International Trade Committee on June 15th, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, Mr. Agnew.

We have Mr. Weber, please.

[Mark Weber, National President, Customs and Immigration Union]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Madam Chair and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today as a witness as part of your study on potential impacts of the ArriveCAN app on certain Canadian sectors.

My name is Mark Weber. I'm the national president of the Customs and Immigration Union, which represents personnel working for the CBSA, the Canada Border Services Agency.

Regarding the matter at hand, I'll be direct. If we look at the impacts of the ArriveCAN application in terms of efficiency of operation and facilitation of cross-border travel, then there is little doubt: From the perspective of border operations, as far as border officers are concerned, the last few months have shown that ArriveCAN neither facilitates cross-border travel nor improves operational efficiency. In fact, it does exactly the opposite.

Every border officer working on the front line will tell you that the implementation of the ArriveCAN application has seen processing times skyrocket. Where a port of entry processed 60 cars per hour previously, we're now looking at about 30 cars an hour, if not less. At land borders, as far as traveller operations go, this means cars waiting for hours and sometimes even being redirected to other ports further away. At airports this means travellers piling up inside and outside of the customs area. In all locations, really, it translates into a frustrating experience for all involved.

In these scenarios, ArriveCAN is not always the only culprit, but it always does play a role in making the process more complex, especially for the traveller. While ArriveCAN was introduced to collect public health data, the tool itself was more often than not the problem.

Even more troubling is the fact that the implementation of ArriveCAN by the CBSA follows the same pattern of overreliance on automated technologies that we have seen before with the primary inspection kiosk, or the PIK machines, that you see in airports. Not only do these technologies have the effect of making the border noticeably less efficient by lengthening processing times; they also contribute to a decrease in border security, weakening the integrity and safety of our borders.

Ultimately, if the government and its agencies wish to facilitate cross-border travel along with the flow of commercial goods, then ArriveCAN is really a step in the wrong direction. Technology absolutely has its place, but it should be used to help travellers and assist officers, not hinder them. By that metric, ArriveCAN simply has not worked and does not work.

It's my hope that the union's input will assist this committee in its important work.

I thank you, and I look forward to your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you, Mr. Weber.

Mr. MacLachlan, go ahead, please.

[David MacLachlan, Executive Director, Destination Northern Ontario]

Thank you, and thank you for the opportunity to speak before you today.

I'm David MacLachlan, executive director of Destination Northern Ontario. I'm also a tourist operator, having grown up in the industry. My family operates one of the largest fly-in fishing and hunting operations in the country. This is our 65th year of business.

Destination Northern Ontario is a not-for-profit tourism organization that looks to grow the tourism sector through programming, product development, investment attraction, workforce development in industry and training and, of course, marketing.

Northern Ontario is a large region. It's roughly the size of France and Germany combined, with a robust and—prepandemic—growing tourism sector. Before COVID-19, the region saw 8.5 million visits, generating $1.6 billion in tourism receipts and roughly $500 million in tax revenues for the three levels of government. In 2019, 4.9% of visitors were from overseas markets and visitors from the U.S. contributed half a billion dollars in tourism revenues.

The land border is of unique importance, as 94% of all visitors to northern Ontario arrived via road.

I think we can agree that the tourism, travel and hospitality sectors have been the hardest hit of any sector impacted by the global pandemic. I want to thank all the members for all the support they have given the industry over the last two seasons.

However, the hardest hit of the hardest hit has to be the resource-based tourism sector, which is very dependent on the U.S. market. As you move from east to west in northern Ontario and get to the Lake Superior region and the northwest, virtually 100% of clients for our iconic Canadian lodges, camps and fly-in outposts come from the U.S. This is due to demographics, proximity to market and market size.

The last two years have been extremely difficult, with the region losing $1 billion in tourism receipts from U.S. guests. The RBT sector has had tremendous difficulty in attracting domestic business. We had hoped that we would see a turnaround this year. However, a recent survey completed by Nature and Outdoor Tourism Ontario shows that the sector recorded $100 million in cancellations in May. While the reasons vary, the vast majority cite border restrictions.

I can concur that, as an organization, this is what we're hearing from operators. We can confirm this from our own experience and our lodge business, where we saw 70 cancellations in May, again, all citing border restrictions. That represented about 15% of our business. I'd like to say that cancellations continue to outpace new reservations.

Recently, the Tourism Industry Association of Ontario, in their newsletter, indicated that border crossings in 2022 are at about 50% of 2019's. I've submitted both the NOTO survey and the TIAO newsletter to the committee.

While the ArriveCAN app is easy to use and works well—as a resident of a border community in Sault Ste. Marie, I've easily used the app—from the perspective of a visitor to Canada and, especially, for Americans crossing at the land border, it's our opinion, and the statistics show, that the app and cumulative impacts of other border restrictions are deterring visits from our friends south of the border. This is a huge loss of revenues for our operators and tax revenues for government. These are new dollars to the Canadian economy that positively impact our balance of trade. I would assume that our northern Ontario experience is repeated in other regions in Canada.

Simply said, our sector would like to see a suspension of the use of the ArriveCAN app at our land border as soon as possible and a cessation of all other border restrictions, especially as financial supports for the tourism sector have been withdrawn. We need to level the playing field with other destinations.

Thank you for the opportunity today.

I look forward to answering any questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

We'll move on to Ms. Potter.

[Beth Potter, President and Chief Executive Officer, Tourism Industry Association of Canada]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

My name is Beth Potter. I am the president and CEO of the Tourism Industry Association of Canada. I will be speaking in English, but I will be happy to answer your questions in French during the question-and-answer period.

Before making my remarks, I want to acknowledge that we're gathered here on the unceded and unsurrendered territory of the Anishinabe and Algonquin.

TIAC serves as the national advocate for Canada' s tourism industry. We represent thousands of tourism businesses from coast to coast to coast and across the suite of sectors that make up our industry. In carrying out our mandate, we work closely with our indigenous tourism industry partners as well as our provincial and territorial tourism industry associations.

To put my comments related to ArriveCAN in context, I'll first share with you some background that I believe is important for you to know, especially from an international trade perspective.

Prior to the pandemic, tourism employed one in 10 Canadians and was a $105-billion-a-year industry. We were an economic powerhouse, one that was outpacing Canada's overall GDP growth for years. Of that total spend, 22%, or $23 billion a year, was the result of foreign travellers coming to Canada. We were welcoming a record 32 million international visitors, 22 million of whom stayed overnight. U.S. travellers accounted for 75% of all international visitors.

Just one year later, things had changed dramatically. Total tourism spending decreased by half, and spending by foreign travellers in Canada dropped to just $4 billion, a decrease of 83%. The number of overnight foreign travellers dropped to three million, a decrease of 86%, and the tourism industry lost 400,000 jobs. It is no exaggeration when I say that tourism was the first hit, the hardest hit, and will be the last to recover from this pandemic.

Our industry now seems to be starting to turn a corner after having lost two full travel seasons. We are really hoping that this summer will see a significant resurgence in tourism. People want to travel. There is a pent-up demand. The latest data from November of 2021 shows that tourism's GDP was 78% of what it was in January of 2020, so we're making progress. The latest projections estimate that international tourism may not recover until after 2025, but domestic tourism should recover by the end of 2023.

My colleagues have already talked about the fact that international tourism brings new money into our economy, and it's something that we have to continually remember.

Now I'd like to turn my thoughts to the ArriveCAN app specifically. When it was first introduced to curtail the spread of COVID-19 into Canada, all travellers, with limited exceptions, were required to provide mandatory travel information before and after they entered the country, whether by air, land, rail or marine vessel, and they must submit the information within 72 hours of arrival.

If an inbound traveller does not submit using the app, they may be denied boarding their plane or cruise ship or entry into the country if crossing at a land, rail or marine border crossing. Despite all best efforts, we all know that COVID spread across Canada, and the omicron variant, in particular, spread very quickly last December and January, even though the mandatory use of ArriveCAN was in place. I would argue that the mandatory use of ArriveCAN is no longer needed for COVID-related purposes.

I would concur with my colleague Mr. Agnew that looking for a digital adoption process to smooth the entry of international travellers into the country is something we have been advocating for.

With pre-departure and arrival testing now eliminated in pretty much every country, it no longer makes sense to force travellers to use ArriveCAN when entering Canada to prove vaccination status, and with yesterday's announcement around the end of vaccine mandates for domestic and outbound travellers, the point is even more sound.

ArriveCAN has not been proven to be the effective tool to stop COVID. It is largely viewed as a hindrance to travel, and it is causing significant delays upon arrival in Canada. There are a host of other issues related to the app, which my colleagues have spoken to, so I would just finish with pointing out that, on public transit, in major stadiums and in restaurants across the country, proof of vaccination is no longer required. In fact, masks are not even required; yet, when you cross the border into Canada, you have no choice but to use the app.

Something in this strikes us as a bit off, and we need to see a level playing field. Travel and tourism is the only industry that still has restrictions associated with participation in the activity. Every other industry in the economy does not.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, Ms. Potter.

I go on to Ms. Bain, please, for no more than five minutes.

[Lynnette Bain, Vice-President, Destination Development, Tourism Windsor Essex Pelee Island]

My name is Lynnette Bain, and I am the vice-president of destination development with Tourism Windsor Essex Pelee Island. We are the official destination marketing organization for the regional tourism industry.

As a not-for-profit organization, we are dedicated to promoting and selling Windsor, Essex and Pelee Island as a remarkable destination for tourists, convention-goers and business travellers. I'd like to thank the standing committee for inviting me today to share insights on the ArriveCAN app. What you will hear from me is not that different from what my colleagues said, but it does need to be heard again.

During the initial phases of the pandemic, the federal government launched the mobile app, which streamlined the process for travellers to submit information regarding their arrival in Canada, alongside their quarantine plan. The application was useful in allowing all traveller information to be processed quickly and transmitted to the relevant government agencies, which was essential for travel during a pandemic.

Now, at this time, with the pandemic moving towards an endemic; with 82% of the total Canadian population being fully vaccinated; with hospitalization rates being greatly reduced over the past few months; and with so many protocol measures having been removed at the provincial levels, this is the time to look at removing the ArriveCAN app at the border as well.

In this case, we are in agreement with the provincial body, TIAO, the Tourism Industry Association of Ontario, on removing these barriers to travel.

While the app did serve its purpose during the height of a pandemic, it has also been viewed by travellers as a potential deterrent. Being a heavily cross-border market, our top attractions, Caesars Windsor, the largest casino resort in Canada, and our award-winning EPIC Wineries, have lost a third and between 25% and 50% respectively of their visitors from the U.S. The Muscedere and Mitchell families from EPIC Wineries have expressed to me that they've seen a 50% decline in U.S. visitation compared with 2019.

Some have viewed the app as a hassle, especially if they were not aware of the need to complete it beforehand. While we realize that there have been efforts to scale back the app significantly in terms of the number of questions and steps involved, including having a quarantine plan in place, it is still time-consuming for the travellers.

Our destination largely depends on spontaneous “rubber tire” travel, meaning visitors drive to Windsor Essex from neighbouring states such as Michigan and Ohio for daytrips or long weekends to visit friends and family. These visitors tend to spend twice as much as domestic travellers. Having any additional encumbrances can lead this highly coveted demographic of travellers to go elsewhere. Now, more than ever, we need to reignite this market, as these visitors play a significant role in bringing expenditures to our local economy, historically accounting for almost 50% of our annual five million visits.

There is a clear, pent-up demand for global travellers to come to Canada and we need to embrace this opportunity now, otherwise the desire will switch to other destinations that are hassle-free, or have fewer restrictions than what are currently being enforced here.

Seniors and people who do not have access to a smart phone or who choose to turn off their phone data when crossing an international border are struggling with the ArriveCAN app as well. The app technology, combined with the app itself, have created confusion at the border, which has contributed to significant delays.

Let’s not forget about the unvaccinated, constituting 33% of Americans, who have not even been able to cross borders based on these restrictions in place.

Ultimately, it needs to be determined whether the ArriveCAN app has any substantial benefits at all to the community at large. At this time, given the aforementioned progress made against the COVID-19 virus, it appears that the benefits of the app are negligible.

It should also be annunciated that symptoms from an infected person with the current strain of COVID-19 can take between two and four days to present, and visitors coming back from daytrips or long weekends may not even have any symptoms until after they have completed the ArriveCAN app. Studies have also postulated that approximately 60% of the population could be asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic, which again would render the ArriveCAN app a moot point, as symptoms would not be exhibited at the time of crossing the border.

Suspending the vaccine mandate for domestic and outbound travel would be a welcome move by the federal government towards normalizing travel. As Canada is viewed as the most desired foreign travel destination by Americans at this time, it's important not only to retain this mindset, but also to build on it through the various stages of the purchase funnel.

As Beth mentioned, our tourism industries face the most significant declines in active businesses. While on the road to recovery, tourism has not kept pace with the rest of the business sector. For our local tourism-related businesses to return to some form of normalcy—restaurants, accommodations, attractions, tours, festivals and events, shops and districts themselves—we absolutely need a clear path for the traveller that does not create hesitancy, doubt, frustration or a complete disinterest in coming over to explore our region, the province or the nation.

To have this much-needed industry and driver in our economy return to prepandemic levels, one of the key considerations is bringing back our most valued geographic market, the U.S. It is incumbent to suspend the use of the ArriveCAN app to encourage these travellers to return to Canada in a more streamlined manner without any complications or delays at the border.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, Ms. Bain.

We will move on to Ms. Ferreri.

Welcome to the committee. You have five minutes.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

There are lots of familiar faces here. It's nice to see you.

Thank you to all the witnesses.

I'm going to start with Mr. Agnew, if I may.

Have you reached out directly to, or had any conversations with, the government about your concerns that the ArriveCAN app needs to be re-evaluated?

[Mark Agnew]

We've been talking to the government throughout about all of the various travel measures. We haven't done a major push, in traditional advocacy terms, on the ArriveCAN app, but we've certainly been having our views well stated on the public record. I don't think that where we are will come as a surprise to anyone.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Thank you for that.

I would like to move to Mr. Weber.

Mr. Weber, thank you for your candid and honest feedback about the app. These are some quotes of yours: “The tool itself” is “the problem”. It's “a step in the wrong direction”. It has not and “does not work”.

My question to you is this: Do you think it should be fully removed, or do you think it should be changed or modified to work better?

[Mark Weber]

Thank you for the question.

Public health measures are not really our territory to comment on.

What I can tell you is that the numbers provided to you earlier by the CBSA, which said that 99% of air travellers and 94% of land travellers have the app completed, are absolutely false. Those numbers are the percentages completed after we helped them complete with the app. In the Eastern Townships branches, the numbers were closer to 60%, for example. Overall, we're looking at closer to 75% to 80% having it completed.

Essentially, our officers now largely work as IT consultants. You have land borders that have essentially become parking lots, with us helping people complete the app. The biggest fear we have, as well, is that, other than public health measures, the use of this app is going to be expanded beyond those simple questions. Technology.... Again, we've seen the effects of it at airports, as I mentioned, with the PIK kiosks. It greatly reduces our border security and takes an awful lot longer to go through than simply speaking to a border services officer. We can process someone at twice the speed a machine does.

The ArriveCAN app, even were it removed, is just a small part of the problem. Our frontline operations over the years.... Because of this overreliance on technology, our numbers have been greatly reduced. In some ports, we're looking at half the number of frontline officers we had even five or six years ago. Even with the app gone, we are going to be seeing major delays at most of our ports of entry.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Thank you so much for that.

I want to go back to you, again, Mr. Agnew, because you said some pretty disturbing things. The fact that people are monetizing people's inability to use the app is a major concern. I've been flooded at my constituency office with seniors who can't use it. They have BlackBerrys, but they don't have smart phones.

Two things have been proposed, and I'm curious about your feedback on them: Drop it at land borders, or lose the 72-hour prerequisite. What are your thoughts on those?

[Mark Agnew]

I think that, whatever we do for land, we probably should do for air, as well. If I look back, where we've had a lot of member complaints—since the start of the pandemic—is in the diffuse rules that exist among different modes of travel. Whatever we do needs to be consistently applied.

In terms of questions about what to do with it, I think a suspension, in the short term, would probably be a pretty shrewd and practical move to ease up some of the congestion. It is going to take time to pivot this into a customs clearance-type app. I believe that CBSA, in the previous panel—if I heard them correctly—said they were moving down that direction. However, even retooling it, in that way, will take time.

In terms of the 72-hour piece, whether it's 72, 48 or 24 hours, or five minutes, I think you're still going to encounter a lot of these same problems, particularly with elderly folks and people whose first language isn't English. I don't think that is going to fundamentally change the issue.

[Michelle Ferreri, Conservative, Peterborough—Kawartha, ON]

Thank you very much for that.

Ms. Potter, do you have an estimate on what the contribution of the ArriveCAN app would have been, financially? You talked about going from a $105-billion industry to a $4-billion one, and a loss of 400,000 jobs. Where do you think the responsibility of ArriveCAN falls into that?

[Beth Potter]

I think that's really hard for us to understand.

I do think we've seen all border restrictions having a massive impact on the return of our industry. It has certainly put Canada behind—from a competitive standpoint with the other G7 countries, at least—many other countries in the world, when it comes to regaining our travel and tourism portfolio.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, Ms. Potter.

We'll move to Mr. Sheehan for five minutes.

Go ahead, please.

[Terry Sheehan, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Thank you very, Madam Chair.

Thank you very much to all of our witnesses for this really important testimony for a really important part of the Canadian economy.

I for one spent most of my life in the tourism industry. I was a sales and marketing manager for the largest independent hotel in northern Ontario. I managed Searchmont ski resort, which was the largest mountain, as we used to say, between the Rockies and the Laurentians. I used to be chair of the Sault College hospitality advisory committee.

I totally get what everyone is saying and how important this industry is. I met my wife. She was working in the tourism industry. We bought a house together and raised our family. What we need to do and ought to do is to make sure that we continue to support the tourism industry.

Madam Chair, as I introduce myself to some of the panellists who don't know me, I want to ask David how important the supports were, including the wage subsidy that, David, you and a whole bunch of other people advocated for so strongly along with those changes that happened.

David, you made some comments about some of the supports that have recently been passed through the 2022 budget for the tourism industry to continue to support you as you recover, as we now start to see levels of travel increasing, which is a good thing. Perhaps you could address some of those comments regarding the kinds of supports that have helped the industry and what kinds of supports will continue to help the industry.

[David MacLachlan]

Thank you for the question.

Certainly the wage subsidy was huge for the tourism sector in northern Ontario and especially for those who were dependent on the U.S. market and unable to attract the domestic visitor. In terms of our lodge, we went from 500 customers in 2019 to 52 in 2020. With the wage subsidy, we were able to protect our core staff of six to work for us. Last year, we had a bit of rebound. We were up to 200 guests. Again, that wage subsidy meant that we were able to keep eight staff working—including two students—for the season.

That has primarily been the biggest support to us. I know that a lot of properties have applied for the tourism relief fund and for help through FedNor as well. I know there are some programs through the CFDCs. In our case, we did take out a loan with our CFDC because we didn't want to fall behind in our capital upgrade program and in purchasing boats. We didn't want to sting the marina for the boats and motors that we had ordered and leave them hanging. Even though we knew we were only going to have 52 customers, we still purchased those.

The northern Ontario and especially the RBT sector is not going to recover until the U.S. visitors can get across. I think Lynnette talked about the vaccination rate in Michigan. Overall, it's only 56% in Michigan, so it's quite an uphill climb for our sector.

As far as using the app goes, I'm not an epidemiologist. I just don't see how it makes it safer for us, because I can go to Mackinac Island next week—the largest tourist attraction in the U.S. Midwest—and spend the day and hang out with all kinds of people who are ineligible to come to Canada, yet I can come back because I'll use the app. There was a time and place, but we just need to look at what we can do to remove restrictions where we can and to get people moving again.

[Terry Sheehan, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

I hear that, absolutely.

Where I live, every morning when I wake up and have my coffee, I open up my window and I can see the United States. We know that in Michigan, their vaccine rates are, in particular, across the board, significantly lower than those of Canadians, which, back in the day, when the borders were closed, resulted in the number of cases of COVID in Michigan alone rivalling the number in all of Canada. That was really important.

Both you and I also lived through 9/11, after which the passport was introduced. When the passport was introduced, as everyone here who was paying attention at the time knows, the Americans didn't go out and get their passports. They just, at the time—

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

I'm sorry, Mr. Sheehan. Your time is up.

[Terry Sheehan, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Oh, I'm sorry.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

My apologies.

Monsieur Savard-Tremblay, please.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would like to quickly address the five witnesses. I have a very simple question for them, and I would like them to answer with a yes or no. This is just a little detour before we get back to ArriveCAN.

Do you support lifting the vaccination requirement for people returning to Canada?

I would like the witnesses attending the meeting in person to answer the question first.

Do you support lifting this requirement in the short term, yes or no?