Government Operations Committee on May 27th, 2024

[Michel Girard]

That is an excellent question again.

When you develop a standard, you have a technical committee, and it has to have a balanced matrix of interests, including regulators, so the first thing is that regulators are at the table. Regulators influence the process. Regulators vote. If regulators as a bloc say, “We don't like this standard, it doesn't meet our requirements and it's not going to help you comply with our legislation”, it's not going to go anywhere. Regulators have a really important role to play in designing standards, especially when they're mandatory, when you know it's going to become part of the law. That's one thing.

The other thing is that if you have a standard internationally that you think would work, you can bring it to Canada, review it and adapt it. If you think some features are not strong enough, you can make deviations to it and then come up with something that works for you.

This issue is that it's a new tool you have in your tool box. You're at the table. You make the decisions with industry, with academics and with experts, but you have the last word when it comes to the actual content of the document that you'll adopt.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Riddle me this. It sounds an awful lot like the process for creating regulations. Where is the distinction?

[Michel Girard]

The distinction is in the way that the standards system works. It has the right checks and balances. It forces people to make decisions in thinking through the issues. When it comes to digital governance, our digital standards institute in Canada can develop a standard within a year. That's a big difference in what we're doing on the standards front and what is being done with regulations.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

I think I could probably dig deeper on that topic, because I find the difference somewhat nuanced.

We've heard a lot about this idea of adding one regulation and taking one regulation away. It seems to me that this is an oversimplification of the challenge we're faced with. Not every regulation is created equal. Some are very complex. Some are very simple. Should we not be focused more on the efficiency of the regulatory process rather than on the number of regulations?

[Michel Girard]

That's a good question. I'm not sure that this one-to-one idea, applied generically, will work for you, but what I know is that when you think about standards in federal, provincial, and territorial regulations—close to 10,000 of them—we know that they're useful and we know that they're dynamic and flexible. We know that in the tangible world we live in, the tangible products you use every day are not regulated. They are standardized and they're safe.

There has to be a way for us to think about this in terms of whether we really need a regulation for this or if we can afford to take a standards approach and achieve the same results. Then you look at the outcomes. If it works, you then save Canadians a lot of money and a lot of time.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks.

We're now going to go to you, Mr. De Thomasis, for your opening statement.

Are you there, sir? We understand that your camera's not working, but your microphone is.

You have five minutes. Go ahead, sir.

[Tony De Thomasis, President and Chief Executive Officer, The Essex Terminal Railway Company]

Good morning. I want to thank everyone for allowing me the opportunity to speak.

What I'm here to speak about today are some of the challenges we're encountering at our deepwater port in Port Windsor.

Morterm Limited is located in Windsor. It's located a stone's throw from North America's busiest international border with the U.S. Some of the challenges we're facing are with the movement of goods back and forth, first from Canada into the U.S. then back from the U.S. into Canada. Customers would like to simplify the regulatory process by cutting the unnecessary red tape to make cross-border trade easier.

We have identified challenges with moving product across borders once the shipments arrive at our warehouse and at the port of Windsor. Morterm customers would like the option of shipping product not only by truckload but also by the entire cargo that arrives at our terminal. Much of the product we handle at Morterm is steel, aluminum, steel plate, project cargo and those types of commodities. These could be moved as one lot as opposed to individual truckloads, which creates a lot of red tape and administrative work for the customers and Morterm.

If we could propose a few solutions to help streamline the process, they would include a trusted carrier and a fast-pass type of solution similar to what the auto carriers and other OEMs use in North America.

Another solution could be the development of a free trade zone in the Windsor area, where customers could land product or commodities in Windsor for further shipment into the U.S. Currently, Morterm has a bonded area in one of our warehouses, and customers take advantage of this for convenience and to move products back and forth. However, the area is limited and fairly small.

I would also like to talk about another possible solution: a sufferance warehouse. We are continually being asked by customers in Europe and the U.S. about moving product into the Windsor area or Canada and landing it in a sufferance warehouse, where product could be stored and then moved in and out of the sufferance warehouse under one bond or limited paperwork. There is a real need for a sufferance warehouse in our location. We believe it's a strategic location in North America that products could move to and from very easily and quickly.

We are a multimodal facility with rail connections to CPKC and CN. We also have a direct connection to CSX in the U.S. Customers are eagerly looking to bring cargo into Windsor because of the connections to the 400-series highways, North American highways and rail shipments.

We would love to be able to continue these discussions and look at some solutions that would make sense for Morterm and Canada.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you very much.

We'll now go to Mrs. Block for five minutes.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I echo my colleagues' comments in welcoming you all here today, albeit by Zoom for many of you. Mr. Girard, welcome to the room.

My first question will be for Ms. Furlong.

Firstly, congratulations on almost reaching 100 years. I'm sure you're busy preparing for that celebration.

In a previous meeting, we heard from witnesses that the carbon tax rebate in the amount of $2.5 billion has been withheld by the current government from small and medium-sized businesses across Canada. Now, in budget 2024, they indicated that they plan to finally return the money to these small businesses.

The budget says:

Budget 2024 proposes to urgently return fuel charge proceeds from 2019-20 through 2023-24 to an estimated 600,000 businesses, with 499 or fewer employees

I'm wondering if you could comment on the impact—or any feedback you've received on the impact—of the carbon tax, whether or not your members are aware of this newfound urgency to return this money to them and the process for doing so.

[Shaena Furlong]

Thank you for the question, Mrs. Block.

The carbon tax works a bit differently in British Columbia than it does in other provinces in Canada. I would be very happy to reach out to my colleagues at the Canadian Chamber of Commerce and share their perspectives on the way this is affecting businesses in those provinces, but unfortunately, I can't provide much input on that question.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Okay. Thank you.

Have you heard from any of your members about a process for having that returned, or are you telling me that because of this difference with British Columbia, they would not be receiving any kind of rebate?

[Shaena Furlong]

The carbon tax is administered provincially in British Columbia, so we would not be under the same federal regime for rebates.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Okay. Thank you very much.

This question is for both you and Mr. De Thomasis.

I am wondering if you are at all aware that Minister Anand, as President of the Treasury Board, is required to publish an annual report on federal regulatory management initiatives under the Red Tape Reduction Act. This act was introduced by the previous Conservative government, back in 2012.

Are you aware of this report? Have you or any of your members or customers had an opportunity to review this report?

I'll pass it over to Ms. Furlong first and then to Mr. De Thomasis.

[Shaena Furlong]

Thank you so much.

I have not read this report. I am aware of its requirements, but no, I have not seen it myself.

[Tony De Thomasis]

I haven't had a chance to review it. I was aware that there is a report, but I have not had a chance to review it in detail.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Okay. Thank you very much.

The current government tends to introduce either deeply flawed or deliberately vague proposed legislation, leaving the details to the bureaucrats through regulation.

Have you given any thought to the kind of advice you would provide to the next government, which will most likely be a Conservative government? What would you like to see implemented in the first 100 days following the next election?

[Shaena Furlong]

I'm sorry. Was that question directed to me?

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

It's for any one of you who would like to provide any advice on regulatory changes that need to be made.

[Shaena Furlong]

Thank you, Mrs. Block. I will jump in first.

Regardless of who forms the next government—and the Richmond Chamber of Commerce, like all chambers of commerce, is strictly non-partisan—we believe very strongly that introducing economic competitiveness mandates across all federal regulators would be an absolutely fantastic first step in ensuring that economic competitiveness is measured across regulators and that they are accountable to it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks. That is our time.

Mr. Kusmierczyk is next.

[Irek Kusmierczyk, Liberal, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Mr. Chair, I just want to ask Ms. Furlong a quick question.

Recently, in the National Post, the leader of the Conservative opposition wrote an opinion piece in which he stated:

At the most, the Chamber of Commerce, Business Council, and Canadian Federation of Independent Business hold pointless luncheons and meetings and write op-eds or record interviews that almost no one sees. As leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, I refuse to meet the aforementioned groups.

I wanted to ask you, Ms. Furlong, what your take is in response to hearing that comment, especially knowing that consultation and discussion are critical to making sure that we future-proof our regulations in Canada here.

[Shaena Furlong]

Thank you so much for the question.

Unfortunately, I haven't read that piece in the National Post, so thank you.

I would disagree very strongly. I think chambers of commerce across Canada are the grassroots non-profit organizations that serve the widest sector of business groups and employers across our communities. I work with everyone, from small solopreneurs and non-profit social service agencies to major companies like MDA, which MP Bains referenced earlier.

I think the chamber network is absolutely critical for providing the voice for businesses across British Columbia, and we're able to do that because we're non-partisan to any government that is formed. I hope the leader will reverse his opinion if the Conservatives take office.

Thank you.

[Irek Kusmierczyk, Liberal, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Thank you very much, Ms. Furlong.

I wholeheartedly agree. Listening to small businesses and supporting them are absolutely critical, because we know small businesses are the engines of our economy here in Canada. Thank you so much for your response.

Mr. De Thomasis, I wanted to say that I had the opportunity last year to join you at Morterm to announce over $12.5 million in federal funding from the national trade corridors fund for Morterm and ETR.

This is part and parcel of investments that this Liberal government has been making in our ports. Just last week, we learned that the Canada Infrastructure Bank is investing in part of a $750-million expansion of the port of Prince Rupert.

This is what this Liberal government is doing: investing in ports because we know that it is so important. It's so vital and critical.

To get it on record, how important is that investment that we made last year to Morterm? How important is that to the operations in Windsor?

[Tony De Thomasis]

Thank you, Mr. Kusmierczyk.

It's vitally important. As you know, infrastructure is key to the movement of goods. It's key to economic development and competitiveness in our space. Many of our assets at Morterm Limited were beyond 60 years old. Their useful life was at the very end. Without the federal assistance, I don't think we would have been able to replace the warehousing and the shorewalls that need major repair and reinvestment.

With that reinvestment, we were able to develop a new warehouse. We're going to be developing another warehouse to support trade and to support transloading and taking trucks off the road and moving to a green initiative, which is by rail, the greenest mode next to marine.

This is why I'm speaking today: It's because our customers are asking for further abilities to move commodities through our port into final destinations. With those requests comes some streamlining of older regulations, I'm going to call it, and of older administrative functions that are required to move these commodities. That's where we're willing and able to work with the federal government and the province to look at ways that we can be innovative in the way that we can move commodities into the U.S. and into Mexico to ensure we're competitive in this space.