Human Resources Committee on Oct. 7th, 2025

[Heather Exner-Pirot]

That's a great chicken-and-egg question that I've seen play out in resource sectors many times. Part of it is that the sector doesn't want to grow if it doesn't think it has the skilled labour force to grow with it or if it thinks it's going to be extremely expensive to do new construction. We've seen a lack of productivity in some of the major projects that we've had out west in the last five years where the labour force was a lot more expensive, a lot slower and a lot less productive than I think was the expectation of the proponents.

So, there is a mismatch. It is a bit of a chicken-and-egg situation, I think, helping to create investment and having a line of sight on major projects being built while then, in tandem with that, trying to work with employers. They have a lot of opinions—and they're not shy about them, as I'm sure they won't be in this study—about what particular skilled trade is in that bottleneck.

I'll just give you one more example.

In Saskatchewan, with Cameco, the world's biggest publicly traded uranium company, they're doing an expansion. Uranium is a hot commodity, a hot market. They are not producing as much—this is in their disclosures. They are not able to expand as fast and produce as much because of skill shortages. It is definitely tricky.

However, I think, in general, we know that trades will be in higher demand.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Madam Desrochers.

Mrs. Gill for six minutes.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank all the witnesses for sharing their ideas and their views with the committee.

I have a lot to say, but I'd first like to address Mr. Salter and Ms. Gagnon.

As MP for the Côte‑Nord region of Quebec, I was struck when you said that part of the population, meaning young people, is having difficulty finding employment. You mentioned the Basse‑Côte‑Nord, which is also in my riding. For me, there's the whole language issue too. Since this region borders Newfoundland and Labrador, the population has very strong ties with the people of this province neighbouring Quebec. Moreover, they've essentially been English-speaking communities for 150 years.

I believe that other elements under federal jurisdiction could help young people to find jobs but also encourage them to remain at home if they wanted to. I'd like to discuss some of these elements with you.

For example, Mr. Bernard mentioned the issue of employment insurance and the social safety net. There are many seasonal workers, including young people in my region. However, they have no social safety net and face the spring gap problem. They're forced to ask themselves whether they should move away or stay in this region, where fishing is the primary industry. There are other jobs here, but it's becoming difficult.

Then there's the postal services issue. There's currently a labour dispute at Canada Post, which remains the only delivery service connecting the Basse‑Côte‑Nord to the mainland. Yes, people in the region really do use the word “mainland”. The current strike threatens postal services. For the people of the Basse‑Côte‑Nord, these services not only enable the delivery of goods, but they're also a way for small businesses to get started. For example, the coastal Cree have been working on various projects, but now they can't even get postal service.

I could also talk about airports, where the situation is the same. There's no longer any air transportation. Air Canada decided to leave the Basse‑Côte‑Nord, and even the Côte‑Nord, because it wasn't profitable enough for them. There's no federal government assistance for upgrading airports or fishing ports either. Often, these young people would like to be fishermen, above all else. But how can we transform our economy without upgrading this infrastructure?

I haven't talked about the highway yet. The Trans-Canada doesn't extend this far. People use snowmobiles in winter and boats in summer. There's a supply ship. They don't have access to air transportation, because it's too expensive.

How then do people survive in my region? They don't have EI, they don't have anything.

I'd add that there isn't a bridge either. Even the ferry depends on Newfoundland and Labrador. This province pays for a road link. It's not even the federal government who's paying.

I haven't even mentioned fishing yet, which is on top of all the other elements. The Department of Fisheries and Oceans could issue additional licences or provide resources for secondary processing in these areas, where there's incredible expertise. We could also focus on the seal industry, which employs young people. I know young fishermen and young entrepreneurs on the Basse‑Côte‑Nord, such as Michael Sheppard, who have lots of ideas.

I'd like to know one thing, Mr. Salter. You mentioned the language issue, but there are also all these issues that are really important to people in this region who want to survive, live in their region, and contribute to the economy. Do you think the government could draw inspiration from these possible solutions to help young people stay employed or even create jobs?

[Nicholas Salter, Executive Director, Provincial Employment Roundtable]

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC]

You've expressed a lot of ideas.

First, I have to say that I had a chance to visit that region a few months ago. It is absolutely worth seeing, and I urge the committee to go and get a first-hand look at the way people live there. I understand why you're so passionate when you talk about it. I've met people from there, and they are all as passionate as you are. It's an incredible place to visit. I even met some of your colleagues in your constituency office at an event hosted by the Coasters Association.

You raised a number of points concerning economic development, highway and infrastructure development, and fisheries. I'm going to focus on employment, employability and skills development. I have two things to say about that.

First, reforming the employment insurance program is essential to helping these people. The program needs to be adapted to their very specific reality.

Second, as the committee has already discussed, there is a need for technical and vocational training. One notable trend is that English-speaking Quebeckers graduate from technical and vocational training programs and work in trades at half the rate that French-speaking Quebeckers do. There is a whole cultural aspect. We really need to encourage a culture of learning and steer young people toward technical and vocational training. I met with regional groups, particularly those in the Basse‑Côte‑Nord, and they mentioned how hard it is to access these programs. The number of people who are interested in technical training is often not high enough for the institutions to be able to offer the program. Expanding access to that kind of training would really be something to look at.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Mrs. Gill and Mr. Salter.

Mrs. Falk for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Chair. I'd like to thank the witnesses for being here today.

Ms. Exner-Pirot, thank you for your comments. I'm on the west side of Saskatchewan, so Lloydminster is my home ground. I relate to a lot of what you're saying.

Building off what was said earlier, we know that Mark Carney promised to grow the economy and build Canada at unprecedented speeds, yet his government has refused to reverse anti-energy policies like Bill C-69, the shipping ban, the industrial carbon tax and emissions caps that are all driving investment away, which is what we have heard in this meeting.

Beyond the direct jobs that are in the energy sector, how does this loss of investment affect indirect employment and related industries that support those workers and those communities?

[Heather Exner-Pirot]

This is a great question, because I think sometimes people think resource extraction only serves certain places: Oil is only for Alberta, potash and uranium are only for Saskatchewan and natural gas is only for B.C. I've done some research, for example, on the oil sands, and cumulatively, the oil sands have spent a trillion dollars in Canada. About a third has gone to royalties and taxes, and some has gone to municipalities, but a very substantial amount of that has gone to manufacturing. There are hundreds of companies in Ontario, Quebec and across the rest of the country that supply the oil sands, which is a huge spender, domestically, in this country.

When you're in a period like they are in right now, where there isn't a lot of new construction and there aren't a lot of new facilities, then you don't need the steel, you don't need the aluminum and you don't need the manufactured goods—everything that those large companies require.

It's the same with mining. Again, you're manufacturing heavy equipment, which Canada is quite good at, but right now if it's harder to open up a mine, then you just don't need as much of that equipment. You don't need the construction, the camps, the catering or the transportation that goes into it. Obviously, it has tremendous impacts on the economy.

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

Those royalties and taxes obviously go into provincial or federal governments, which then can use them on our social services such as hospitals, education, etc., which would then give a better quality of life to Canadians in any part of the country. Would you agree with that?

[Heather Exner-Pirot]

Royalties accrue generally to the provinces, and they use those for health care and education in particular. Health care is obviously one of the employment categories that we need a lot more of as our population ages, and you can hire more people when the resource sector pays royalties. That is what makes them so important to provincial governments. The more royalties you have, the more staff the health care, education and social sectors can hire.

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

Thank you.

If the government continues with its current approach, what long-term effects do you foresee for Canada's energy sector and the employment prospects of young Canadians?

[Heather Exner-Pirot]

It's already having effects now, obviously, and it's been much discussed. We talk about the just transition. Certainly that talk discouraged people from going into the resource sector. We saw, for example, petroleum engineering programs shut down in Alberta. Even though this is still a sector that produces $160 billion a year, there are not enough people for a petroleum engineering program that would graduate a couple of students a year, so we're already seeing the medium-term impacts of that.

You do see a demographic bubble in the resource sector, in the trades and in construction, where obviously it is aging and you have more people in their 40s and 50s. That is the grey tsunami—and I'm sure you'll hear it from other trade associations—that we're very worried about. They're still in the workforce, but they will all soon start to retire, and no one is going to replace them. We're still a G7 country. We still have 41 million people. We're still growing at a phenomenal rate. Who is going to build that infrastructure to help us catch up on all the infrastructure gaps we have, including in housing?

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

Exactly.

What regulatory or policy changes would have the greatest impact on attracting investment and creating career opportunities for young Canadians here in Canada?

[Heather Exner-Pirot]

The best thing we can do is a hot jobs market to lower the youth unemployment rate. Things that would attract tens of billions of dollars.... I'm at the Business Council of Canada meeting here and you can see the potential, but they feel very stymied.

LNG terminals and the natural gas pipeline that is being built are big, major projects that will hire thousands of people and create lots of contracts. Bitumen pipelines from Alberta.... We already saw with Trans Mountain a very good economic analysis on how that contributed to the Alberta, B.C. and Canadian economies and how many jobs that created. We would like to build some more critical mineral mines. You need the railroads and the ports to be enhanced to sustain that, as well as transmission and power generation. If we want it, AI—

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Exner-Pirot.

Ms. Koutrakis for five minutes.

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for being here today and for your excellent testimony.

My first question is for Ms. Exner-Pirot.

My perception is that youth employment is always among the first to be hit when the economy is going through difficult times. Even though 95% of our exports to the U.S. are tariff-exempt under CUSMA, steel, aluminum, autos and forestry are being hit hard by the Trump tariffs. The uncertainty affecting Canadian businesses is also having a large impact on the economy.

Would it not be reasonable to assume that all these would hit youth unemployment first and quickly, and that the Trump tariffs explain much or most of the youth unemployment increase this year?

If any of the other witnesses would like to chime in, I'd like to hear your thoughts.

[Heather Exner-Pirot]

Those are obviously having a huge impact. I'm sure you'll hear from other witnesses about how the impact of immigration has affected youth unemployment.

I would draw from Prime Minister Carney. Those are things that are driven by the United States that we have to deal with, but there are things we can do in our own house to help ourselves. Making this country more competitive for foreign investment is something that I've heard Minister Hodgson speak about...seeking to attract, going to Europe and soon going to Asia to try to attract investment.

In talking about critical minerals and energy, we saw that when they went to Berlin, they led with—and the speeches were about—attracting more investment to energy and to critical minerals. I think that's a great strategy. I'm glad they're seeking to attract investment, but there are still things we need to do at home to improve the regulatory and policy environment, so that those foreign investors see a good business case for investing in Canada.

Hopefully, if we can unlock all that, it would help drive down youth unemployment.

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Before any other witness adds comments, I would add that this is exactly why, before we rose for the summer break, we were doing the one Canadian economy bill. It aims to ensure that we are delivering the projects that are required for good-paying jobs here in Canada.

In your response, I'm hearing that you think the current government is doing all the right things and looking in the right direction to make sure that we do create those good-paying jobs here in Canada for Canadians and our economy.

[Heather Exner-Pirot]

It's a good question. The oil and gas CEOs have written three letters. I think about 96 oil and gas CEOs have signed a letter asking for five specific policy changes. None of those policy changes have yet been made. While I think everyone in western Canada agrees that the tone is much better and prioritizing major projects is very positive, nothing has happened to unleash the capital people have out here that would make them actually be able to go to their boards and make final investment decisions saying, I have certainty that I will get a better return on investment.

I hope they also look at what industry is specifically asking for and I don't think we'll see the investment come in until they do.

[Nicholas Salter]

Madam Koutrakis, can I add something here?

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Yes, please.

[Nicholas Salter]

I do think obviously increasing investment is important in Canada, but I do think the skills mismatch piece is really important to keep in mind as well. Employers are saying there's a scarcity of the kinds of employees to meet the needs of their job requirements. When you think of what you can do at this committee, it is really important to provide youth the ability to be agile in the labour market and retrain themselves. I think that's pretty essential and very much on mission for how I understand the committee's mandate.

I know my colleague, Morgan Gagnon, also had a comment to make as well, so I want to hand it over to her and let her have a chance to speak.

[Morgan Gagnon, Director of Policy and Research, Provincial Employment Roundtable]

Thank you, Nick.

Yes, here in Quebec we have a wonderful model, through our CPMT structures, that brings together labour market groups representing industry, regions and different vulnerable workers in the labour force. I think that is a meaningful intervention that gets everybody around the table talking about the same topic. In this context, that enables us, at the provincial level, to have the interests of youth groups, of industry and of the regions, for example, come together to talk about what specific skills mismatches might look like in the region.

From our lens, when we're talking about the English-speaking community in particular, that training also always needs a linguistic component to ensure our youth are able to integrate successfully into the predominantly francophone market. That's something that's mirrored for francophone youth in the rest of Canada. It's a common thread for some immigrant youth as well, in that attention to the specific context the youth are facing and that they need addressed in order to integrate into their local labour market so that they don't, as Heather mentioned, have to move great distances. They're able to stay rooted in their communities with those supports.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Koutrakis.

Mrs. Gill for two and a half minutes.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd now like to ask Mr. Bernard a question.

I listened to your presentation at the beginning of the meeting, and I don't disagree with you on anything. It was even good to hear those words. I've wanted EI reform for years and I've been fighting—I think that's the right word—for it.

They always give us reasons why reform isn't possible. We've been waiting for 10 years, 20 even, since I used to work in other fields where people were already waiting for this reform.

Should the government move forward with the implementation of an emergency assistance measure, a bit like it did with the Canadian emergency response benefit during the COVID‑19 crisis?

How come rapid reform isn't happening? The Bloc Québécois tabled a bill on this. Is the government prepared to move forward? Has it done enough consultation? How do you explain the current situation?