Industry Committee on June 3rd, 2010

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Thank you.

When the government announced this act, it did so in a certain way. Indeed, it stated that its purpose was to protect the consumer. In reality, in my view, the consumer is going to see the additional inspection costs that the business owner is forced to absorb passed on to him. These costs are going to be passed on to the consumer.

Did the government consider a different option, for example hiring more inspectors within your organization, in order to ensure a higher inspection frequency so as to respect the targets that you have set for yourselves? If not, why?

[Gilles Vinet]

We considered all of the options in order to try and determine which model was the best. We looked at what has been done in other countries. Our conclusion is that the model proposed in the bill is the best one.

If we were to hire more inspectors to carry out this work, if that were possible, we would need at least 300 inspectors. Even in that scenario, one must realize that the cost for the industry would be quite significant. It would mean that we would inspect a greater number of gas pumps and other devices, but without any intention nor possibility of calibrating them.

It would mean that every time we found a faulty device, the merchant would have to call the service provider and have someone come out and do the calibration. We would then possibly have to go back to redo the inspection and ensure that the calibration was done properly.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

I wanted to underscore the fact that the priority, here, is not really consumer-based. From what you have just told me, the consumer was not your priority. It was other factors and other criteria.

[Gilles Vinet]

Our priority is always accurate measurement, and this is in the interest of the consumer. It is for the merchant as well, but it is for the consumer, because the consumer is the vulnerable party in the transaction.

In fact, our aim is to ensure that the devices are accurate. We have recently seen in the marketplace that there are an awful lot of devices that do not respect the legal tolerances with regard to accuracy. That is really what our purpose is.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

The way this has been outlined, I believe that, in the end, it is the consumer who will be forced to pay.

The way this was projected in terms of a communiqué--and I realize you're not the creator of the communiqué--was that consumers were being chiselled or gouged at the pump. The implication was that this was largely because of dishonesty on the part of the gas pump operators.

I would like your assessment on how much of it is due to fair wear and tear--and pumps do get out of calibration--and how much, in your opinion, would be due to tampering. Tampering, of course, is not a good idea, for a whole bunch of reasons, and it's not even in the interests of the owner.

The way the communiqué came out, it was projected as though there was a lot more tampering going on to gouge the consumer than I believe is the case. What are the statistics, in your opinion?

[Gilles Vinet]

Well, we cannot be 100% sure, but our data clearly show that the vast majority of the infractions with regard to accuracy are due to wear and tear, or negligence, such as companies not having their devices calibrated over the years. Is that fraud, or is that...? I think there's a lot of negligence and there's a lot of wear and tear.

We cannot rule out that there are definitely some cases where some cheating is going on. Now, is it the majority? No, it is definitely not the majority of the errors.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Mr. Vinet and Mr. Garneau.

We still have 25 minutes to go in the meeting. If it is the wish of the committee to hear more questions and comments, we are free to continue. It is your call.

Are there other committee members wishing to ask questions? Very well.

We'll continue. I know there are certain members who want to adjourn just before 11 o'clock because of the briefing that's to be held at that time on Bill C-28 and C-29.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

If all members of the committee want to adjourn, I'd be fine with that. I have some more questions, but it's up to....

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Okay.

Mr. Masse.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I have a couple of quick questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Okay, so we'll continue. We'll continue with Mr. Lake, and we'll get to everybody.

Mr. Lake.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

I disagree with Mr. Garneau's characterization of the communiqué, and I want to get that on record. There was certainly some discussion that said chiselling, or whatever you want to call it, was not okay. But I don't think it was ever said that this was the entire problem.

Certainly, though, there's concern when we see that a far greater percentage of the inaccuracy is weighted towards the retailer as opposed to the consumer. I think Canadians would be concerned about that, and we saw after the original report that this was the case. Whether that was because someone was cheating the system or because they were being negligent in fixing their inaccurate pumps, which might have been purposely negligent in some cases, we don't know. You might not tamper with a pump, but you might know a pump is inaccurate. We have to figure out what the situation is.

At the end of the day, Canadian consumers should get what they're paying for. Through the consultations, if I'm not mistaken, it seems that the retailers have agreed with that right off the bat. It's in the retailers' interest to ensure that Canadian consumers are getting what they paid for. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the retailers themselves, to their credit, have recognized that this is an issue, and have said as part of the consultation that it needs to be corrected.

[Alan Johnston]

In our consultations, we found that the retailers supported mandatory reinspection periods—two years for gas pumps, one year for propane—depending on compliance rates. So you're correct.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

Right, and that's to the retailers' credit.

I want to chat a bit about the recognized technicians again. We've talked a lot about this situation. Taking up Mr. Masse's point, there's been some conversation over the last couple of days about the number of inspectors in different regions. To me that illustrates more about the problem we're trying to solve than it does about what this bill is going to do. If I'm not mistaken, the bill will take measures to correct that. Because of this bill, there will be a demand created for these technicians because the retailers have to have their pumps inspected. This demand should follow population patterns across the country. Where there are gas stations, which is everywhere, there will need to be inspectors. Am I correct?

[Alan Johnston]

You're correct. We now have a certain number of inspectors trying to cover the marketplace. There's no requirement for reinspections under the Weights and Measures Act. What we're looking at is supplementing the inspectors, operating under the act, with these recognized technicians. We will have much greater marketplace coverage. We'll have regular re-inspections of these devices, which should improve the overall compliance of these devices in the marketplace.

We're going to be working to improve marketplace coverage through the use of these private sector technicians. This will improve measurement accuracy in Canada. Keep in mind that we will continue to do marketplace monitoring--that is, random inspections of the marketplace--and we will also be the sole agent responsible for taking enforcement action under AMPS or taking cases to court.

[Mike Lake, Conservative, Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB]

I'm sympathetic to some of the concerns that some of the members of the committee have had regarding the role of these recognized technicians. I think there are some good questions there. Who inspects the inspectors? Give us a little more detail, if you could, on that part of the program. I think those are fair questions that are being asked.

[Alan Johnston]

I'll defer this one to Sonia.

[Sonia Roussy]

I think I've described the qualification process at length. It requires quite a few steps and hurdles, if we can call them that, to actually become recognized.

Once recognized, we have what we refer to as audit teams in each of our regions. We have some 26 people who are full-time auditors at Measurement Canada, and their job is to follow up on the work that is done by these recognized technicians. Our random inspectors also assist in that process, and we do follow-ups in terms of surprise visits to where these technicians have been. We perform an inspection as if we're there for the first time, and can compare our results to their results to ensure that the work they have done is adequate.

So far, because there has been little incentive for these kinds of technicians, we have 68 of them across the country, hired by 26 organizations. We believe that with the passage of the bill we would have many more, which would help with the competition and the pricing between the technicians.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Thank you, Madame Roussy and Mr. Lake.

Monsieur Cardin.

[Serge Cardin, Bloc, Sherbrooke, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Earlier, you seemed to say that temperatures could have an impact on the workings of these devices. However, I always thought that temperatures could also have an impact on volumes as well. That being the case, if a deviation did creep in, how important would it be?

[Gilles Vinet]

Earlier, when I talked about temperatures, I rather had in mind the impact on the mechanics involved, but you are right: the temperature has an impact on the volume of any liquid, including gasoline. In Canada, the great majority of gas pumps are corrected to 15 degrees, which means that the variation in temperature is taken into account. Therefore, as far as measurement is concerned, no matter what the temperature, consumers will always get a fair measurement.

[Serge Cardin, Bloc, Sherbrooke, QC]

That is what the little sticker says, in other words that the mechanism rectifies...

[Gilles Vinet]

The pumps correct the effect of the temperature, such that temperature variations cannot change the quantity received.

[Serge Cardin, Bloc, Sherbrooke, QC]

You were saying earlier that there have not been very many charges laid. We can therefore quite easily presume, especially in the case of gas retailers, given the fact that the volume is not that high, that there are perhaps few retailers with bad intentions and wishing to defraud people. In fact, the deviation or the correction at the pump would have to be rather sizeable in order for it to be a paying proposition. The retailer or the corner store owner is not going to start playing around with that. In brief, the problem is mainly mechanical: breakage can occur more quickly than normal or be brought about by insufficient maintenance.

Lastly, the monetary penalties that you want to impose are more aimed at instilling fear in people. One would really have to act in very bad faith in order to be handed a certain penalty. There is great potential — like what you call “transaction": the minister may provide a partial reduction or the complete cancellation of a penalty.

This leads me to the matter of review by the minister. If someone is facing a fine, he or she may contest it. One may, before the minister, invoke the principle of the balance of probabilities: the minister could determine whether or not there has been a violation on a balance of probabilities. What does that mean?

[Gilles Vinet]

You are talking about the issue of monetary penalties. At present, the only mechanism is the laying of charges. In fact, our aim is to ensure compliance. That means that if cases of non-compliance arise, we wish to have a progressive application of the law. It is an important tool allowing us to impose fines in cases of negligence or inaccurate devices. However, in very serious cases, we would lay charges.

In those cases where administrative monetary penalties would be imposed, there would be mechanisms for appeal, which are written into the act. In such cases, certain circumstances are taken into account.

We have consulted other departments that have used this administrative monetary penalty approach. And based on our experience, there are very few appeals. The purpose of the administrative penalties is to give a clear message to retailers, namely that they have made a mistake and that they will receive a penalty but will not have a criminal record. Most of the time, it would appear that people pay, get the message and comply.

The law provides mechanisms for those wishing to appeal. This is therefore one of the mechanisms you mentioned and which allow people to defend their point of view.