International Trade Committee on May 9th, 2024

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

I will call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 105 of the Standing Committee on International Trade. It feels like only meeting number three, not meeting number 105.

Before I begin, I just want to give a brief message on avoiding audio feedback, especially for our witnesses and other members. Please be aware of the following important measures to prevent disruptive and potentially harmful audio feedback.

We're asking all participants to keep their earpieces away from their microphones at all times. You might see that there's a little circle where you can put your earpiece when you're not using it. We've also adjusted the room layout to increase the distance between microphones and reduce the chance of feedback from an ambient earpiece.

This is to protect the health and safety of all participants, including the translators.

I see that we have some people online. I want to say that today's meeting is also taking place in a hybrid format. For members in the room, please raise your hand if you wish to speak. For members on Zoom, if you wish to speak, please use the “raise hand” function. If there are any technical issues, please inform me, and we can suspend if necessary.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Tuesday, October 17, the committee is resuming its study of Canadian businesses in supply chains for global markets.

We have with us today the Aluminium Association of Canada, Jean Simard, president and CEO, via video conference; the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, Michelle Auger, senior policy analyst, national affairs, and Jasmin Guénette, vice-president, national affairs; the Canadian Trucking Alliance, Stephen Laskowski, president; the Canadian Wood Pallet and Container Association, Scott Geffros, general manager; the Eagle Graphite Corporation, Jamie Deith, founder; and the Railway Association of Canada, Lora Smith, vice-president, public and government affairs.

Welcome, everyone. You will all have five minutes to give us your opening statement. I'll give a bit of latitude, but please try to keep your remarks as close as possible to five minutes. After the opening statements, we'll proceed to our rounds of questions.

Mr. Simard, we will have you go first to make your opening statement.

[Jean Simard, President and Chief Executive Officer, Aluminium Association of Canada]

Thank you for inviting us to participate in the work of your committee. I will speak on behalf of the Aluminium Association of Canada.

Our ecosystem benefits from economic development centred on its natural resources and its vast potential for renewable energy production. As a critical material, aluminum is also a strategic metal subject to numerous trade pressure measures between major trading regions. Often exploited to affect the position of a country hyper‑exposed to global trade, it is directly and constantly affected by global geopolitics.

Canada's low population density relative to its size positions it as a key supplier of high‑value‑added processed resources to its strategic allies. The United States, which is more densely populated, has fostered the development of its aluminum manufacturing sector. The development of both sectors would not be possible without a deep synergy between the two economies. This allows Canada to benefit from its abundant energy resources, while the United States can benefit from its manufacturing process and critical mass. As a result, Canada accounts for 84% of North America's primary aluminum production, with 2.7 million tonnes of exports to the United States. This represents $12 billion in export value, 70% of U.S. imports and 50% of U.S. consumption of primary aluminum.

I will now share with you a few elements of our brief submitted to the Canadian government as part of the supply chain consultation that took place in February. We have submitted this document to the committee. My remarks will focus mainly on the transportation aspect.

Ensuring a consistent regulatory approach across all levels of government is critical, particularly in the area of commercial freight transportation. This collaboration between the various levels of government and Canada's trading partners is all the more important given that Canadian trade routes have suffered in recent years by rail strikes on the east and west coasts and on the St. Lawrence Seaway that disrupt trade flows. These disruptions, combined with pressure on international trade routes during the pandemic, have damaged Canada's reputation as a reliable source within North American value chains.

As I mentioned earlier, in addition to the importance of the Canada‑U.S. border, the industry has also faced border issues with Mexico that have affected supply chains and can make North American surface transportation less competitive than options for importing directly into Mexico.

Consistent trade flows are essential to our industry and to the Canadian economy. In this sense, commercial freight routes must be considered an essential service. To address this, the Canadian government should prioritize strengthening the resiliency of the logistics network for moving goods across the Canada‑U.S. border as part of its regulatory review.

Managing and protecting future trade routes with high economic potential, including the Arctic sea route, should also be a priority for the government. Complementing this policy approach, it would be wise to adopt customized treatment for importers and exporters based on their trade history. The Aluminium Association of Canada advocates the possibility for Canadian economic players who meet all standards and have an exemplary track record to benefit from accelerated or preferential treatment when importing or exporting goods and services. If, for any reason, the flow of goods on a trade route were to be restricted, Canadian players meeting all these criteria should be given priority access.

In response to the growing challenges facing our freight transportation sector, and given the high value of aluminum shipments, we are also proposing a vital policy change. Building on the successful U.S. model, we are advocating for mandatory commercial load marking for all freight vehicles in Canada, as well as the creation of a centralized national vehicle registration database.

These measures will not only improve the security and efficiency of our supply chains, but they are also part of our ongoing efforts to strengthen the sustainability and resilience of our national freight logistics. We believe this streamlined approach is essential to maintaining Canada's reliability in North American value chains, and we look forward to a collaborative effort to achieve these goals.

Regulatory frameworks could also play a key role in encouraging and supporting experimentation with new environmentally friendly freight transport options. As part of the search for sustainable practices, regulations can be developed to encourage the adoption of zero‑emission vehicles for freight transport, thereby encouraging the reduction of carbon emissions in freight logistics. An innovative approach to reducing—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

Mr. Simard, it's been almost six minutes, so I'm going to have to ask you to—

[Jean Simard]

I'm done.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

That's excellent.

[Jean Simard]

In closing, as we have seen in the recent past, and are likely to see again, our privileged access to the U.S. market must be protected and never taken for granted.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

That's great. Thank you very much.

We'll now go to Mr. Guénette and Ms. Auger.

Please make your opening statement for up to five minutes.

[Jasmin Guénette, Vice-President, National Affairs, Canadian Federation of Independent Business]

Good afternoon. My name is Jasmin Guénette. I'm vice-president of national affairs with the CFIB. I'm here today with my colleague Michelle Auger, a senior policy analyst.

We would like to thank the committee for inviting us today.

I will make my opening remarks in English, but I'm able to answer questions in French and English.

As you may know, CFIB is a non-partisan organization representing 97,000 small and medium-sized businesses across every industry and region of Canada.

Today we will share insights on how best to support the growth of small businesses into domestic and global markets.

Small business optimism is currently very low. Every single line of a small business budget is increasing, and demand is low. Reducing the tax and regulatory burden will help small businesses address the current increased cost of doing business, will help address growth and sales limitation, and will support SMEs to thrive and contribute more to our trade and supply chain.

Trade barriers within Canada must be removed. There are too many regulations that currently hinder the efficient movement and sale of goods because federal and provincial requirements are not aligned.

CFIB recommends adopting a policy of mutual recognition to internal trade, which means any regulatory standard in one jurisdiction is recognized in all other jurisdictions without further requirements having to be met.

Our transportation network, like railways and ports, is at the centre of Canada's supply chain system. It needs it to remain fluid at all times. However, disruptions like strikes at ports and on railways can cause significant delays, affecting the entire supply chain, and impacting small businesses' finances and operations.

We recommend that the government make ports and railways essential services so they remain fully operational at all times.

I will now turn to my colleague Michelle Auger.

[Michelle Auger, Senior Policy Analyst, National Affairs, Canadian Federation of Independent Business]

In January 2024 we conducted a survey on international trade. We found that in the past three years, 31% of SMEs exported goods, services or both; and 63% of SMEs were not involved in exporting and did not plan to do so at all.

These rates at which SMEs export have not changed since the last time we conducted the survey, in 2017. Today a majority of SMEs are exporting primarily to the U.S., followed by Europe, the U.K. and Mexico.

Businesses in manufacturing, wholesale, natural resources and the agricultural sector have the highest rates of exportation. If we look at our data by size of business, the bigger the business, the higher the likelihood they are involved in exporting. Only 25% of micro-sized businesses are involved in exporting goods, compared to 49% of medium-sized businesses.

For businesses involved in exporting, 66% of SMEs indicated that the cost of shipping is the biggest challenge they face, followed closely by the cost of currency and the cost of duties and taxes. Despite these challenges, 54% of SMEs involved in exporting activities indicated that they plan on increasing their exports over the next three years.

While there are some services and programs available to support and assist small businesses in importing and exporting endeavours, many of them remain underutilized. For example, 76% of SMEs are unaware of and have not used the programs available through CanExport Innovation; 63% of SMEs are unaware of and have not used programs available through the trade commissioner service; almost half of SMEs are unaware of and have not used the programs available through EDC; and one-third of SMEs are unaware of and have not used the programs available through CBSA.

To better support SMEs looking to expand into international markets, the CFIB recommends, among other things, to simplify customs and duty regulations, to enhance communication and information targeted to SMEs, and to lower border-related fees for smaller firms. Doing these things could encourage more SMEs to participate in trade activities.

We thank you for your time today and we look forward to answering any questions you might have.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

Thank you very much.

We will now turn to Mr. Laskowski for an opening statement of up to five minutes.

[Stephen Laskowski, President, Canadian Trucking Alliance]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair and committee members, for having the Canadian Trucking Alliance here today.

Briefly, about the alliance, we have about 5,000 members. The way the alliance works is that the seven major provincial trucking associations form one board and send delegates—very much like the House of Commons—to our board, and we vote and make policy. What I'm about to present to you today is one such policy.

In February, the Canadian Trucking Alliance submitted a proposal to the Government of Canada through a regulatory review of the supply chain task force with regard to issues that can improve both international and domestic trade. I think, though, that we need to understand, too, that a lot of domestic—quote, unquote—moves are generated from international moves and moves out of ports and railheads and from other customers when they come up from the United States.

Here's the laundry list. There's a lot here. I won't be able to give you much background in five minutes, but I'm happy to take questions.

Number one, allow and invest in CBSA to have more sufferance warehouses in Canada. What this means is that we'd be allowed as an industry to clear Customs inland, as opposed to the border points, and also—very topical right now—from railheads and marine heads to move inland from CBSA in potential strikes.

With regard to in-transit moves, we will all recall the environmental disaster in British Columbia when we had the landslides and the roads closed. Well, the only way that a lot of the goods moved was in what's called an “in-transit move”, where domestic trucks move through the United States back into Canada, like to Toronto or Vancouver. Canada allows such in-transit moves through Canada for the United States, but the United States does not allow Canada to move in transit, which would allow what needs to be done. There is some political pressure that needs to be put on Washington, but also an investment from CBSA into some electronic investments.

With regard to other issues, one is reporting time frames at the border. Right now, the auto sector and trucks are required to report 60 minutes before crossing the border. We'd like to shorten that to 30 minutes. It would greatly help the auto industry and the trucks that move it.

Another is more resources at the border for agriculture. Right now, the border is 24-7 except for food and agriculture inspections, which work on more what we call traditional banking hours—nine to five. That means trucks sit loaded with agricultural product over the weekend or after those hours. Again, when we're spending billions of dollars.... We applaud the Canadian government for investments like the Gordie Howe bridge. Such smaller investments would also greatly improve the border.

With regard to in Canada...next is working with the provinces and the federal government to align winter road maintenance standards. The reality, as we all know as consumers, as individuals, is that when it snows, we move slowly. So do trucks. When we don't have winter road standards that are aligned between the provinces, those trucks justifiably will sit. Nobody wants to put truck drivers in danger. If provinces align winter road standards, we can move our trucks more quickly and safely.

On rest areas for truck drivers, truck drivers are governed by hours of service. They move loads whether they're full or not. They need places to rest, to move the economy more safely. When we don't have those rest areas, they're looking for spots to park. When they don't find them, more hours are wasted in looking for safe spots—as the drivers should—as opposed to moving the economy.

Last, but definitely not least, are overweight and over dimensional standards. What that means, folks, is that when we have large pieces of equipment or machinery that moves between provinces that are doing goods and services or manufacturing processes and those standards aren't aligned, those trucks sit. For example, different provinces, believe it or not, have definitions for when evening sets or when the sun rises, and when those definitions aren't aligned, the truck sits until those definitions align.

As you can see, we have some significant investments to make, some major policies to make and then just some common-sense moves to make, where we can make our industry and our economy far more competitive.

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

Thanks very much, particularly for being on time.

We'll now turn to Mr. Geffros.

Please go ahead and make a statement for five minutes.

[Scott Geffros, General Manager, Canadian Wood Pallet and Container Association]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon to you all. It's an honour to be here before the Standing Committee on International Trade. Thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to speak about our organization and the vital role of wood packaging in both the domestic and global supply chains and markets.

As general manager of the Canadian Wood Pallet and Container Association, or CWPCA, I am here to represent the views and perspectives of the wood packaging industry. We were founded in 1968. The CWPCA was built on strong professional relationships with its members, the private sector and the respective government departments tasked with regulating our industry.

The CWPCA has been the leading voice in Canada for the wood packaging industry since its inception. Our core objective is to promote the use of wood packaging and protect Canadian interests on the global stage while supporting our members by sharing tools and information that protect and sustain the wood packaging industry. We have successfully done this, and will continue to do so, by connecting our members with relevant and noteworthy industry-related information at the regional, national and international levels.

Since our creation, we've developed a compelling voice on domestic and international matters related to wood packaging, including supporting industry practices within regulatory affairs and promoting the sustainable nature of our business and products. We act as a conduit for the dissemination of industry news and issues, both domestic and international, and maintain strong relationships with sister associations and prominent industry representatives around the world via the Global Wood Packaging Forum.

The CWPCA has over 160 members across the country and almost two dozen more international members. Our sector generates just over $1 billion in sales annually and happens to provide one of the most critical elements that our supply chain is based around. While our sales figures of $1 billion may not be incredibly large in comparison with some, the actual value of goods that ship on and in wood packaging is astounding. Canada's international trade supply chain cannot properly function without wood packaging. This is why it's crucial to sufficiently support the industry by creating an environment that allows it to succeed and function effectively.

The CWPCA as an industry organization is quite unique in the fact that we also act as an alternate service delivery organization on behalf of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. Our purpose in this role is to oversee facilities registered in the Canadian heat-treated wood products certification program who are engaged in the manufacture of wood packaging that is certified under the global ISPM 15 program.

The ISPM 15 program, for those who aren't aware, is a phytosanitary certification program that allows wood packaging to continue to be used in international trade and mitigates the risk associated with invasive forest pests that sometimes move via forest products in trade.

In addition to our connection with our core membership, acting in this role also keeps us involved with in excess of 325 more Canadian companies who manufacture certified wood packaging for export. This important role supports Canadian exporters and ensures that our wood packaging products meet the highest phytosanitary standards possible.

This role also enables our participation in Canadian task groups, such as the Canadian forest phytosanitary working group, which works to ensure global market access for our forest products, and the Canadian forest products advisory committee, which works on plant health issues and domestic regulatory programs. As well, we participate internationally in working groups spearheaded by the North American Plant Protection Organization and the International Plant Protection Convention.

As we in Canada return to somewhat more normal times postpandemic, Canada's wood packaging companies are slightly less consumed by strained operational demands. However, all things, as we know, are cyclical. We know that we could be called upon at a moment's notice to ramp up production to meet the needs of the supply chain, as we experienced during our COVID years. While many wood packaging companies were very profitable during the pandemic, the pandemic definitely exposed some cracks in our industry's armour. If unaddressed, these weaknesses can and will exacerbate issues caused by future disruptions.

With this in mind, we ask the Canadian government to learn from these experiences and recognize how close we as an industry came to not being able to meet the demands of our supply chain for several years. We feel that the time is now for the Canadian government to invest in the wood packaging sector, which can also be seen as an investment in supply chain stability and an investment in the future. Thus, in our most recent pre-budget submissions, we have requested that a specialized pool of funds specifically be earmarked for the wood packaging sector to support our domestic and export supply chains. We have explored funding at the regional and provincial levels, but we feel that a federal program would benefit us most. We ask that a pool of funds in the amount of $30 million—or $10 million a year over three years—be set aside in a special purpose account for investment into the wood packaging sector.

We need our supply chains to function properly in order for the Canadian economy to thrive and in order to boost the competitiveness of Canadian businesses. A healthy and robust wood packaging sector provides a solid foundation to support supply chains, and investment in the wood packaging sector is an essential element needed to help us achieve this.

Thank you again for the opportunity to appear before this committee. I'm happy to take any questions you have.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

That's great. Thank you.

We'll now hear from Mr. Deith, the founder of Eagle Graphite Corporation.

[Jamie Deith, Founder, Eagle Graphite Corporation]

Honourable Chair and members of the committee, thank you for this opportunity to share insights that I hope will prove useful in shaping future policy. My name is Jamie Deith. I have been the founder and CEO of Eagle Graphite for 17 years. I'm very fortunate to have had a professional career of over 30 years, rich in experiences in various countries and in a range of fields, including financial markets, medical equipment and mining.

In the mining field, Eagle Graphite's primary focus has been a graphite mine in southeastern British Columbia. On paper this project is endowed with a number of significant advantages. It's environmentally pristine; it has permits for production and it has a proven track record of producing high-quality graphite. Graphite has been on critical minerals lists globally for many years and it is critically important to both traditional industries and emerging technologies crucial for the energy transition. Most notably, graphite is an essential ingredient in electric vehicle batteries, and China has a monopoly on supply.

Unfortunately, the biggest challenge—and this is shared amongst everyone in the critical minerals field—has been our inability to fund an objectively good project. Over time this inability to fund the project has taken its toll and has resulted in our recently losing the entire project to a vulture capitalist.

This outcome is all too common in critical minerals. Each failure has its own specific twists, but the common thread is the lack of capital. I cannot name a single critical minerals mining project in Canada that has achieved the goal of scale production in this century nor one that has even secured the necessary financing to do so.

The alarm bells around critical mineral supplies have been ringing for years. We all seem to want a meaningful reduction in our reliance on adversaries, yet somehow the market is unable to deliver. As Canadians, we want to play a valuable role in the western supply chain, but we've been unable to start the ball rolling on the basic supply of minerals. The capital simply isn't appearing.

In my view, the lack of capital arises because there exists too much risk in the relationship between producers and suppliers. Individual mining projects are inherently risky. Projects may fall short on quality, fail to meet production targets, miss deadlines, and frequently fail to achieve any production at all. For most end-users, capitalizing such a production is well outside their comfort zone. After all, they aren't miners, and there is already a well-established China-centric supply chain. Even the signing of binding agreements to purchase materials from an aspiring project comes with a risk of being left high and dry if the project fails.

On the other hand, more traditional capital providers, such as mine investment funds, might be comfortable with the project, but they struggle with the uncertainties of a future market price. If the users of the minerals won't commit to buying them, there is deep uncertainty about whether a mine that takes five years and a huge number of dollars to ramp up will ever be economically sustainable. This commitment gap is the biggest barrier to Canada's objective of playing a meaningful role in these supply chains. I see no realistic scenario in which existing market structures can overcome this problem without help.

To address the capitalization gap, I propose a critical mineral stabilization reserve. Here's how it could work. For each critical mineral, policy-makers determine a strategic quantity to stockpile. For instance, we could aim for a supply of lithium carbonate sufficient to meet North American demand for six months. For the sake of argument, that might be 100,000 tons. Over the course of two to three years, reserve managers gradually acquire the lithium to build the reserve, emphasizing a few key features.

First, stockpiles are acquired through transparent and competitive auctions that are held quarterly. Domestic producers get preferred terms. They still have to compete, but substantial incentives exist to favour the domestic sources over the non-domestic ones. The domestic sources will also enjoy an additional benefit of being able to forge long-term contracts with the reserve for their future production.

Even as this reserve is being ramped up, a portion of the reserve is opened up to industrial consumers of minerals. Again there are some key aspects. Just as there are auctions to acquire minerals, there are transparent and competitive auctions to sell the minerals to consumers at market rates. Domestic consumers also have to compete to purchase those minerals but they get to do so on preferred terms and they also have access to the stockpile through long-term contracts.

After the reserve reaches its target size, it continues to function as a clearing house but also as a stabilization mechanism. Stabilization occurs by allowing the reserve to sell a little more when prices go up and to buy a little more when prices go down.

Here's how everyone benefits.

The consumers of minerals benefit because transacting with the reserve eliminates the risk to any one supplier. Domestic consumers committing to Canada gain further through preferred-access provisions. The producers also benefit because the reserve is a secure buyer for their goods. Domestic producers also gain a huge advantage in being able to set up long-term, stable contracts. They can take these contracts to mine financiers, who now see a much improved financial certainty for their investments.

The benefit for Canada as a whole is a system that provides incentive for the producers and consumers to come to Canada and to remain tied to Canada for the long term. If the end goal is a vibrant and prosperous energy-transition ecosystem in Canada, this will go a long way. Perhaps most attractive of all—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

I'm going to have to interrupt there because we're well over time. We'll get to it in the questions.

[Jamie Deith]

I have less than a minute, if you'll indulge me.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

We're already at almost six minutes, so I'm going to apologize.

Now we have Lora Smith from the Railway Association of Canada for five minutes.

[Lora Smith, Vice-President, Public and Government Affairs, Railway Association of Canada]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Every year, Canada's freight railways move $380 billion worth of goods, including half of Canada's exports. The Canadian freight rail network is world class by any objective measure. Canada's railways provide the highest safety performance in North America, industry-leading environmental innovation, and strong service.

Since the changes to the National Transportation Act, 1987, rail productivity have more than quadrupled, average wages for rail workers are on the verge of tripling, and rail rates have risen about half as fast as inflation. Today, Canada's freight rates are, on average, the lowest among major market economies, including the United States.

I'll use grain as an example. Farmers pay far more to truck an elevated tonne of grain less than 100 kilometres than it costs the grain company to move that grain 1,500 kilometres by rail from prairie to tidewater. Rail is the greenest mode of ground transportation, and railways are three to four times more fuel-efficient than trucks.

Over 35,000 Canadian railroaders work around the clock in some of the harshest weather to bring Canadian goods safely and sustainably to global markets.

Canada was built by rail. Railways, both passenger and freight, continue to help build and develop this country. While my remarks today are focused on freight, I'd like to underline the critical role of passenger railways in economic and social development.

As this committee considers ways to support the growth of Canadian businesses, the committee should encourage a policy and regulatory framework that allows the Canadian rail network to remain world class.

Extended regulated interswitching, resurrected last year, is a federal policy that puts Canadian jobs and investments at risk. The policy can slow down supply chains and raise costs for Canadian exporters, importers and consumers. Under extended interswitching, U.S. railways can solicit Canadian traffic at below-market regulated rates without any reciprocity for CN and CPKP to do the same in the U.S. That means fewer available carloads for Canadian railroaders to move across Canada. It may also mean less available work for port workers if shipments end up in Seattle rather than in Vancouver, for example. These are good-paying union jobs. That's why Canada's rail unions oppose extended interswitching.

Extended interswitching has been tried before, and it failed. Informed by David Emerson's Canada Transportation Act review panel and by substantial evidence, Transport Canada concluded in 2017 that extended interswitching “was having unintended consequences on the competitiveness of our railways vis-à-vis the U.S. railways.”

Then minister Marc Garneau did not just sunset extended interswitching at that time. He replaced it with long-haul interswitching, a remedy which today still exists, available to shippers up to 1,200 kilometres.

What those advocating for extended interswitching want is to use government policy to secure an unfair advantage at the expense of all other users of the rail network. Extended interswitching hurts Canadian supply chains, workers, consumers, and businesses relying on efficient rail service to remain competitive. It must be immediately repealed.

Short-line railways are also incredibly important links in the supply chain, and they connect communities and businesses to global markets. One in five carloads starts on a short-line in Canada, and short-lines need predictable government funding mechanisms to remain viable alternatives to trucking. Unlike the U.S., there is no dedicated support mechanism for short-line railways at any level in most provinces, despite their outsized impacts. Multiple House committees have recommended greater short-line support, and we respectfully request this committee to do the same.

Canada needs more investment, not less. It should be promoting the fluidity of trade, not creating barriers. The federal government should take action to address supply chain challenges, including the inability to load grain on ships at the port of Vancouver when it rains, and workforce stability, which is a significant challenge right now.

To conclude, over 10 years, railways have invested more than $21.5 billion to enhance the fluidity and resilience of Canada's rail network. Railways are enabling their customers and the economy to grow. The government should help enable this positive growth story for Canada.

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Kyle Seeback]

Thank you very much.

We'll now turn to our first round of questions and will start with Mr. Martel for six minutes.

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank all the witnesses for being here.

Mr. Simard, you're the president of the Aluminium Association of Canada. Who do you actually represent: the producers, or the entire aluminum industry in Canada?

[Jean Simard]

Thank you, Mr. Martel.

The Aluminium Association represents the three major primary metal producers—Alcoa, Rio Tinto and Alouette—with eight plants in Quebec and one in Kitimat, British Columbia.

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

We often hear that SMEs, small and medium‑sized enterprises, and processors would sometimes like to buy Canadian aluminum but are rarely able to do so. You sell Canadian aluminum to producers, but are you aware that our Canadian SMEs and processors can't get their hands on it?

[Jean Simard]

I'm a little surprised. Canadian metal is traded all over North America. Certainly, a lot of our metal is destined for the United States. We have to honour fixed‑term contracts related to supply chains, whether in transportation or packaging. So some of the metal is already reserved for a specific clientele, but there is still metal available here in Canada and Quebec.

Sometimes certain constraints arise from the volume produced, delivery or ability to absorb the metal when it's ready to be delivered. All kinds of constraints can arise in situations where small volumes are required, but there's metal for Quebec SMEs and others involved in processing.

[Richard Martel, Conservative, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Back home, I often hear concerns about aluminum, because we're producing more with fewer employees. As you know, there's a great deal of innovation going on in this area. Are you worried about the future of aluminum workers? Aren't we going to need them less and less?