Human Resources Committee on Oct. 6th, 2026

[The Chair (Robert Morrissey (Egmont, Lib.)), Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Good morning, committee members.

Welcome to meeting number 47 of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. Pursuant to the order of reference received on Wednesday, September 23, 2026, the committee is meeting on Bill C-266, an act to establish a national framework respecting skilled trades and labour mobility.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the Standing Orders. Participants may be participating virtually or in the room.

There are a couple of items I'd like to review before we begin.

To those participating, you have the right to participate in today's meeting in the official language of your choice. If you're in the room, please select the channel that gives you the language that you will be participating in. If you're appearing virtually, please click on the globe icon at the bottom of your Surface and select the language of your choice. If there is an interruption of interpretation services, please get my attention. We'll suspend while it is being corrected.

As well, for those in the room, please make sure your devices are on silent mode. Please refrain from tapping on the boom in front of you. This is for the protection of the interpreters.

Please direct all questions through me, the chair. Wait until I recognize you by name before proceeding.

We have two panels today. One is beginning shortly with two witnesses, and then we'll have the second one.

I have Ms. Falk raising her hand before I get to the introduction of witnesses.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake, SK]

Thank you so much, Chair.

This is minor housekeeping. Is it possible that you could direct the clerk to provide committee members with an updated draft working calendar with the changes from the past meetings? I don't believe we have one of those. That would be great.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Falk.

We had discussed that, and we'll accommodate it.

Today, we are hearing from witnesses on Bill C-266.

I would like to welcome our witnesses for the first panel. From Canada's Building Trades Unions, we have Sean Strickland, executive director. From the Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Institute of Canada, we have Martin Luymes, vice-president of government and stakeholder relations.

Each witness has up to five minutes for their opening statement. Speak slowly for the benefit of the interpreters.

We'll begin with you, Mr. Strickland, for up to five minutes.

[Sean Strickland, Executive Director, Canada's Building Trades Unions]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to the committee for having me here today.

As the chairman mentioned, my name is Sean Strickland. I'm the executive director of Canada's Building Trades Unions. We're the national voice for more than 500,000 skilled trades workers across Canada. Our 14 affiliated unions represent workers in more than 60 different trades and occupations.

Firstly, CBTU is in full support of the goal of improving labour mobility. It is important to our members and to the future of Canada's economy to make it easier for skilled trades workers to move to where the work is. We've been working on this issue for years. We need to keep training workers in the communities where they live and where the work is happening, but mobility is how the industry works. Our members often travel far from home to follow major projects and go to work.

The problem is that workers face different rules when they move from one province to another. Bill C-266 is an opportunity to fix some of this and get some important things right, even with the Red Seal trades. The Red Seal system is vital and should be strengthened. However, we still have cases where trade in one province is not recognized the same way in another, and not every skilled trade is deemed a Red Seal trade. This can and should be improved and modernized, but it should not be overhauled. Mainly, the Red Seal system is working. Any improvements need to strengthen the system, not weaken it.

A national approach needs to look at the full range of skilled trades. Provinces don't even all agree on whether a trade is compulsory—that is, whether you need a licence to practise that trade. We need to understand and map those differences so qualified workers aren't facing unnecessary barriers when they move.

We also need to get safety right. When we talk about safety harmonization, we should be harmonizing up, not down. We can stop forcing workers to repeat the same safety training just because they cross provincial borders, while also making sure we're always moving to the highest safety standard. It's good for the industry, good for the economy and good for workers.

National digitization is another way we can support labour mobility—again, as long as we do it right. Digital credentials and other tools can make it much easier for workers to prove their qualifications and move quickly, but privacy and security need to be built into that work from the beginning.

Finally, this bill points to a bigger issue. Clause 3 calls for “at least nine months” of consultation. We suggest that the consultation should be ongoing. That consultation includes labour unions and calls for mapping provincial credentials, reducing duplication and ongoing collaboration. It's all very good stuff and should proceed.

The workforce planning problem doesn't end when a framework like this is tabled. That is why CBTU is proposing a labour supply coordinating committee, so we can understand both the demand for workers and the supply of workers from the beginning, before the shovel gets into the ground. How many workers, what trades and when are the questions Canada needs to answer as we build these large-scale industrial and infrastructure projects. The labour supply coordinating committee could look at project timelines, trade-by-trade labour demand, apprenticeship capacity, worker mobility and where workers are available across the country. It could match workers from areas of high unemployment to areas with excess worker demand in real time. It could also help us understand where we need to build local training and apprenticeship capacity and where workers may need to move to meet demand.

This needs to be led by unionized labour. Unionized labour is the closest to the workforce. We know what is happening on job sites, where workers are available, where there are shortages and where training capacity exists.

This is not just about training more people. It is about knowing what Canada will need, training the right people in the right trades at the right time and making sure we can get them to where the work is. Optimizing jobs for Canadian skilled trades workers is the primary objective. This is how we build a skilled workforce that can meet Canada's needs. Our members have proven we can build the projects Canada needs, wherever they are. We're ready to work together to build what's next.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I look forward to the committee's questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mr. Strickland.

Now we'll move to Mr. Luymes for up to five minutes.

[Martin Luymes, Vice-President, Government and Stakeholder Relations, Heating, Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Institute of Canada]

Mr. Chair and members of the committee, good morning and thank you for the opportunity to speak about Bill C-266.

My name is Martin Luymes. I am vice-president of government and stakeholder relations at the Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Institute of Canada, or HRAI.

HRAI supports the objective of making it easier for qualified tradespeople to work across Canada. We believe this framework can help with that goal, provided it connects labour mobility with workforce development, maintains confidence in trade qualifications and respects provincial and territorial responsibilities.

Founded in 1968, HRAI is a national not-for-profit association representing more than 1,150 manufacturers, wholesalers and contractors in the heating, ventilation, air conditioning and refrigeration industry. Our members collectively employ more than 50,000 people. HRAI also provides industry training and guidance on codes, standards and best practices, though our training is all considered supplemental to trades training and apprenticeships.

Our contractor members hire and train apprentices. They install and service the systems that heat Canadian homes, cool workplaces, ventilate buildings and keep food refrigerated. Their work is essential to public health, comfort and economic activity. Our interest in the bill is therefore very practical. Canada needs enough qualified people to deliver those services in every region. Housing construction, energy efficiency improvements and the adoption of heat pumps all depend on that capacity. A national framework should help a qualified worker find opportunities across provincial boundaries, help employers meet demand and give consumers confidence that the person doing the work has the necessary skills to do the job safely and competently.

These are our asks.

First, labour mobility is an important part of ensuring a sufficient supply of skilled workers across the country. Demand for our member services varies by region and by season. Construction activity, retrofit programs and changes in heating and cooling demand can create pressure in one market while excess capacity may be available elsewhere.

We welcome the bill's proposals to map credential equivalencies and reduce duplication. That mapping should explain what workers are qualified to do. Similar trade titles do not necessarily describe identical scopes of practice, and different titles do not necessarily mean different competencies.

At the same time, moving workers across the country cannot by itself increase the total number of qualified people. A national strategy must also strengthen local apprenticeship pipelines and help experienced workers update their skills. Otherwise, mobility may simply transfer a shortage from one community to another.

This brings me to our second point: Credential recognition must be supported by needed investments in training. In our May 2026 federal pre-budget submission, HRAI called for broader support for apprentices and employers in compulsory trades serving the residential HVACR sector. We also called for support to develop appropriate, interprovincially consistent residential HVAC trades training with the aim of certifying 5,000 workers by 2035.

In our letter to Minister Hajdu, we raised a specific concern about restricting new apprenticeship income support to Red Seal trades. Ontario's residential air conditioning systems mechanic trade, known as the 313D, illustrates the issue of concern. It's a compulsory trade with prescribed training and certification requirements, but it is not yet a Red Seal trade. Our position is that apprentices in compulsory, high-demand trades should have access to support during mandatory technical training. Red Seal status should not be the sole test of whether their training deserves federal support.

We encourage a collaborative approach involving employers, organized labour, colleges, regulators and governments. The framework should use evidence to assess positive possible training pathways and maintain the competencies needed for safe, effective work.

Third, labour mobility must be accompanied by stronger enforcement of provincial trades training and certification requirements. Credential portability depends on confidence in the credential being recognized. Workers, employers and consumers need to know that qualifications have meaning and that rules governing compulsory trades are applied consistently.

Fourth, the framework must be realistic about federal authority. Education and the regulation of trades are primarily provincial responsibilities. Territorial governments also administer their own training and certification systems. Decisions about compulsory certification, apprenticeship requirements, scopes of practice, and enforcement generally rest with those governments and their regulatory bodies.

Bill C-266 would require federal ministers to develop a framework, consult stakeholders and report to Parliament. It would not itself replace provincial trade laws, issue provincial licences or compel every province to adopt identical requirements. We support the bill's recognition of provincial and territorial jurisdiction. Harmonization would require co-operation and, where necessary, changes made by the governments and regulators responsible for those requirements.

In closing, Mr. Chair and members of the committee, HRAI welcomes the opportunity that this bill represents. We ask you to preserve the broad coverage of skilled trades, including those outside the Red Seal designation; connect mobility with accessible training and apprenticeship support; encourage credible provincial enforcement; and establish a practical implementation plan that respects jurisdictional authorities and measures results.

Qualified workers should be able to use their skills where they are needed. Employers should have confidence in the qualifications they rely on. Canadians should be able to trust the people installing and servicing essential heating, cooling and refrigeration systems. HRAI would welcome the opportunity to contribute our industry experience and training expertise to the development of this framework.

Thank you. I would be pleased to answer any questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mr. Luymes.

We'll begin the first round of questioning, which is six minutes each, with Mr. Reynolds.

[Colin Reynolds, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. It's nice to see you again.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

You as well. It's good to see you back.

[Colin Reynolds, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you, witnesses, for coming today.

This is a very important issue to me. I have been a Red Seal electrician for 20 years, and I am a 20-year member of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. As somebody who's actually gone through the apprenticeship program, I can say this is something that's very near and dear to my heart. Trades mobility is very important to this country.

One thing that I think is a big issue is apprenticeship mobility. Apprentices are registered in their respective provinces, and they train in their respective provinces. For example, an apprentice who works and is registered in Manitoba can't work in Saskatchewan or Ontario, and I think that's a big barrier.

My first question is for you, Mr. Strickland. What other barriers currently exist for trades workers who want to move between provinces?

[Sean Strickland]

MP Reynolds, you highlighted an important one there with apprenticeships and the mobility and recognition of apprentices from one province to another. In the training regime for your trade, to be a certified electrician in Ontario takes about 9,000 hours. To be a licensed electrician in Alberta, it's 6,200 hours. I think you were telling me before the meeting that it's 7,100 hours in—

[Colin Reynolds, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

It's 7,200 in Manitoba.

[Sean Strickland]

It's 7,200 hours in Manitoba, so you have varying degrees of requirements for different trades, even through the apprenticeship. Even through the recognition of the licence there are variations from province to province.

The other big barrier, which I mentioned in my opening remarks, is around safety harmonization. You can get a working at heights certificate in Ontario, for example, but if you go to work in Alberta, it's not recognized. You have to sit in a classroom and take what is essentially that same course all over again because they're recognizing that the authoritative body in that province is different from the one in the province you came from.

There are many barriers with respect to safety harmonization where there has been work under way. That work needs to have a tighter timeline in some of these areas where they can achieve safety harmonization. Of course, it's all in provincial jurisdiction. The federal government can facilitate the provinces to move in the right direction.

The time is right. If ever there was a better time for us to get some of these things right, I can't think of one.

[Colin Reynolds, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you.

I have the same question for you, Mr. Luymes. What barriers do you see in your industry? I'm sure they're similar to those in the electrical industry, but if you could comment on that, I'd appreciate it.

[Martin Luymes]

In our industry, our members employ a variety of trades, including electricians, but primarily refrigeration technicians, mechanics, gas technicians, plumbers, sheet metal mechanics and a few others. As Mr. Strickland said, the requirements differ from one province to the next.

We also have the challenge that in some jurisdictions, the way the licence is regulated is quite different. As a case in point, the gas technician licence is a trade in some provinces, but not in others. In Ontario, it's not even regulated under the same regulatory body; it's under the fuel safety regulator, the TSSA, and that creates challenges if there's no apprenticeship to be served there. It makes it difficult for that program to be aligned with others across the country where it could be designated as a Red Seal trade. That's a simple example.

We have a particular challenge in our sector in the residential space where we're seeing decarbonization policies or programs—electrification, if you want to call it that. We're seeing a shift in technology, and we therefore need to see a shift in skills. The problem is that the way the residential sector is regulated varies quite considerably from province to province. We need to see some harmonization there to allow for our members and technicians to adapt to the changing needs of the marketplace in a consistent way across the country.

[Colin Reynolds, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you.

With so many of the issues being provincial issues, do you see anything in this bill that might entice the provinces to co-operate or collaborate with each other or nationally to get to the point where people can move interprovincially?

[Sean Strickland]

That's a fundamental question of Confederation, I think, MP Reynolds. It's moral suasion.

As I said, the timing is right. There's more provincial-federal co-operation right now in a variety of areas because of the threat to our economic sovereignty, so there's an opportunity to look at some of these issues.

From my perspective, as the regulation of the trade is provincial, I think it's going to be very difficult for the federal government to try to get into that space, but the safety harmonization piece, for example, is low-hanging fruit. Maybe there are things that can be done in the Red Seal designation. As Martin alluded to, not all trades are recognized as Red Seal. A drywall installer, for example, is not a Red Seal trade. A cement mason is not a Red Seal trade. There are things that can be done at the edges that won't take a lot of arm-twisting to get done to help us move in the right direction.

I think safety harmonization is something that everyone can get behind, because through that harmonization effort, if we're able to raise the standard and improve the safety of all workers in Canada, how can you argue against that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mr. Reynolds.

Mr. Villeneuve, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Louis Villeneuve, Liberal, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning, gentlemen, and welcome.

I'm going to start with Mr. Strickland.

During his testimony before the committee, the sponsor of the bill specified certain gaps that the bill seeks to address in terms of governance and the implementation of standards in the skilled trades, among other things.

What gaps have you seen in the governance and implementation of the standards?

[Sean Strickland]

The gaps are similar to the conversation that we were having with MP Reynolds. On the Red Seal trade system, for example, not all trades are recognized as Red Seal. Some are recognized as Red Seal in some provinces and not recognized as such in other provinces.

You have the differences between compulsory and voluntary trades. A compulsory trade means that you have to have a licence to practise that trade, and not all provinces recognize the licensing requirements. One trade might not need a licence to practise in one province but requires a licence to practise in another province. There's a whole host of examples—a construction electrician, a structural ornamental ironworker, a reinforcing ironworker, a carpenter—with different regulations determining whether or not a worker who goes to work has a licence to perform that work, whereas in another province they won't need the licence.

This impacts safety. For example, British Columbia deregulated the whole industry. The government there is now trying to bring it back, but you didn't even need a licence to operate an overhead crane there, whereas in Ontario and most other provinces in Canada, you need a licence to operate an overhead crane.

These are glaring examples, and there are other examples that are less evident in terms of compulsory and voluntary recognition. In safety harmonization, there's a huge gap between the provinces. In the Red Seal designation, there is compulsory and voluntary, and there are probably a few others. To map it—the bill is talking about mapping out these differences—would be a really good start so that we can have a comprehensive overview of this and then begin to tackle the problem.

[Louis Villeneuve, Liberal, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you.

To follow up on that, to what extent do you think this bill would address those gaps in governance and implementation of standards?

[Sean Strickland]

This is what the bill is calling for: list all the skilled trades, map credential equivalents and identify barriers. By putting it all there, having the consultation period and putting it on the table.... This is comprehensive. If we were just talking about construction trades, from my perspective, there are like 60 construction trades. There are hundreds of trades in Canada. I don't know to what extent this bill is limited in its scope, but by having that mapping to begin with, through the mapping process you'll be able to identify some of the things that MP Villeneuve alluded to in terms of compulsory versus voluntary.

Why does one province consider it important for you to have a licence? You have to pass a test. You have to have a licence to be an HVAC installer. You have to pass a test, but in another province, you don't need to pass a test. That doesn't make sense, so let's get it on the table. Let's shine some light on it and try to figure it out.

[Louis Villeneuve, Liberal, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you for that.

Mr. Luymes, since coming to power, our government has been focused on growing the Canadian economy. What positive economic impacts do you think removing barriers to labour mobility in the skilled trades could have nationally?

[Martin Luymes]

In terms of economic growth, this is a barrier. The lack of harmonization is a barrier to growth because it prevents workers from working where they could be most productively used, as I indicated in my opening statement.

In our sector, we see a tremendous opportunity associated with electrification. I mentioned this already. If there's a barrier to progress in transforming Canadian homes and buildings from fossil fuel usage to electrified forms of heating, the barrier is the lack of competent workers to do that type of work. That's holding back progress that could be growth for the industry. It could be good for Canadians during this electrification push and obviously could be a job creator.

On the lack of harmonization, as Mr. Strickland mentioned, I'll give you a specific example of a gap that was in existence in British Columbia. The government decided that there weren't sufficient numbers of workers to do residential HVAC work on electric heat pumps, so they deregulated the trade. The trade that existed was the refrigeration trade, and there were very few people who held that licence working in residential. The solution identified by the government was to deregulate all equipment under a certain size, effectively making the residential space unregulated.

In our view, that's not a good solution. A better solution is to look at what's happening in other provinces where trades have been developed specifically to serve the needs of that sector. They are compulsory. They're not Red Seal, but they are available. The examples of those certifications could have been applied in British Columbia. That's a very practical example of a limitation that exists today.

[Louis Villeneuve, Liberal, Brome—Missisquoi, QC]

Thank you for that.

I think my time is up, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you.

Ms. Larouche, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank both witnesses for being here today for the study of this bill.

The Bloc Québécois is trying to fully understand the urgency and importance of this bill, since the issue of labour mobility and training falls exclusively under Quebec's, and so the provinces', jurisdiction. In fact, in Quebec, we already have our own model in this area, and it works. Quebec is responsible for skills training, and we are trying to promote trades related to that. In addition, credential recognition falls exclusively within Quebec's jurisdiction under the Canada-Quebec Labour Market Agreement in Principle, which was signed in 1997 by Lucien Bouchard and Jean Chrétien. There's also chapter 7 on labour mobility of the Canadian Free Trade Agreement, which includes provisions for credential recognition. I can come back to that.

When we heard about this bill, when the 2026 spring economic update and the team Canada strong project to train skilled trades workers were introduced, Quebec called for an unconditional transfer of the amounts announced. The economic update committed $2 billion over five years starting in 2026-27, with $262 million per year afterward.

Mr. Luymes and Mr. Strickland, how important are these transfers and sums to training skilled workers?

Apart from the act and the transfer of money invested in training, what more can the federal government do in that regard?

[Sean Strickland]

In the unionized construction industry, we have 200 training centres across the country. We partner with our contractors to deliver that training. We've been able to access the union training and innovation program. We've spent our own money. Training is critically important to a successful construction industry and Canada's economy, so we encourage governments across the country to spend and invest in training tradespeople.

In terms of your comment about the trade recognition in Quebec, we're starting to see some real improvement there. For example, we have at least 100 tradespeople from Newfoundland working in the Davie shipyard right now, which was easily accomplished compared with how it was a number of years ago in terms of getting tradespeople into Quebec.

I would re-emphasize this notion of safety harmonization. I think that's an area where Quebec and all the other provinces could get together to look at safety harmonization and improve the safety of construction workers, particularly in Quebec, which has one of the worst construction safety records in all of Canada.

With the good work that's happening in trade investment, training, and investing in trades, and with how the system works in Quebec, I agree with you that there are a lot of positives to that system, but safety harmonization is an area where I can see some room for improvement for workers in Quebec.

[Martin Luymes]

May I make a comment?

There's a suggestion that the primary role in this space is with the provinces, and we would agree wholeheartedly. However, I would say the federal government has two important roles that it can play. One, you can identify funding through programs like build Canada strong. Maybe the lion's share should go to the provinces, but perhaps some of the funding that's directed to the provinces could have conditions attached, to find ways to compel the provinces to get to the table and identify ways to harmonize among the trades. The roles I would suggest that the federal government can play, then, are to fund using its tax base, which is richer than the provinces', and, secondly, to actively convene the provinces to exercise the authority they have in this area.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

However, following the signing of the 1997 agreement that I mentioned, side agreements were entered into. These include the labour market development agreements, or LMDAs, for employment insurance claimants, and the workforce development agreements, or WDAs, which were created in 2017 to support a broader cohort, including low-skilled workers, the self-employed and people distant from the labour market. All of this was created in that context.

In Quebec, these transfers are integrated into a partnership model structured around the Commission des partenaires du marché du travail, which brings together employers, unions, the education community and community organizations to guide priorities. Therefore, we want federal money to go to the workforce and to be entrusted to Quebec so that Quebec can choose its programs, not Ottawa.

What do you think of this Quebec-created model where everyone talks to each other: the community sector, the union sector and self-employed workers?

[Sean Strickland]

The model in Quebec currently doesn't allow our union training centres to receive transfer payments to train workers. The training is done through the CEGEP system. That is a challenge for us. If you want more mobility and a more trained workforce, I think Quebec and the CCQ need to look at a way in which that funding can be returned to union training centres so we can train our members.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Madame Larouche.

Madame Kramp-Neuman, you have five minutes.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington—Tyendinaga, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

I'll start with you, Mr. Strickland.

I'd like to start with the Red Seal program. As you've indicated, and we're all aware, it requires co-operation between Ottawa and the provinces, the territories, employers, unions and training organizations, but ultimately, it has to work for the people who are actually working in and entering the trades.

From where you sit, is that coordination working? What do you feel is the biggest disconnect between the governments and the people training and employing skilled tradespeople?

[Sean Strickland]

I think our members and our union leadership are generally quite happy with the Red Seal trades system. The Red Seal was really put together to overcome all of the challenges that we're identifying here today in terms of differences in apprenticeship hours, differences in standards and so on so that there's one national standard.

Not all tradespeople become Red Seal journeymen. Getting the Red Seal gives you the mobility to travel across different provinces, but many just get their licence or their voluntary certification and stay within their home communities to practise their trade.

I think there are things that could be improved in the testing and the availability of testing to make the Red Seal exam more worker-friendly. In some jurisdictions—in Ontario, for example—for Red Seal qualification and licensing, the government allows the apprentice to take the test within their own union hall. Not all jurisdictions allow that. In some jurisdictions, you have to go to a central body, a college, and the college is only available on certain dates at certain times.

There are things that can be improved in terms of the availability of testing through the Red Seal program that will improve labour mobility, but generally, notwithstanding the comments I made earlier and the comments that Martin has made, the Red Seal system works pretty well. It needs to be tweaked, not overhauled.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington—Tyendinaga, ON]

To go further with that, we're hearing consistently—I know I am—that Canada needs more trained, skilled people, but getting someone interested in a trade and then finally getting them all the way to certification are two different things. Between entering the Red Seal system and actually getting the certification, what's losing people? What's the gap in between A and B that's happening?

You touched on a few things earlier. Is it classroom availability? Is it a shortage of employers to provide hours? Is it the cost of taking on a new apprentice?

Also, if the federal government could do one thing, what could it realistically do to help remove some of the bottlenecks in getting people from A to Z?

[Sean Strickland]

That is a very comprehensive question.

I think the federal government is trying to do that right now through the Canadian apprenticeship service program. They're going to be bringing back a program with $10,000 to incentivize contractors to take on a first-year apprentice. We're hoping to expand that to $10,000 for a second-year apprentice as well.

In the unionized industry, an apprentice is indentured to a joint apprenticeship training trust. That's a multi-employer approach, so if you get laid off from one employer, you go into the pool and you might get hired by another employer. That helps with our completion rate. Our completion rate—getting an apprentice from initiation to completion—is much higher than in the non-union or alternative unions because of our training, but it's also because of the model. If you're an individual contractor, you have to take that apprentice on, and it's a risk to take on an apprentice and put money into training and invest in training, because if you run out of work, you have to lay that apprentice off.

There are differences in the models that lead to better outcomes through the unionized industry, but there are things that can be fixed for the entire industry.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington—Tyendinaga, ON]

If I could bring this specifically now to HVAC, Mr. Luymes, the government is currently talking a lot about building significantly more housing. At the same time, we're seeing changing technology when it comes to the growing demand for HVAC work.

Do we currently have enough trained workers coming through the system to meet that demand? If not, what's preventing an HVAC contractor in a community like mine, Hastings—Lennox and Addington—Tyendinaga, from taking on and training one more apprentice in that particular field?

[Martin Luymes]

This is a very good question.

There's a really significant barrier in our sector. Not all of our members are unionized. Many are not. In fact, disproportionately in the residential sector, the industry is dominated by small family businesses, SMEs. The average number of employees for a typical residential HVAC contractor is nine, and most of them skew smaller than that.

What we have found is that the non-union contractors don't benefit from the union and apprenticeship intake programs that exist there, the structure that exists in that environment. The challenge is that while they might identify an appropriate candidate or a candidate might have an interest in becoming an apprentice, the system isn't particularly friendly to that process, and our contractor members—small business owners—are not very sophisticated in using the apprenticeship system. I would suggest that this is a major barrier.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington—Tyendinaga, ON]

It's not successful because of cost.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Madame Kramp-Neuman.

Mr. Saini, you're up next for five minutes.

[Gurbux Saini, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Strickland and Mr. Luymes.

My question is about the current situation we have with the U.S. The International Monetary Fund says that removing internal trade barriers and improving the mobility of the workforce within the provinces could add up to a 7% boost, or equal to $210 billion, to our economy when we are fighting tariffs, or equal to 9% of the total tariffs. I would like to hear your viewpoint on that issue.

[Sean Strickland]

I don't dispute that figure at all. We've had several reports. Martin's group, I'm sure, has done some analysis. The mechanical contractors have done an analysis, and the cost to contractors on large projects for safety harmonization, trade equivalency and retraining workers is in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

This does have an economic impact. It costs money, and it also impacts productivity. When you dispatch a worker from the east coast to work on LNG phase two and they have to sit in a classroom for a week to retake courses that they took in Newfoundland and Labrador, New Brunswick or Nova Scotia, that costs time, money and productivity.

[Martin Luymes]

I would add that there are costs that are labour-related. I'm assuming that built into that number are also the costs of goods being transferred from one province to another.

In our sector, we've seen significant barriers because of different provincial requirements for the approval and certification of products. It's a different topic, but it's also a contributor to the slowing down of the economy. When products that come in from another country have to be certified individually in each province, it's a redundant process, and there's really no basis, no justification, for it. We are arguing strongly for the removal of many of the barriers that exist today in relation to products, in addition to the ones that concern workers.

[Gurbux Saini, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

We know that we must rapidly increase housing supply on a national scale. This is a core priority for our government. Can you speak to how a harmonization of skilled trade certification would lessen the timeline for the construction of newly built homes in Canada?

[Martin Luymes]

How is this situation constraining the growth of new homes? Is that the question?

[Gurbux Saini, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

That's correct.

[Martin Luymes]

Well, there are insufficient numbers of workers. We know of a report that was done by BuildForce Canada that said in our sector alone, achieving the goals that were set out for housing growth and the electrification of heating systems would require—I forget the number in relation to construction workers, but in our sector alone—a quadrupling of registered licensed refrigeration mechanics within 10 years. That's a pretty significant leap, one that the apprenticeship system today cannot deliver, even under the best scenarios.

We have to find ways to re-skill existing workers coming from other sectors. That alone is a barrier to growth. Especially when growth is also tied to policy goals like electrification, it creates a significant challenge.

[Sean Strickland]

If I may add to that, Mr. Luymes is correct in quoting that report, but that report was based on a scenario that we would build a million homes in less than 10 years, so that's not happening.

The notion that trade shortages are forever thus, or skilled trade shortages, is not the problem. The problem, really, is trade optimization. Trade shortages don't occur with all trades in all regions at all times. Brother Reynolds knows that his own local in Manitoba has high unemployment, but here we are talking about skilled trade shortages across the country when we have a couple of hundred electricians who are looking for work.

The issue is really important in terms of coordinating the requirement for construction workers, predominantly on large-scale industrial projects and large-scale infrastructure projects. We need to put together a labour supply coordinating committee so we can figure out how many tradespeople are needed, in what trades, when and where, for what job, where they are available and how we're going to get them there. We don't have that kind of sophisticated analysis in Canada. BuildForce does a good job at a very macro level based on scenarios and hypotheses, but not in real time. We need labour analysis around labour market requirements in real time—fluid, boots-on-the-ground, real-time analysis. I've been pushing for this since the creation of the Major Projects Office.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mr. Saini.

Ms. Larouche, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This consideration, particularly on the construction industry, is worthwhile and important. At the very least, the bill makes us think about the labour issue, which is positive and constructive.

Gentlemen, I would like to hear your reactions to things we heard during the debates at first and second reading of the bill.

First, it says that labour market needs vary from one region to another, which is obvious, and that the harmonization proposed in the bill will not necessarily lead to an improvement for everyone.

What is your response to those who said that about Bill C‑266?

[Sean Strickland]

MP Larouche, thank you very much for the question.

Can you achieve perfection through this bill? No. Is it perfect? No, but is it signalling the right kind of conversation we need to have in Canada about trade harmonization across our provinces? Given the economic situation we're facing, given the major projects we want to build and given the infrastructure we want to build, this is going to begin the way of doing that.

Our current system gets in the way, so how can we find a way across the aisle for federal and provincial governments to figure out a way we can deal with that, to help us meet the moment, to help us build these major projects and to help us build the infrastructure? I think this is a good start.

It's not going to solve it. You're going to need a lot of provincial support and you're going to have to be careful about what's in the provincial jurisdiction and what's in the federal jurisdiction, but there are a lot of things around the edges in this conversation that I think really need to happen.

I would agree with your comment that maybe it's not perfect, but it's a step in the right direction, and it's a big one.

[Martin Luymes]

I would echo that. It doesn't hurt to have the conversation.

I'll just say that we are aware that in some provinces—not Quebec, but in other provinces—there is generally a lack of awareness about what's happening in other provinces. As an industry association, we have found that convening by the federal government and convening with multiple provinces create lessons and dialogue that maybe wouldn't have existed otherwise.

We tend to assume the provinces are talking to each other. They aren't. Maybe the federal government can play a role in facilitating that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Madame Larouche.

Mr. Genuis, you have five minutes.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you very much.

It's great having both of you here.

We think it's very important to train Canadian workers for the Canadian jobs that we have. One of the areas we've championed to address the shortages in the trades is increasing familiarization and pretrades training in primary and secondary schools.

I wonder if you can share what you're seeing in the trends in that regard. Where are there some real success stories? Where are there some areas that need improvement in terms of exposing people as early as possible to the opportunities that exist in this area?

[Sean Strickland]

I would be happy to go first on that.

We've seen some tremendous results in certain provinces. For example, in Ontario, the Doug Ford government and the respective ministers of labour and training have done a fantastic job, starting about 10 years ago, of exposing people to careers in the trades. You've seen the commercials on TV, and there's a new run of commercials out there right now. I don't have the statistic right in front of me, but they have increased apprenticeship registrations in Ontario significantly. Integrating that with the secondary school system and introducing some of the opportunities in the trades through the grade school system, as was being done 50 years ago, have really helped improve trade take-up as well.

We're seeing more improvement in British Columbia. They're embarking on a system right now—the election notwithstanding—to bring back regulation to trades, and they're funding training in union training centres. Alberta is funding training through training delivery agents. We're seeing the direction of some really positive impacts from these initiatives to encourage more people to become involved in the trades at a younger age in a few provinces across the country.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I have a quick follow-up on that, and then we'll hear from Mr. Luymes.

Are your union training centres able to partner with secondary schools and bring people in, or does the training have to happen outside of that?

[Sean Strickland]

Absolutely, we have lots of union training centres. Back in the day, when I was a business manager for a local building trades council in Waterloo-Wellington, we embarked on a fantastic program with secondary schools to have young people come in and get exposed to what it would be like to weld and build a scaffold. Lots of our training centres do that across the country on a regular basis.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Excellent.

Do you want to pick up on this, Mr. Luymes?

[Martin Luymes]

I will echo the comment that there are a lot of very exciting things happening at the provincial level. We have seen commitments from different provincial governments to support the trades. I will say that this has to be backed up, not just by trying to draw kids into the industry but also by providing funding for seats in apprenticeship programs, which may not have met.... We stimulate the demand, but we haven't really followed through on making seats available.

I'll just add a quick comment. In our sector, as I indicated earlier, we draw a lot of people into the industry who have an interest but then find the system too complex. They turn away. They go into something to do with IT or whatever, because the process isn't straightforward and clear-cut enough. We need to do more to take them by the hand and walk them through the process.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I have a minute and a half left. I'm going to try to get two quick elements in.

First of all, would you support explicitly referring to the mobility of apprentices within this bill, ensuring that we do more on apprentice mobility as well?

[Sean Strickland]

CBTU would support that.

[Martin Luymes]

Yes, we would too.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Great. My impression, in talking to trades workers and different organizations, is that—not always but in many cases—shortages are more acute in trades where there is less recognition. If there's less codification or affirmation through the Red Seal program, or in other ways, there are more likely to be shortages.

I imagine part of the reason is that if there's a trade that's well-understood and well-recognized, it's easier to explain to people in your family, for instance, why you're going into that trade. If it's a less recognized or understood trade culturally, then it's a bit harder to recruit people for it. Is that your impression as well? I would love your feedback on that semi-anecdotal observation I have.

[Sean Strickland]

We need to add a caveat to apprenticeship mobility: as long as apprenticeship mobility goes to the highest standard, not to the lowest standard. That's critical.

You're right. Most people, when they think of the trades, think of a few specific trades—a carpenter, a plumber, an electrician—but there are 57 other trades. We're doing the best we can to expose young people to the variety of different trade opportunities that are out there.

The other thing is that not everyone is cut out to be a construction worker. It's bloody hard work. You have to get out of bed at six o'clock in the morning and be on the job site for seven o'clock. You work off the sweat of your brow. You have to use your brains, and you're working outside when it's -20°C and 30°C.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mr. Genuis.

Madame Koutrakis, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to our witnesses for being here with us today and for sharing your expertise.

It's been really informative to hear the experience—

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

I have a point of order.

There's no interpretation.

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Can you hear me now? Excellent.

Mr. Strickland, you piqued my curiosity when you referenced in your testimony and in your response to a colleague's question earlier clause 3 of this bill. You said that consultation should be ongoing.

You're advocating for the creation of a labour supply coordinating committee. Can you walk us through how that would work and what kind of representation it would have? Who would make it up? Who would be sitting on such a coordinating committee? Can you see how that would be helpful throughout the provinces? How would it work?

[Sean Strickland]

Sure.

On the consultation part, just based on the conversation we've had today, it's going to take more than nine months. You're going to need provincial and federal co-operation. That's why we're recommending that the consultation not have a prescribed time limit on it.

In terms of a labour supply coordinating committee, I can tell you how our unionized industry works. Our IVP, our international vice-president for the electrical workers, could send out a note to all the locals across Canada and would know within a day how many workers are available, how many workers are out of work and how many workers are working. We could do that for all of our 14 different unions. We'd be able to feed that into a secretariat that could help match that up with the Major Projects Office.

For example, LNG phase two has workers on site right now. It's probably going to start peaking in Q2 next year. How many tradespeople do you need? What are the tradespeople you need at the beginning of the job? Where are you going to get them? We're going to get them mostly from British Columbia. Do we have enough supply in British Columbia? You're going to need carpenters, form workers, labourers and operating engineers for the first phase of that job. What's the labour availability in British Columbia right now for that major job, and similarly for the pipeline?

Feed that into this secretariat. Have government involvement as well, with Statistics Canada and labour market people from ESDC, so that we can have a real-time labour analysis of what workers are available through our union halls. That's going to help successfully complete these projects on time and on budget, but it doesn't happen.

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

What I'm hearing is that we need data in order to make sure that this coordinating committee would have the information that it needs in real time.

[Sean Strickland]

Yes.

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

This means buy-in from all jurisdictions.

In my previous role as parliamentary secretary to the minister of transport, during COVID, we were having a lot of challenges with the supply chains. One of the things that became quite apparent at the time was that many companies or industries didn't like to share their data. I don't know why. I don't know if it's because of competition.

Would you see it as a challenge to get that data if we were to think of putting such a coordinating committee together? It's important to be able to measure success.

[Sean Strickland]

Yes—

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

In order to be successful, we need the data. Do you think that would be possible?

[Sean Strickland]

I'm sorry. I kind of laughed there, but not out of disrespect. I laughed because unions don't like to share their data either.

There's a difference now if it's tied to a job. In our union halls, we've experienced multiple times the promise of a job. Let's say a business manager needs to bring in 100 more apprentices this year because there's a big job coming, so the business manager brings in the apprentices. The job doesn't come. What happens to those apprentices? We lose them. They go elsewhere.

However, if you have this tied to a job and you have these major projects and all this other infrastructure tied into this coordinating committee, I'm pretty sure we'll get the data.

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

There was another thing that piqued my curiosity. You said that the Red Seal certification program needs to be tweaked but not overhauled. What does that mean?

If we don't have enough time, I'd be—

[Sean Strickland]

I'm happy to follow up.

Some of the examples that Martin and I have given are around how certain trades are recognized in some jurisdictions. Not all trades are Red Seal trades. Why aren't they Red Seal trades?

In the testing process, there are things at the edges that need to happen to improve the Red Seal system, but overall, generally it works. It works quite well. We're really happy to have a Red Seal system in Canada. The alternative is much worse in terms of moving workers across the country and having them comply with different jurisdictions and their requirements for hours, licensing, etc. The Red Seal works.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Madam Koutrakis. That concludes our first hour.

Thanks to the witnesses for appearing and taking questions from committee members.

We'll suspend for a couple of moments while we transition.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

The committee is back in session. Order in the room, please.

I would like to welcome the witnesses for the second hour. Before I do so, for the new witnesses appearing, you have the option of participating in today's meeting in the official language of your choice. Make sure that you are on the correct channel if you're in the room, to participate in the official language of your choice.

For those here virtually, please click on the globe icon at the bottom of your Surface and choose the official language of your choice. If there is an interruption in the interpretation, please get my attention. We'll suspend while it is corrected.

I have one other point. Please direct all questions through the chair and wait until I identify you by name before proceeding.

In the second hour, we have two witnesses. We have, from Academy Canada, Lisa Lovelady, president and chief executive officer, appearing virtually. From Polytechnics Canada, Sarah Watts-Rynard, chief executive officer, is appearing in the room.

We'll begin with the opening statement by Ms. Lovelady.

You may begin with your opening statement of up to five minutes.

[Lisa Lovelady, President and Chief Executive Officer, Academy Canada]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to members of the committee, as well, for the invitation to appear today.

My name is Lisa Lovelady, and I am the president and CEO of Academy Canada.

Academy Canada is a regulated career college operating in 14 locations throughout Newfoundland and Labrador since 1985. We have graduated more than 40,000 students in over 35 programs, including skilled trades programs. We provide pre-employment training in over a dozen Red Seal trades, and we also deliver apprentice-level training. Our graduates successfully complete their Red Seal exams and have rewarding careers provincially, nationally and internationally. We are incredibly proud of their achievements.

Labour mobility is critically important to our graduates as they travel to where the work is. Before they are journeypersons, our graduates are apprentices who face additional labour mobility challenges. This is unfortunate, because it's important to retain as many apprentices as possible so that they become the next generation of journeypersons.

Academy Canada is an employer of journeyperson instructors. It's not uncommon for us to use national instructor recruitment strategies to ensure that we have journeyperson instructors to teach our programs. Sometimes, especially for low-volume trades or provincially designated trades, it can be incredibly challenging to find instructors to teach the next generation of learners. Labour mobility matters to us as employers so that we can efficiently recruit qualified instructors.

We ask that the committee take the following points under consideration on the topic of establishing a national framework respecting skilled trades and labour mobility.

One, protect multiple pathways into the trades. We ask that the framework recognize equivalent competencies achieved through apprenticeship, public colleges, private career colleges, prior learning, and other legitimate pathways. Harmonization should not inadvertently turn one training model into the national default.

Two, harmonize outcomes before inputs. Equivalency should be determined primarily through demonstrable occupational competencies and learning outcomes. Requirements concerning training hours, sequencing, delivery methods and other inputs should be imposed only where they are necessary for safety.

Three, make credential recognition work for apprentices, not only certified journeypersons. Mobility problems occur before certification as well. A student who completes training in Newfoundland and Labrador and subsequently moves to Ontario should have a transparent way of knowing what training and competencies will be credited rather than potentially repeating education.

Four, do not equate harmonization with additional layers of centralized assessment. Where a provincially or territorially accredited or approved institution delivers an agreed curriculum and demonstrates that a student has achieved the prescribed competency through valid theory and practical assessments, those results should be trusted. Independent national assessment has an appropriate role for certification, but governments should demonstrate a clear educational safety or mobility benefit before imposing additional high-stakes examinations at every stage of training.

Five, create portable records of competencies. The framework could establish a common digital record showing competencies completed, assessments passed, technical training and recognized work experience.

Six, give training institution administrators a formal role in implementation. It is very good that we are consulted now, and training providers must also have a seat at the table for implementation. We have practical perspectives that will contribute to solutions that governments, regulators, unions, instructors and employers might miss.

Academy Canada strongly supports the goal of improving labour mobility for skilled tradespeople and apprentices across Canada. As you consider this framework, I encourage you to acknowledge provincially and territorially authorized training providers, properly assess the learning they deliver, recognize the competencies that apprentices have already demonstrated, preserve multiple pathways into the trades and ensure that mobility works for apprentices and journeypersons.

Before we make any requirement part of a national framework, we should ask this question: Can we demonstrate how it improves competency, safety or labour mobility? Including training provider administrators as well as instructors in ongoing conversations with other stakeholders will provide a fulsome answer to this critically important question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Lovelady.

Next is Madam Watts-Rynard from Polytechnics Canada, for up to five minutes, please.

[Sarah Watts-Rynard, Chief Executive Officer, Polytechnics Canada]

Thank you for the invitation to provide testimony to support your study of Bill C-266.

I represent an association that is made up of Canada's public polytechnics and institutes of technology. These institutions deliver hands-on training and experiential learning to nearly half of the college population.

While polytechnics offer training in occupations well beyond the skilled trades, my members are responsible for delivering apprenticeship technical training across 49 Red Seal skilled trades and countless other provincially recognized skilled trades. Each year, 70% of apprentices who are actively progressing towards certification attend a polytechnic institution to do so.

As Canada moves ahead on major projects, builds its energy infrastructure and increases the availability of housing, skilled tradespeople will play a critical role. As the Canadian Armed Forces seeks to grow their numbers, trade skills are also top of mind. This puts a lot of pressure on an already constrained system to attract Canadians to skilled trades careers and ensure they get high-quality training in a timely way and are able to complete their certification efficiently.

Virtually every sector of the economy relies on the trades—advanced manufacturing, mining, energy and transportation, to name a few—and finding enough workers with the right skills in the right place at the right time is a persistent challenge. This is why, despite major investments in apprenticeship, labour mobility remains a priority. As you consider the benefits of a national framework for labour mobility in the skilled trades, there are several items to consider.

Beginning in 2013, the Canadian Council of Directors of Apprenticeship began efforts to harmonize apprenticeship training in Red Seal trades. This effort was designed to improve mobility before certification, increase completion rates and expand access by harmonizing such things as training hours and levels of training. Content sequencing, for example, was designed to enable apprentices to move between jurisdictions. This effort is substantially complete and started more than 13 years ago.

There have also been advances to recognize certifications across Canada's provinces and territories. An interprovincial agreement was signed in August 2026 to ensure that skilled trade certifications from other jurisdictions are recognized within 30 days of application. This is a significant change for tradespeople and business owners because it essentially eliminates the need for lengthy recertification processes outside of the Red Seal program. A 30-day standard enables an employer to hire tradespeople from other jurisdictions much more efficiently.

These efforts show that Canada is working to address the long-standing challenge of labour mobility in the skilled trades, and as you consider Bill C-266, I'm pleased to offer a couple of thoughts.

While labour mobility solutions have been put in place, there is little to no certainty that they will have the desired impact. This framework could act as a series of checks and balances to assess what's working well, where labour shortages persist and what additional measures might be required.

There is undoubtedly a federal role to ensuring that apprentices and certified tradespeople can apply their skills to projects of national interest and in workplaces across the country. This is even more important as long-term projects get under way and search for talent that is, frankly, already in short supply. There need to be ways to assess how substantive federal investments in the skilled trades are playing out across the country.

Somewhat beyond the scope of this bill but important to delivering on its spirit is data. There's an opportunity to develop much richer data about the skilled trades. For example, the registered apprenticeship information system offers a delayed snapshot of registrations and completions, but information about what happens midstream is missing, and there's simply no way to be sure why apprentices stall and drop out. A framework that requires regular reporting may prompt better data collection and a broader understanding of how we can support trades training and labour mobility.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Watts-Rynard.

We'll now begin our six-minute opening round of questioning with Mr. Genuis.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to both of our witnesses. Both of you represent institutions that are key parts of the trades training ecosystems. We need to recognize the critical role played by polytechnics and by private career colleges.

It's my view that there has been a lack of recognition and appreciation on the part of the government of the role played by these kinds of institutions. We see this in various aspects of government policy.

I'm going to start with you, Ms. Watts-Rynard. I know you had some comments after the last federal budget about proportions and where funding has been directed. I wonder if you can speak to the role of polytechnics and some of the concerns you've had in the past about decisions the government has made with respect to supporting or not supporting polytechnics in Canada.

[Sarah Watts-Rynard]

Really, I think our main challenge, particularly if we're talking about the skilled trades, is that the federal government has not necessarily recognized the critical role that public institutions play in training. A lot of funding has gone in the way of union training, another important piece of the training infrastructure, but we've sort of left it to the provinces and territories to figure out the training infrastructure. We're not going to be able to get the workforce we need without these institutions all playing the same role of moving folks into the workforce.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Could you just quickly comment on the research funding issue as well?

[Sarah Watts-Rynard]

The research funding issue is something different. Certainly, we see a large portion, 97% of all federal funding in research, going to the university sector, and very little going to institutions that play a critical role in bringing industry R and D into commercialization.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

More recently, we've heard members of the government say verbally some good things about addressing inequalities, stigmas and issues around the perception of trades work. In terms of funding and specific decisions of the government, it seems that there are still a lot of gaps in policy.

You've spoken to the perspective of the public institution. I'll turn now to Ms. Lovelady. I had the honour of touring an Academy Canada facility just last week, facilitated by MP Carol Anstey, who's been a great champion of Academy Canada in particular. She highlighted the important role in Newfoundland and Labrador played by your institution and the reality when you have government policies moving against private career colleges: Where does the government expect young people who want to study in the trades to go? You're the ones on the ground who are providing this training.

In the last budget, we saw a decision of this government—one that this committee wanted to see reversed but hasn't yet been reversed—that denies student grant funding to students attending institutions like yours. If you go to a university for any program, you are eligible for a student grant, but if you go to a private career college, the government is saying that, outside of a few narrow exceptions, you're not eligible for that grant anymore.

I wonder if you could speak to that policy and the impact it could have on trades training.

[Lisa Lovelady]

The issue regarding access to Canada student grants would impact students completing training of a longer duration than our trades programs. It's not a direct hit, I would say, on students who choose to do our pre-employment trades, which tend to be around 37 weeks in duration. However, we are actively applying for the exemptions for the 14 programs we have for students who would be impacted and miss out. We're prepared to put the work in to ensure that they have access to the same types of grants that they would receive if they were to go to our public college, with which we are partners.

Funding is best if it follows the student in all training institutions that are approved and rigorously regulated by the provinces. We work really hard to make sure that we're providing quality education and that students have a great experience. If they need assistance securing work afterwards, we're here to help them as well.

We're also excluded from many of these funding opportunities that the union trade schools enjoy. We're partners with our locals as well.

I would like to point out that in Newfoundland and Labrador, the union trade schools, the public college and Academy Canada all offer the exact same programming. It's a provincial plan of training. My welder program is identical to the welder programs at the public or union training schools. It's governed under the same private training act and regulations as the union training schools.

It is tough when you see opportunities pass you by because you don't qualify to bid on them. However, we persevere, and many of our employers are driving apprenticeships because they're not part of the big projects. They're working on going to people's homes and fixing their electrics or plumbing. When the big projects come looking for JPs, our students have come up through apprenticeship systems and through small and medium businesses that hire our graduates, so we do make an impact, and we're happy to do so.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mr. Genuis and Ms. Lovelady.

Mr. Joseph, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Natilien Joseph, Liberal, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank the witnesses and all my colleagues here.

I'm a refrigeration service engineer myself. I have a diploma of vocational studies, or DVS, which I received in France a long time ago. When I arrived here in Quebec, I too faced mobility-related barriers. In 2007, French Prime Minister Manuel Valls even came to Quebec and concluded an agreement with Quebec on mutual credential recognition. At one point, I decided to move on to something else. That's not what we want for Albertans or Ontarians who want to go and work in Quebec. We want them to be able to.

In the first panel, we talked a lot about needs, but we also talked about benefits. I know there are benefits for workers. I'm not an expert in that, but you are. Can you list the benefits for workers? We need to talk about that. I know they exist, but what are they?

[Sarah Watts-Rynard]

I was listening in on the previous panel, so I followed the conversation around the differences in the labour markets in each province and territory and the challenges those have. The reason that people leave the trades is often that the work is not consistent. That has everything to do with the economic cycle. When somebody is unable to work in their occupation—this is well beyond the skilled trades, but it's certainly true here—and a project ends and that opportunity is finished, we want to find another place to apply those skills. The importance to workers is consistent employment and the ability to go where their skills are required, rather than facing a situation where their certifications are not recognized and their skills are perhaps not recognized and then they're put in a position of having to decide that maybe they should do a different kind of work.

This is one of the really big challenges we have, particularly with apprentices. Getting them their very first job is fantastic, but if we don't think about progression and completion, we will lose people. We'll be stuck at a 50% completion rate and still be talking about the real constraints when it comes to a sufficient number of workers to undertake the projects that need to be undertaken.

[Natilien Joseph, Liberal, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

I know we need to make the transition easier, simpler and faster. What could be done, Ms. Watts‑Rynard?

[Sarah Watts-Rynard]

I like the idea of there being solid data on what trades are required in what major projects. I don't believe it is possible for us to develop a sufficient number of people to take care of Canadian Armed Forces requirements, to take care of housing requirements and to take care of major projects. The reality is that the number of workers we need is astronomical, but the requirement is not to have all of those people in one place at one time. The solution is understanding and trying to put in place systems that recognize where the requirement is, who's available and then how we can support mobility.

[Natilien Joseph, Liberal, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Ms. Lovelady, I know that the government has a role to play and will definitely continue to play it.

What role can digital tools and apprenticeship registries play in job skills recognition and worker mobility?

[Lisa Lovelady]

It's becoming what is expected. My daughter is a first-year electrical apprentice. We had to pick up her logbook, and it was paper. She's taking that to the job site, and she needs to get her hours signed off on it. I asked her, “What do you think about that, that you have a paper logbook?” She said, “Well, I just hope I don't lose it, get it dirty or somehow accidentally destroy it.” She's 18 years old, and it was strange to her that this wasn't digital so she could access it on her phone and take it with her wherever she goes.

I too have lived experience with credential recognition. I taught at a post-secondary school in England for five years, and my Canadian teaching credentials weren't recognized. I had to challenge exams and recertify.

The more portable your credentials are, the easier everything becomes, so you're not having to keep track of all the bits of paper and make sure that everything is in one place. Anything we can do to make it easier for the apprentice, the journeyperson and the employer will help with efficiency and productivity.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mr. Joseph.

[Natilien Joseph, Liberal, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Ms. Larouche, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank both witnesses for helping us consider this bill.

Ms. Lovelady and Ms. Watts‑Rynard, you do important education work with your respective organizations, Academy Canada and Polytechnics Canada. Naturally, I listened carefully to what you said. In Quebec, we are working hard on the education system, which falls under the jurisdiction of the National Assembly.

I'm going to ask you a question, but first I'd like to hear your thoughts on the initial reactions to Bill C‑5 last spring, I believe, when we were talking about the labour issue. Back then, we were saying that we wanted to improve labour mobility between the provinces and Quebec.

At the time, Quebec's minister responsible for Canadian relations and labour initially reacted by saying that he wanted to defend jurisdictions and ensure that the federal government did not encroach on Quebec's. Let me remind you that labour, like education, also falls under Quebec's jurisdiction. However, in his opinion, we also had to avoid duplication, an aspect that we haven't discussed much here. He insisted that federal training funds be channelled through existing structures and bilateral agreements between Quebec and Canada, for example, and that programs not be created that might duplicate existing services.

Ms. Watts‑Rynard and Ms. Lovelady, from an education standpoint, could such a bill create duplication?

[Sarah Watts-Rynard]

There's always a risk of duplication, but when you are trying to undertake projects of national interest, it is important to think from a federal perspective. It is about Canadians being able to move to different parts of the country at different times to undertake work. In all cases, education is the jurisdiction of the provinces, and I'm very happy to see the provinces working together on things like certification recognition across the country. That has not always been the case, but in our reality, we have to be able to move east to west in a way that is efficient. That is where the federal government can play a role, not to duplicate responsibility for education, but to ensure that certifications are recognized and movement of people is not constrained by borders.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Do you have anything to add, Ms. Lovelady, on the risk of duplication?

[Lisa Lovelady]

Yes. Thank you.

It's incredibly important. The constitutional ability of provinces and territories to be responsible for education is paramount. The framework would not have to worry about duplication if it's focused more on a common language guidance, providing a national overview while respecting the provinces' and territories' responsibilities of overseeing education. I think it can be designed in such a way that it would be in concert with rather than a duplication of what we have in place. It would have to be intentionally designed, absolutely.

It's critically important. In Newfoundland and Labrador, there are seven members of Parliament representing the province. If control of education goes to the federal level, I worry about what that might do in terms of the decisions being made that impact us that may be solving a problem in another part of the country but are actually creating problems for us here at home. That's my biggest fear with things like that.

I do support a framework, though, for a common language. The Red Seal trades are less of a problem, in my experience, in terms of trying to recruit and hire qualified instructors. It's when we have blue seal. In Newfoundland and Labrador, blue seal doesn't mean the business courses; a blue seal means a provincially designated trade. I have been through the ringer trying to secure a power sport technician instructor to teach my students on a first nations reserve. We succeeded. It was incredibly challenging because of the labour mobility issues that we faced, but we got there in the end.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

You find it hard to recruit people in some cases.

We also heard about the issue of the bill's timelines, which may be too short to allow for effective implementation. Ms. Watts‑Rynard or Ms. Lovelady, in a few seconds, can you tell me if this is something that worries you?

[Sarah Watts-Rynard]

Efficient implementation is going to be incredibly critical.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Larouche.

Ms. Falk, go ahead for five minutes.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake, SK]

Thank you very much, Chair.

I want to thank both of our witnesses for taking the time to be here.

Trades work is very important work, as it is everything. It is our infrastructure. If we're going to talk about building infrastructure in this country, we must have the labour force to do that.

I want to touch on something that Ms. Lovelady brought up. I represent a rural neck of the woods, but oil and gas and ag are very prominent, and those are trades all over. A lot of the time, students where I live will travel three hours to the biggest centre to go to school, but it gets a little more complicated when you have rural and remote areas, especially for first nations.

A lot of our colleges, especially in Saskatchewan, are trying to keep people close to home, especially when people are going back to trade school. A lot of times, they have started life already. They got a degree and found out they couldn't get a job with the degree they went to school for. Now they are going to a trade school. There are some of the social aspects that have to be taken into consideration so that students have access to school.

I wanted to touch on that because it's an important point that I think the committee should keep in mind.

I want to ask both of you, since you're both in education, what apprenticeship completion rates look like.

I'll start with you, Ms. Watts-Rynard.

[Sarah Watts-Rynard]

Completion rates depend on the trade and depend on the region, but if you look overall, completion is about 50%.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake, SK]

Ms. Lovelady.

[Lisa Lovelady]

I'll build on that.

If you need to have your journeyperson status in order to pull a permit—i.e., you're an electrician—there's more pressure to achieve your journeyperson status if you want to have your own business and have that ability to do these different types of work. Other trades that don't have that extra push behind them tend to have lower completion rates. It matters what certification gets you.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake, SK]

Would you say those would be the biggest reasons for completion not happening?

[Lisa Lovelady]

Is that for me?

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake, SK]

Yes. Sorry. I'm just following up on your answer.

[Lisa Lovelady]

Well, as to the biggest reasons for completion rates not happening, I would love to see data on that. I have a theory. We're part of the Atlantic harmonization project. A lot of it has been very good. However, I worry a lot about students having to write what's called “level exams”. They come into a public college like Academy Canada or a union trade school and do their apprentice level. They pass all the courses, and then they have to take an external multiple-choice exam before they can advance. Those exams are a barrier. If they're not really well written and it's a high-stakes exam happening midstream in their apprenticeship process, as an educator I don't support it. It's a risk for completion, in my opinion, but I don't have access to data to prove it.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake, SK]

That's interesting. I took my power engineering. It was interesting, because all our exams were actually multiple-choice.

[Lisa Lovelady]

Yes. That's right.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake, SK]

Multiple-choice can be written in a very interesting way that may or may not be helpful. I would notice that just within those circles, when I was going to school, this was a barrier. Not everybody thinks that way when it comes to multiple-choice, as opposed to doing a written explanation: “Here's your question and you can write it out.”

[Lisa Lovelady]

Ideally, authentic assessment for trades work is practical assessment. That's not always realistic. The Red Seal examination is multiple-choice. I don't really have an issue with any of that. For me, it's the multiple-choice external exams they have to write between their apprenticeship levels. That is the one that breaks my heart. When students complete level four, they have to write the level exam, and then a couple of weeks later they have to write their journeyperson exam. It's just testing people to death, in my opinion.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake, SK]

Ms. Watts-Rynard, do you have any insight into why completion is only about 50%?

[Sarah Watts-Rynard]

As I said, it depends on the trade and the region, but by far the biggest issue is continuous employment.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake, SK]

I'm sorry, Chair. Can I ask one quick follow-up?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

You can ask a quick follow-up.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake, SK]

Which regions in the country have lower completion?

[Sarah Watts-Rynard]

It depends on the trade.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake, SK]

Okay. It's trade-specific.

[Sarah Watts-Rynard]

If you think about an oil well driller in Alberta, that's a 6% completion rate. An electrician is generally in the 80% range.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake, SK]

Wow. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

It's a good question. It would be good to see if we could get an analysis from across the country.

The promoter of the bill, Mr. Bains, will now have five minutes for questions.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Richmond East—Steveston, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to my colleagues for giving me an opportunity to join the HUMA committee and ask some questions.

My first question is for Ms. Watts-Rynard.

As the sponsor of the bill, I'd like to thank you for your hard work, your ultimate support of the trades in general and your outspoken support for the spirit of this bill.

The bill specifically identifies training and educational institutions as stakeholders in the development of the framework. What role should colleges and polytechnics play in harmonizing standards across Canada?

[Sarah Watts-Rynard]

When we think about any institution, there is a sense, particularly in the skilled trades, that the curriculum is determined at a provincial level and there are differences across the country. There is a real opportunity to think about the trainers. We have instructors who have come from industry and who themselves have a Red Seal certification or a certification in a trade. They have a sense of what makes sense to do first, what makes sense to do second and how those things build on each other. If we put that expertise to work, we'd really have a system that would allow for us to build on best practices across the country, which is not something we worry too much about right now.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Richmond East—Steveston, BC]

In which trades are you currently experiencing the greatest challenges with interprovincial mobility and why?

[Sarah Watts-Rynard]

I haven't looked at data with regard to interprovincial mobility for a while. I'm hopeful that the interprovincial agreement to put in place a 30-day opportunity for someone to apply to move between provinces will take away some of the friction. I wouldn't be able to say a trade in particular. I know that apprentices do have a hard time moving between provinces. That work has only been done in the Red Seal trades.

To the point made in the earlier panel, not all trades are Red Seal trades. We have to think about what the demand is and then how we actually try to overcome that.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Richmond East—Steveston, BC]

You spoke a lot about data. Within this framework, there is an opportunity to generate data collection. That's some of the work you're hopeful for. You also talked about the varying curricula. Questions have arisen about how long certification or recertification can take.

Can you shed some light on the gaps between interprovincial mobility and having to recertify? How long can that duration be?

[Sarah Watts-Rynard]

The nominal period of most trades is four years. It can already take up to eight years for somebody to complete in their trade. That is in part because there are gaps in employment. You're sitting at home waiting for another job to come up. In part it's because you're waiting for a trade school.

One thing I would say about the efficiency of the system is that we really don't know where there's a seat available in another school that could move people forward more quickly. That's not something we do. If there is a major project in British Columbia, for example, and we have a high need for plumbers, it is possible that trade school is not available when somebody is ready to progress in their trade, but that isn't to say that there are no plumbing seats available in any other parts of the country.

I'd like to see a much more streamlined system. This is a place where data could play a role, not just in terms what projects are coming up and what we're going to need, but also in terms of efficiency and efficient movement through the education system.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Richmond East—Steveston, BC]

The efficiency of mobility to train would also be an effective thing.

[Sarah Watts-Rynard]

Yes.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Richmond East—Steveston, BC]

How much time do I have, Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

You are over by three seconds, Mr. Bains.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Richmond East—Steveston, BC]

Okay. Thank you so much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

That was good questioning. Thank you.

Ms. Larouche, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Thank you, again, to both witnesses for being here today.

Ms. Watts‑Rynard and Ms. Lovelady, I'm going to ask you a question about another aspect of the bill that you may have had a chance to think about.

Clause 6 of the bill provides that a committee of the House or Senate shall undertake a review of the national framework that would be created by the act within five years of its coming into force.

In your opinion, what criteria should be looked at in five years to assess whether the national framework is working well and whether the objectives have been met? Have you thought about the criteria this committee could look at?

[Sarah Watts-Rynard]

In my view, we should be assessing success in moving people to where they are required and in seeing apprentices and tradespeople less often collecting unemployment insurance and less often sitting and waiting on an out-of-work list for another opportunity that's being offered. Efficiency is what I would be looking for the framework to collect and report on.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

What do you think, Ms. Lovelady? What criteria could we look at in five years to evaluate the legislation and determine whether we're going in the right direction or not?

[Lisa Lovelady]

I would build on the previous comments. I agree with that.

It would be excellent if we could also have criteria around ensuring that Canadians know about it, with an awareness of the careers in trades and the opportunities in trades for all people, and then an awareness of the portability of those credentials. If we could increase the awareness of these things, it would increase the number of people who are trying the trades and getting involved in them in the first place, because we need more people.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Larouche.

We'll go to Mr. Reynolds for five minutes.

[Colin Reynolds, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much, witnesses, for coming here today.

As a bit of background, I mentioned in the first panel that I'm a 20-year construction electrician, and I'm also an alumnus of Red River College Polytechnic. That's where I took all my levels and got my training, so I appreciate you coming here and bringing the perspective from the polytechnic and the training side of the skilled trades.

I want to ask both of you the same question. What do you see as the biggest barrier to skilled trades mobility in Canada right now?

I'll start with you, Ms. Watts-Rynard.

[Sarah Watts-Rynard]

If I'm completely honest, I think the biggest barrier is a lack of desire among people to pick up and move across the country. I see tradespeople do this all the time. They leave their families behind, go to work and then come back. I think that will continue to be our biggest challenge.

It's not just the number of people who decide to pursue the trades and stay in the trades, but the number of people who are willing to move from one part of the country to the other, because we've built a culture of, “Stay where you are. There's going to be work around the corner for you.” That's something that, as a country, we have to be able to wrap our arms around.

[Colin Reynolds, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you.

Ms. Lovelady, could you weigh in on that?

[Lisa Lovelady]

My graduate data supports what Ms. Watts-Rynard just said.

Before 2014, we graduated many trade students, and they went to Alberta, specifically Fort McMurray, and worked in the oil sands. Some of them did hitches—they came back and forth—and other people settled in Alberta. These days, our graduates are staying closer to home, and they want to find meaningful employment in their hometowns or a commuting distance from their hometowns. By commuting, I mean in a car, not on a plane. There has been a shift in that way that I too have seen.

I want to go back to something about the Canadian Armed Forces. In terms of labour mobility, the Canadian air force recognizes our construction, industrial and electrical program as meeting the requirements for its electrical distribution occupation. Wouldn't it be amazing if people did that occupation in the air force, but were able to log their hours, and then when they decided to come back and eventually leave the forces, they were ready to go with their journeyperson status as well? That's something I'd like to see happen. I wanted to raise that here on the off chance that this framework could help address that too.

[Colin Reynolds, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

To follow up on that, Ms. Lovelady, what does a national framework look like to you?

[Lisa Lovelady]

To me, a national framework would be helping the provinces and territories act in concert without getting in the way of their responsibilities. It would be developing a common language and a better scope of what all the available trades are beyond Red Seal so that folks who are trying to make a decision about what career to choose will get a sense of what is out there in terms of the full scope. It seems a bit fragmented right now, so this type of framework as more of a maestro than an enforcer would be ideal for me to see.

[Colin Reynolds, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you.

Ms. Watts-Rynard, could you add to that as well? What does a national framework look like to you?

[Sarah Watts-Rynard]

In my view, a framework has to be about the checks and balances to really understand where we're having success in moving labour to places of shortage and moving it away from places where there's perhaps excess. That has to do with, absolutely, having a list of trades and an understanding of what's required.

A good place to start is on projects of national interest and trying to think through what trades are required at what stage, and then where we have excess and where we have a shortage. To me, the framework is a place to understand the requirements for achieving, and how successful we are at achieving, the right people in the right place at the right time.

[Colin Reynolds, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mr. Reynolds.

To conclude, we'll go to Ms. Harrison for five minutes.

[Emma Harrison, Liberal, Peterborough, ON]

Thank you to the witnesses for being here.

So many of the barriers that you're speaking about remind me of my childhood and my dad being a skilled tradesperson. He was willing to move, and he could sometimes handle the inconsistencies of work because at times he made up for that with farming. He would work seasonally in northern Alberta or northern Ontario in the winters and then come back and farm in the summer. It left a huge burden on my mother to be the person who consistently had to work in a job she maybe didn't love to have, but they needed that consistency to support the family.

I was wondering, Ms. Lovelady or Ms. Watts-Rynard, what supports you would like to see for smaller, rural, northern or private training institutions. What alignment would you need to see in programs for them to meet common standards?

[Sarah Watts-Rynard]

Lisa, do you want to go first on that?

[Lisa Lovelady]

Do you mean what alignment would I like to see in terms of common standards? Is that the question?

[Emma Harrison, Liberal, Peterborough, ON]

Yes.

[Lisa Lovelady]

Okay. Thank you.

Basically, I'm forecasting that instead of our Newfoundland and Labrador-trained workers leaving, we will have to figure out the qualifications and credentials of people coming in. That is my hope.

Having a common language so that it can be done quickly without.... You want to make sure that folks are qualified, safe and able to do the work they're coming here to do. You want to make sure that, as I said, a common language is there. If you say, “This is what you're qualified to do”, what does that really mean? The names of programs can be different across the country, in different provinces and territories.

I hope that answers the question. It's just something that lets you figure out fairly quickly if this is a match or, if it's not a match, figure out pretty quickly what the upskilling requirements are to get a little adjustment to make sure you're ready for the job at hand.

[Sarah Watts-Rynard]

I'll add that skilled trades programming in particular is very expensive to deliver. Not all institutions will be able to deliver everything that is required in a given community.

There are opportunities. We have big institutions—my members among them—that are more than capable of being able to assist. When we look at an institution like the British Columbia Institute of Technology, as an example, we see that it has a provincial mandate. It can do things because it's a large institution. It has a bit more breadth and flexibility, and it's able to deliver some of the training and expertise out into more rural and remote areas, in concert with its colleague colleges across the country. We also see a number of big institutions doing things like sending out trades trailers and thinking about how they can deliver training closer to community.

Those solutions are going to be more and more important in an environment where institutions are financially strained. We have to figure out ways to be able to benefit the entirety of the system and try not to leave rural or remote institutions to carry that burden on their own. They will not be able to.

[Emma Harrison, Liberal, Peterborough, ON]

For both witnesses, if there's time, how would you say prior learning and work experience should be assessed without creating shortcuts and undermining full trade competence?

[Lisa Lovelady]

As someone who has done prior learning assessment recognition with folks, I'd say that it is a process, because you're trying to figure out if they have non-formal credentials and if all their learning has been on the job. You're trying to figure it out how their learning and what they've done compare to the curriculum you have. It's a process that involves instructors and doing the authentic assessments that I mentioned earlier.

If we're trying to figure out where they are in terms of their strengths and challenges, we get them in the shop and say, “Okay, show us what you can do.” We have assessments where we have them using the grinder or welding a bead and going through that process. It's a one-to-one or small group process. It's intensive, but it does help individuals to not have to complete the entire program. They would only do pieces of it to fill the gaps. That's been my experience with it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Harrison.

That concludes this round of questioning.

Madame Larouche, if you could stay, I have three administrative items we have to deal with.

Go ahead, Mr. Genuis.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

This is an administrative note. We don't have to make a decision, but I'll put it out there. Given that we're getting a lot of interesting recommendations from witnesses who may not all be able to contribute to amendments, I wonder if we could consider also having the analysts prepare a bit of a report separate from the bill that would contain some of the recommendations we're hearing. I don't think it makes sense to make a decision on that now, but I want to put it out there as a suggestion. Maybe we can return to it later.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

That's a good idea. There's good information coming. Remind me to deal with that.

We thank the witnesses for appearing in the second hour. You can leave at your leisure.

I have three items to deal with. We need budgets to do these studies. The clerk has circulated the following budgets.

First, Bill C-266, which we're currently doing, has an estimated budget of $7,200 attached to it. Is it approved?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

On food price inflation and the national school food program, it's $16,700, which is an estimate.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

I guess the price of food has gone up, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Yes.

Is it approved, or will we have the study with no lunches?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

On EI parental leave, it's $23,150.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Attached to that, I need a motion adopted. This was agreed to earlier. The motion reads:

That, in relation to the study on EI parental leave in Canada, the committee offer mental health support to the witnesses, and that the clerk be authorized to make the necessary arrangements, if requested.

This is similar to when we were doing the private member's bill on the premature death of a child.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

There were some instances of bereavement.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Yes, there was, and we had to deal with it midway through. I would prefer that it be dealt with now.

Is that motion adopted?

(Motion agreed to)

Our next meeting is on Thursday, October 8.

Thank you to all of you for signing the card for our long-serving analyst who was with us and has now moved on to the Senate. I went shopping for it. I got it myself. I didn't have my assistant get it.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

With that, is it the will of the committee to adjourn?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

We'll see you on Thursday. We are adjourned.