Government Operations Committee on Oct. 21st, 2016

[Dave Sauer]

I would have to believe that we're not going to be dumping that many employees.

We're not going to be hiring that many right off the bat, right? There have to be some test case scenarios that we would want to look at first, so I think a gradual approach escalating into that would be probably the most prudent. Then, as was stated by the previous speaker, brother Rebeck, eventually it would pay for itself.

I think you have to start small. I don't think we would want to get out and do it right away. We'd have to do a little bit of investigation first and find out where it would actually work, and then gradually build up to that.

[Alupa Clarke, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Okay.

Mr. Sosa, the floor is yours.

[Carlos Sosa]

I'm not enough of an expert to comment, but I will say that Canada Post does have the retail outlets to do such a service. Obviously, I think that speaks right there.

[Alupa Clarke, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Let me ask you another question, Mr. Sosa.

Canada Post proposed that, once a week, employees gather all the mail from the community mailboxes for people with reduced mobility and seniors who have difficulty getting around, and deliver it to their homes.

It seems that the task force found that a number of associations representing people with reduced mobility consider that an interesting option.

Would you be in favour of such a service being provided?

[Carlos Sosa]

The concern with this type of approach basically for us is it says that it's just because you have a disability that we'll deliver the mail to you.

There are some issues with this. We need to look at the vulnerability of our community. Let's say somebody could steal mail out of your box. If we bring it right to your home, the mail could be stolen. That's another issue right there, the whole issue of vulnerability.

Quite bluntly, what we want is independence here. We would rather have five-day delivery here than have an employee just bringing it to our house because we have a disability. We should all be treated just as equally as everyone else, and we therefore should have five-day delivery right to our house.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

Go ahead, Mr. Blaikie, for seven minutes.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Sosa, carrying on on that theme, I wanted to ask this. When people living with a disability are trying to make a decision about where to live, would you say that door-to-door delivery counts as an amenity in the same way as being close to schools for families with young children or being close to public transportation for people who don't have a car does? Is this something that's considered in terms of how they're going to get their mail?

[Carlos Sosa]

I think that could be considered, but another factor is income.

Our community is disproportionately in poverty, so we're limited in terms of the areas that we can live in. Typically, those areas would be inner-city communities that have door-to-door mail service already. Therefore, that could have an influencing impact, but obviously income is the bigger influencing factor.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Professor Camfield, in your remarks you alluded briefly to the idea that Canada Post could play a meaningful role in combatting climate change. I just wondered if you wanted to take an opportunity to expand on that.

[Prof. David Camfield]

The Delivering Community Power plan that's been developed by a number of organizations and endorsed by people including David Suzuki does look at the question of how Canada Post could assist in a broader process of change that would be necessary to move towards a renewable economy. I think the whole idea of using that as a model is to have a public sector leadership role, for example, by converting the vehicle fleet to low-carbon-emission vehicles and by providing electric charging stations at Canada Post locations in order to promote the diversification of the transportation system.

I think these ideas are quite visionary. It's not that Canada Post can do it all by itself, but it can play kind of a leadership role in that respect.

There is also the idea of being able to expand delivery services through Canada Post. When you actually look at the way it works out, greenhouse gas emissions are lower when they're delivered through this kind of integrated network rather than through other options. There is actually less carbon emission to carry out deliveries that way, and you could expand the range of deliveries that would be available.

The idea of having food delivery from local farmers to local residents through the system that Canada Post has is one that's been floated there. Then, of course, you could consider further expanding other services that would be perhaps a bit more tangential, but would bring in revenue to Canada Post, allowing it to do more. An example referred to earlier that exists in some countries and is just being rolled out now in France is having letter carriers look in on the aged or people with disabilities.

There's a range of creative revenue-generating ideas that could be tried out for a diversification of Canada Post services, and those things are compatible with the overall vision in the Delivering Community Power plan.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

One of the arguments that's sometimes made for reducing the offering of public services is that private companies will create more employment when they get into the market. They start making money, and it's going to trickle down. In the case of Canada Post, you have an organization that's offering a service that's needed, they're doing it on a competitive basis at fair prices, and their employees are getting paid usually better than their private sector counterparts. They have access to more benefits. Does that argument go through in the case of Canada Post?

Maybe Messrs. Rebeck and Sauer want to comment on that.

[Kevin Rebeck]

When we have a public service model like this that can have good jobs for Canadians and reinvest profits back for the public good, why would we devolve that to the private sector?

I know there are accusations that when we move into a private sector domain, we're doing something that might be up for some debate and challenge. However, this is about a service that's in place, an infrastructure that's there, a good job process that's there, and profits that go to the public good. It should be maintained and grown, not shrunk.

[Dave Sauer]

I would argue that in some jurisdictions around the world, when you have the mixed delivery system, you have a public sector player and a private sector player, and this keeps prices down.

If I had to give you an example here in Winnipeg, it would be the big debate we had over golf course privatization a number of years ago. The argument was that if you privatize the golf courses, you can look at how much the other golf courses are actually charging, so the prices won't go up. However, with the public player removed from that equation, there's nothing stopping those other private entities from actually increasing prices. I think that actually has the benefit of not only having good-paying jobs and good services but in also keeping costs down.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

If you look at it from a net benefit perspective—if you use the public sector instead of the private sector in a case where you can charge the same kinds of prices, but it just means that the people providing that service are making more money and receiving better benefits—is there not a net benefit to the community?

Even if in terms of GDP you have the same effect, there's a benefit in terms of its distribution and making sure that it's getting into the hands of ordinary working Canadians instead of being held in the hands of whoever happens to be the owner of the private sector player that comes in.

[Kevin Rebeck]

Yes, in the net distribution of wealth, the government's better served to have a public entity that's reusing those profits for the public good and providing for good jobs. When those comparisons are made, it's always that way.

[Dave Sauer]

I'm not really one to quote Warren Buffett, but he has already come out very strongly that if you keep stacking wealth at the top, it doesn't really do very much to get the economy churning. Getting more dollars in average working people's pockets, I think, is probably the best way to actually get an economy churning, so I'm going to quote Warren Buffett on that one.

[The Chair, Conservative, Tom Lukiwski]

We can conclude on that.

Thank you.

Mr. Whalen, you have seven minutes, please.

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you all for coming.

I have to apologize to the people from the labour group and to the Manitoba League of Persons with Disabilities. We've heard from so many of your representatives across the country, but we haven't had many academics come, so that's where I'm going to focus, and maybe my colleague will get back to your groups.

I had to agree with a lot of what you said when I read the task force report for the first time. I had the sense that rather than it being a discussion paper, it felt a little bit like a sales pitch. I'll point to one thing in the report that stuck out to me, and that was around the notion of expenditure. It was focused on how much everything cost, rather than how much revenue was earned in different ways.

They broke down the cost associated with different types of delivery, saying that door-to-door costs $272 per such and such, and they didn't really focus on the different ways that revenue could be generated.

From an academic perspective on these types of discussion papers, what's your sense of the way they should have avoided a one-sided narrative, and maybe what an alternate narrative might have been had they focused on revenue instead of cost?

[Prof. David Camfield]

An alternate narrative would have maybe started with a different understanding of what they're dealing with as an organization. Of course, it's a crown corporation and that's not the same as a government department, but it is a public sector organization, which has a different social role from a purely private firm. To see that there's a social value, which is not always easily quantifiable in a public sector asset like that, would provide a kind of different dimension to the analysis.

Of course you have to deal with the statistical side of the operation, which is operating in a competitive market, with the exception of door-to-door mail delivery, but in terms of parcels, of course, there are competitors. You have to look at the industry it is operating in.

It's more than just another corporate player. It is also a public institution that has a mandate that is broader than simply a private firm. There's a different approach to dealing with those kinds of questions in the public sector, when you have an organization that has a role and a purpose that's broader than that of simply a corporation.

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

I will say, though, in defence of the task force, they had a restricted mandate. Their terms of reference were to look at Canada Post from the lens of self-sustainability.

I don't feel that our committee is bound by that same constraint. I think we have the ability...and hence this nation-wide consultation. It would be redundant otherwise to examine other options.

To each of you, do you feel there is enough opportunity for revenue out there for Canada Post to support the type of service that we expect, so it can be profitable and meet its pension obligations, or do you feel that we should accept the fact that it can't be and it should be subsidized? Then what level of subsidy do you feel would be an acceptable amount in the context of potentially an $8 billion shortfall in the pension plan right now?

That's to each of you, so maybe we'll start with Mr. Sosa and work down the table. Is a subsidy okay for Canada Post, and about what amount would be appropriate?

[Carlos Sosa]

Again, I'm not an expert to comment on that, but I will say that I think postal banking would help Canada Post diversify its revenue stream. We know it works in other countries.

The corporation has the retail outlets in order to do that, and it would benefit underserved communities, including persons with disabilities and seniors, very much so.

[Dave Sauer]

On this point I'm not too much of an expert. I don't know an exact number I could throw at you, but if we haven't even looked at other revenue streams, you can't answer that question just yet. We have to look at how you can make money for this service.

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

So play to win, and then if we don't, then maybe reassess a few years down the road.

[Dave Sauer]

That's where the test cases would come in, to find out how much we are going to be able to make. If we're going to be talking about what we need to get as a subsidy and what's acceptable, I can't answer. I can't throw a number out there for you.

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Camfield, go ahead.