Food Inspection Agency's mission. I'm afraid that with this change, we're heading toward lower standards rather than higher ones.

As the member of Parliament for a riding representing an agricultural region, I know that produce growers, for example, compete with Mexico, the United States, Chile and Peru. These countries use pesticides that are banned here in Canada. Local produce growers therefore find themselves competing on a totally unfair playing field with countries that use pesticides not approved here, but whose products end up on our shelves anyway.

Agricultural producers are therefore calling for uniform standards. There must be reciprocity in our trade agreement negotiations. It's not right that I can buy a bell pepper from Florida in the United States when I know that in Sherrington or Saint-Michel, two municipalities located a few kilometres away from my home, major Quebec producers grow them, but they can't compete with Florida producers at the same price. This concerns me.

I'm also concerned that Quebec inventors of organic pest control methods, or even methods that harness nature, face significant difficulties getting their inventions recognized, even though they are less polluting and less hazardous to health. They are having trouble making their way, getting recognized by Health Canada and getting their products approved.

The changes related to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency will help these people find their way. They're not only looking for ways to be competitive, but also to ensure health, safety and good productivity by using less toxic products.

That said, Ms. Levasseur, I get the impression that the changes made to the agency will serve the interests of the major pesticide lobbies and that they have won the battle. So, if we face a challenge, we'll allow products to be registered quickly, without ensuring health and safety. I'm afraid that the agricultural community is going along with this.

I understood that you weren't necessarily opposed to this, and that worries me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Excuse me, Ms. Lavasseur, your time is up.

That concludes the question period. On behalf of the committee, I'd like to thank all of today's witnesses.

We will suspend for five minutes to welcome the Minister of Transport.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

We are going to resume our meeting. Colleagues, please take your seats.

Welcome back for our fourth hour today on Bill C-30.

I would like to take a moment to welcome the Honourable Steven MacKinnon, the Minister of Transport. He is joined by the deputy minister, Michael Vandergrift, and the assistant deputy minister, Serge Bijimine.

Minister, you have five minutes for your opening remarks.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Minister of Transport]

Thank you, Madam Chair. I also want to thank all the members of the committee.

Thank you for inviting me here today to provide an overview of a key measure contained in Bill C‑30, an act to implement certain provisions of the spring economic update tabled in Parliament on April 28, 2026, specifically, the airport information provision.

As you know, Canada's airports are central to our economy, connectivity and the daily lives of Canadians. They are managed by a range of organizations, including not-for-profit corporations and other levels of government. However, to develop effective policies and support the growth of our economy, we need to improve our access to information held by airport owners, operators and related organizations. Access remains limited at present for the federal government, including myself, as Minister of Transport. Bill C‑30 proposes a measure that will close this gap.

The Minister of Transport would be able to require airport owners, operators and others whose activities could affect airport value to provide information when needed. The sharing of relevant airport information will help improve our understanding of the sector and support evidence-based decision-making. This information could help us identify potential adjustments to the existing model that could attract more private investment. This initiative is crucial to advancing goals that matter to Canadians such as affordability, enhanced economic development and an improved passenger experience.

I want to emphasize that collaboration remains the cornerstone of our approach. We will continue to work closely with airport authorities to gather information on a voluntary basis and maintain an open dialogue with the sector.

This measure will also position the Government of Canada to advance policy development in other areas, such as improving air travel affordability, expanding regional connectivity and responding effectively to operational challenges.

Ultimately, the measure would further enable Transport Canada to carry out its mandate to build a more secure and reliable aviation transportation system. We will use the ability to request information only when needed so that we can keep Canada's transportation system strong and able to meet the needs of Canadians.

In closing, Madam Chair, this measure reflects our commitment to evidence-based decision making. It will help make sure that Canada's airports remain strong economic levers. The information we gather will help us better understand how different airport ownership models impact the air sector.

They will help guide our decisions and priorities to support economic growth, encourage investment and create more opportunities for both the industry and Canadians.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Karina Gould]

Thank you, Minister. That was short and concise, which is much appreciated.

We will begin with Mr. Albas for six minutes.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Minister, deputy minister and officials, for making yourselves available to discuss this important piece of legislation.

Minister, this casts a wide net across all airports. What should airports be concerned about in terms of the new requirements?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

I don't think they should be concerned at all. In fact, what we're seeing is a good deal of co-operation between airport authorities. The deputy minister just met with the airports council, and we're seeing voluntary compliance with information requests.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna, BC]

If you are seeking voluntary information, why are you legislating it?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Well, there's a chicken, and there's an egg. We want to ensure that we can run a process that is uniform, where we are able to access information as required but only when required. We want to have the ability—quite frankly, it surprised me, as Minister of Transport, that we did not already have it—to secure operational data from airport authorities.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna, BC]

First of all, Minister, your department is a bit of a mess right now when it comes to aviation. We saw, in the W5 exposé on Pearson, what's happened. There is a sudden requirement for small airports such as those at Castlegar or Comox to comply and send you information.

Are you actually going to be looking at these things, or is this about something else? Is it about the valorization of certain airports, and you're using this catch-all mechanism to basically require information from the major airports so that you can, so-called, asset recycle them?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

We're looking for operational data that, frankly, I believe the Government of Canada should be in possession of in any event. You referenced security issues. That would be a relevant area of study and examination in terms of operational data. We have some. We don't have all, but I do want to reassure those in Castlegar and Comox that we have made no request for their data as yet.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna, BC]

Again, you cast a net on all airports. Are you asking for all airports to comply or not?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

We don't want to legislate this piecemeal. We'll have this provision that will allow the transport minister to make an information request. That again is something that I believe should be de rigueur. It should be normal in any event.

To reiterate, I was surprised that we did not have ready access to this data. I suspect there will be a high degree of voluntary compliance.