Our west coast is Canada's largest gateway to the world, handling over 800 million dollars' worth of cargo, from agri-food and potash to critical minerals and household necessities, every single day. That accounts for a quarter of Canada's total trade.
This summer we saw over 35 days of uncertainty and disruptions to our west coast gateways, including Vancouver, Vancouver Island and Prince Rupert, which caused major delays for Canadian businesses in virtually every sector across the country.
I'll repeat that 25% of our total trade stopped. That meant that Canadian potash had to cut production and sales during the strike, causing those who rely on Canadians for fertilizer to look elsewhere to ensure that they could continue to grow crops. This meant that businesses looking for replacement parts to fix machinery were delayed, causing production to slow or stop. It meant that fruits and vegetables that we bring to Canada were left to rot in containers as opposed to making it onto shelves for consumers to enjoy. Plain and simple, it meant that goods were going to become more expensive, thus fuelling inflation.
I'll stress to the committee that the damage from a strike does not simply take place in the days when workers are picketing. Businesses need certainty. They need to know that, if they are importing or exporting goods, those goods will get to where they need to go when they need to be there. If not, then suppliers will go elsewhere, and there's no guarantee that they'll come back.
When looking at Canada's record, many of our trading partners are beginning to question if Canada can reliably get goods to market. We saw that shortly after the west coast port strike with the St. Lawrence Seaway and with the uncertainty that is looming at the port of Montreal.
I must state that the Canadian chamber respects the right to collective bargaining. We believe sincerely that the best deals are reached at the table, but when negotiations break down and meaningful bargaining is no longer possible, the Canadian business community expects the government to show leadership and act in the best interests of the country.
The Canadian chamber calls on the government to use the tools that it currently has in its tool box to prevent a strike and then solve it. We applaud the Minister of Labour for directing a senior mediator to recommend terms for settlement to reach a fair deal. Unfortunately, we did not see that action until nearly two weeks into the port strike, when significant damage to the Canadian economy and Canada's reputation had already taken place, and that dragged on for further weeks while the union failed to ratify the agreement.
The review initiated by the Minister of Labour under section 106 of the Canada Labour Code is a key opportunity to do this to equip the government with more tools and to be able to avoid labour disruption while protecting the public interest. We need to make sure that the government has the ability to force the two sides together in the form of a binding resolution. We can't have the government waiting on the sidelines for two weeks before action is taken.
Canada's supply chains are only as strong as their weakest link. Government can't solve all of our supply chain issues, but it must look to enable policies that will enable trade and strengthen our supply chains.
Less than a month ago, the Minister of Labour told Canadians that our credibility as a trading nation depends on the stable operations of our supply chains and that we must do everything we can to preserve that stability. We couldn't agree more. However, the introduction of Bill C-58, which aims to prohibit the use of replacement workers during strikes, suggests that the government wants to move away from preserving stability. It is, in fact, doubling down on Canada being seen as an unreliable trading partner. We need our leaders to engage in an honest dialogue that will provide our government with the tools it needs to address our labour challenges while allowing employers and employees to bargain in the way they should.
For the sake of our economy, I would urge all parties to vote against this legislation.
Thank you for your time. I look forward to your questions.