Industry Committee on April 22nd, 2021

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Thank you very much, MP Erskine-Smith.

I apologize. You're over time.

Mr. Lemire, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Généreux has told us that he currently has a successor wanting to take over from him. For the sake of our work, I sincerely hope that he's not talking about his political successor. We will have to keep an eye on that.

I'll continue with the Fédération des chambres de commerce du Québec. Globally, international agreements are made up of countless laws, regulations, measures, standards or clauses, to the point where it is difficult for entrepreneurs to properly evaluate them and grasp all the possible benefits.

What strategy do you think the federal government could develop with Quebec and Canadian entrepreneurs to increase their capabilities and the competitiveness of industries and businesses in the face of global competition?

[Philippe Noël]

This is a very good point. In fact, we feel that many businesses could benefit from international markets, but are missing out on opportunities because of the regulatory and legislative complexity surrounding the rules of free trade agreements. That's an important fact.

We expect the federal government to do a better job of promoting the business opportunities arising from trade agreements. In general, we've observed that large companies are very knowledgeable about global trade issues, but exporting or potentially exporting SMEs are unfortunately often reluctant to go into international markets for fear that it is too complex. If they had the knowledge and support of the federal government, among others, they could benefit greatly from better growth in their activities.

So it's a bit of a missed target in that there has been an increase in the number of free trade agreements, including the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement, or CETA, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, or CPTPP, and, of course, the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement, or CUSMA.

Still, 28% of the Quebec economy is linked to the production of goods and services for export markets, and this rises to 45% if we include other Canadian markets. So there are opportunities to increase this, but the federal government must conduct a better information campaign.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

You have mentioned one of the costliest administrative burdens for businesses, namely the tax return. Apart from the single tax return, what are the possible solutions that would be available to our entrepreneurs to reduce this administrative burden?

[Philippe Noël]

I will let my colleague, Mr. Lavigne, answer this question.

[Mathieu Lavigne]

I see that we only have 30 seconds left.

For example, in Quebec, the government has mobilized economic associations to develop an action plan for regulatory relief that includes concrete measures, a clear timetable and quantified measures. Thus, everyone is mobilized around this objective, and there is public accountability.

We were hearing earlier from the Treasury Board officials, who are doing some work in this regard. However, we need to mobilize with economic associations to get a clear plan.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

We also need to have stability.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Thank you very much.

The next round of questions goes to MP Masse. You have two and a half minutes.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Ms. Tiessen, you mentioned the Rogers-Shaw takeover or merger—whatever it's characterized as. If that were a foreign acquisition, the Investment Canada Act would have some provisions—although they're very weak in enforcement, as we've seen with Stelco—and other types of legislative requirements. Following up and enforcing them is rather complicated, but at least there is something there.

We're getting a lot of promises and suggestions of things that will happen, but at the end of the day, the reality is.... Is it really left to collective agreements to enforce job protection with that type of a merger or an acquisition?

[Kaylie Tiessen]

I'll just reiterate that we need as many tools in the tool box as possible to make sure that these types of mergers and acquisitions don't negatively affect the labour market. Collective bargaining is one extremely important tool, and the use of the Competition Act in order to make sure that the merger doesn't have that negative affect is another important tool. Together, we can make sure workers are not impacted in a negative way, and that would be the case—

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

We heard some of that with the efficiency defence. Are you familiar with that in the Competition Act? We've heard a lot about it, but I want to hear more in terms of almost a universal agreement that this is antiquated and counter to collective agreements as well as competition.

[Kaylie Tiessen]

Yes. In general, what happens is that as long as a company can prove it will experience more savings or additional profit than the equal or value of the damage that would be done to the Canadian economy through that anti-competitive behaviour, then automatically the merger is approved. What happens is that the benefit to corporations gets put above, or gets a higher level of power, than what might actually happen to workers, and that's just something that's not acceptable.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you for your answers.

I see the yellow sign, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Thank you so much, MP Masse.

We'll now go to MP Dreeshen. You have the floor for five minutes.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer—Mountain View, AB]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

I really wasn't going to go here, but Mr. Erskine-Smith mentioned plant-based proteins and so on. I guess if the concern is about simulated chicken nuggets and where that's going to lead people in the future, I think it's important that.... Vegan ideas and vegan thoughts are great, but promotion at the expense of other industries is not great. We need a few beef animals out there to manage these millions of acres that we have of grazing land. Anyway, I just thought I would start off with that.

I guess if we want to talk about regulations, maybe we should take a look at oil sands reclamation, because these are regulations that have been in place for years. Here's what one of them says, that 100% of land must be reclaimed:

The Government of Alberta requires that companies remediate and reclaim 100 percent of the land after the oil sands have been extracted. Reclamation means that land is returned to a self-sustaining ecosystem with local vegetation and wildlife.

If anybody has ever gone there, they will see what that is all about. I think that's important. Maybe, as we discuss that here on Earth Day, keep that in mind. We can also think about the 19 square miles of mined land in China that is there for solar panel production and about the rare earth minerals in Africa that are being dug out by children for battery development. These are the things that we're going to have to think about, as well, when we talk about mining for rare earth minerals here in Canada. It's not going to be very easy to get past regulations if we have this attitude that industry is always bad. Believe me, Canada is something that we should be proud of, and I do stand for that.

Mr. Priddle, you mentioned that soft costs are typically half of the cost of the total project. I wonder if you could expand somewhat on what you see as those soft costs.

[Tim Priddle]

Soft costs come in very different areas. In the jurisdiction I work in, we usually start by meeting with the local conservation authority to see what effect we may have on drainage. There's the conservation authority, and there are sound studies, emission studies, soil studies, tree studies. We are off of the grid, so to speak, in terms of sewage here, so we have to have septic system studies. You have a fleet of engineers that you hire to start doing these studies. We have to do traffic management studies, too. You have to invest a huge amount of money before you can even see if the project is feasible. Each time you do a project, this happens, so the soft costs keep adding up and adding up.

Then you apply for planning permission. You might have a site-plan application that you make, and there's a very heavy fee when you make that application. If you get through that hurdle, then you run into the site-plan agreement, coming up with an agreement that satisfies you and the city and the local conservation authority. Then you apply for the building permit. Each stage takes a long period of time, and you don't know until you pass one stage whether you're even going to get to the next stage, so you're incrementally putting out more and more money before you even know if the project is feasible.

It's just uncertainty. Business people don't like uncertainty. We like certainty, and obviously it's not feasible all the time. Unfortunately, many governments can't make any exemptions. Everything has to go by a particular rule, whether it makes sense or not. There's no common-sense clause in legislation.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer—Mountain View, AB]

I was on the international trade committee for a number of years and we talked to businesses that wanted to get a foothold here in Canada, agriculture-based ones and so on, but then when they talk about how long it takes to get through the regulatory process, they say it's going to take months and years here in Canada. They'll find an answer—maybe not the answer they want, but they'll have an answer—in a week in other places in the world. When they have that much money that can be caught up in these projects, it's pretty obvious where they're going to go.

Do you have any suggestions as to how we could streamline some of the processes you've gone through so others could perhaps enjoy some of the opportunities to work here in Canada?

[Tim Priddle]

I've often thought, especially when it comes to international opportunities, that the government needs to have salespersons who can walk businesses through the various stages. We need co-operation between municipal, provincial and federal governments and the conservation organizations. They need to get together and—as you guys are trying to do—reduce red tape so you aren't tripping over each other.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer—Mountain View, AB]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Thank you so much.

Our next round of questions goes to MP Jaczek, for five minutes.

[Helena Jaczek, Liberal, Markham—Stouffville, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses for your very interesting testimony today.

Ms. Waterous from Norquay, you mentioned the Canada Infrastructure Bank. I'm also on the transport, infrastructure and communities committee and we've been looking very closely at the Canada Infrastructure Bank.

Could you tell us a little about your experience dealing with them?

[Jan Waterous]

We've had a fantastic experience with the Canada Infrastructure Bank. When my husband and I decided to take on this gnarly project of trying to return passenger rail to Banff National Park, we knew that the number one thing we had to do was work with them to try to provide the funding to build a dedicated track. We knew at that time, and it has been confirmed, that it was going to be over a billion dollars.

The Canada Infrastructure Bank had been in business five days when we flew across the country to meet with them. They didn't have business cards. They had a few light bulbs in the ceiling, and that was it. They really embraced our vision of moving to the small, two-modal green transportation hub; train travel would be part of it.

I'm going to be really straight. The relationship we've had with them has been outstanding. They've worked with us every step of the way through our project. They have signed an MOU with the Province of Alberta to further consider passenger rail and we are extremely optimistic that our dream of having passenger rail return in Alberta will come to fruition.

[Helena Jaczek, Liberal, Markham—Stouffville, ON]

Thank you very much for that.

In terms of the red tape you encountered, obviously, as a pretty new institution, the Canada Infrastructure Bank hopefully has tried to streamline things. Can you comment on the issue we're studying here today, in other words, the regulatory burden you might have faced?

[Jan Waterous]

With the Canada Infrastructure Bank, we found them lean and mean, so we didn't have an issue there.

Our issue has really been with Parks Canada. They are a bureaucratic bear. We knew that. We were private citizens living in Banff prior to getting involved in this. The feedback we've had within our community over the 24 years we've lived there is “don't even attempt to try to work with Parks”, as if there's a big “keep out” sign on their door for private businesses.

We understand their role as a regulator. All the businesses in Banff understand their role as a regulator. It's an important role, but there should also be an opportunity to have a business hat on and to work with private operators. Instead of a “keep out” sign, what we're thinking—and what many businesses are thinking—is that there should be a sign that says something like “come on in” and “we want to partner with you, with considerations”. Just like in the business-to-business community, considerations can be contracts and they can be agreements. We understand all of that, but work with us, with the private sector.

What we have observed with the bureaucracy at Parks Canada is there isn't that same sense of urgency to get things done. As I mentioned in my remarks, intercept parking had been official town policy in Banff for over 40 years, and not a single lot was built. Now, why was that? The Town of Banff and everyone in it wanted an intercept lot. The issue was that they didn't have land, and Parks Canada wasn't going to give them any. We got involved and bought land from CP rail, or leased it, and created the first lot. That's an example of businesses understanding urgency and importance.

Just to summarize, what you find in Banff National Park is that there's this real commitment to the status quo, and the changes that happen are so incremental—

[Helena Jaczek, Liberal, Markham—Stouffville, ON]

Ms. Waterous, I do perfectly understand the issue of Parks Canada. My riding is home to a very large part of the Rouge National Urban Park, so I can relate somewhat to your comment on Parks Canada.

In my last 30 seconds, I'd like to take the opportunity to ask Mr. van Raalte this question. How do you, in your role, interact with other ministries? In particular, have you had any interaction with Parks Canada in terms of the regulatory burden?