International Trade Committee on Dec. 5th, 2023

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair. Thanks to my colleague.

Madam Chair, I'm going to move the motion that I put on notice earlier—on Friday, I believe. It is as follows:

Given that:

(a) the Senate is expected to vote on Bill C-234 to remove the carbon tax from grain drying and barn heating;

(b) Canadian farmers have called upon the Senate to pass this important legislation;

(c) Bill C-234 would save farmers $1 billion and help lower food prices for Canadians; and given

(d) the special importance of agricultural exports to Canada's international trade profile and reliability as a trading partner with our key allies;

The committee call upon senators who are delaying the passage of the legislation to stop playing political games with the livelihoods of Canadian farmers, recognize the decision of the elected House of Commons, and pass Bill C-234 into law without further delay.

Madam Chair, I'd like to now speak to that motion as well.

Madam Chair, the Senate has had this bill since March 30, 2023, so that would, by my estimation, mean that we're now into almost nine months of this bill being in the Senate after having been passed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Mr. Seeback, I apologize for interrupting, but I have to indicate to you as the mover of the motion that I have reviewed it and discussed it with the clerk, and I'm ruling that the motion is out of order.

For us to direct the Senate is similar to how we would resent the Senate dictating to us. I have reviewed it and, as the chair, I'm ruling it out of order, sir.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Madam Chair, we will challenge the chair, then.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Okay.

[The Clerk]

The question is, shall the ruling of the chair be sustained?

(Ruling of the chair sustained: yeas 7; nays 4)

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much. I have never had so many times that the chair has been challenged. Thank goodness we have some very sensible people here who manage to keep it going.

We're back on to Ms. Fortier, please, for five minutes.

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, witnesses, for being here today and bringing your thoughts on the port of Vancouver strike.

I wanted to start by saying, let's remember that when there were issues at the Port of Montreal, it was after two years of not having a contract and a lot of disruption that the government, as a last resort, brought the back-to-work legislation. There was no other opportunity to bring workers back.

Let's not say it's a day. It was almost two years of disruption, and I think it's important that we get back to understanding that the government really believes that collective bargaining is done at best at the table.

That is also, I believe, what was done during the port of Vancouver collective bargaining issue. I know that Minister O'Regan was present for the whole time, working with parties, trying to work and bring parties together, and making sure that the long-term effects of these discussions would be giving the port of Vancouver a way of functioning again.

I'm trying to understand something.

Maybe, Mr. Ashton, you would have some remarks, or others would, on this. Knowing that we wanted to bring both parties to a fair settlement—quickly, of course, but to a fair settlement—without doing anything that would upset the balance at the bargaining table, what was the effect or the impact of the minister's referral to recommend a settlement with the Canada Industrial Relations Board? Can you give us a bit of insight on that, Mr. Ashton, and then maybe others, if they have any comments?

[Robert Ashton]

Let me back you up for a second. I don't represent the members in Montreal, but I will say that the two-year struggle those workers went through was forced upon them by the Maritime Employers Association and their screwing around at the CIRB. It had nothing to do with the workers doing anything nasty. That was all on the shoulders of the MEA, in my humble opinion.

As for the CIRB, out here with the west coast port strike, when we entered the room with the employer and the chair, our employer had no intention of negotiating with us at that time. It was their go-to all through bargaining. I said at that meeting that we were going to get a deal by the end of the night, because a negotiated settlement was the only settlement that's appropriate for workers, and we got it done that night. We ended up getting a deal within hours after being there, because the parties finally realized we should get a deal done.

Binding arbitration, or however you want to say it, when it comes to workers' rights and labour relations in the future, kills everything. It should not be accepted by anybody, because it drags out ill will in the parties and gives the employers the upper hand. The employers will just sit back and do absolutely nothing. They won't have to do anything, because they have this special law that they can put in place.

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Did anybody else want to comment on that?

Minister Dreeshen, you've spoken today about the economic impacts of the port of Vancouver strike, and you've been very vocal in calling for increased government interventions to mitigate those impacts. How do the impacts of the Vancouver port strike compare to the economic impacts of the illegal closures of the Coutts border crossing and the Ambassador Bridge in Windsor? Do you also believe the federal government has a role to play in ending those illegal blockades and occupations, or do you prefer federal intervention only when it comes to labour?

Thank you.

[Devin Dreeshen]

To an earlier comment about how the Port of Vancouver and the west coast Canadian ports don't have to compete with anyone, I would like to remind all the members of the container port performance index, a global ranking of container ports across the world. Vancouver ranks 347th, second-last on the index. We do compete as a country to make sure we can ship our products around the world, but I wanted to put that into context.

Again, I heard other testimony that shippers are deciding to permanently move away from Canadian ports. That results in not investing in Canadian companies—

[Mona Fortier, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Could you answer my question, though, Mr. Minister, please?

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

The member asked the question, and the witness can take the time to answer in whichever way. The members have a very limited time, Minister, as you know from the work that you do, so if you could answer the member, it would be appreciated.

[Devin Dreeshen]

Thank you for that, Madam Chair.

To quickly finish that thought, if every shipper moved away from Canadian ports, there would be no jobs at Canadian ports, just to put that in context.

To the member's specific question about any type of disruption, whether it be rail, our border with the U.S. or at ports, we take it very seriously as a provincial government. Those are federal jurisdictions, and that is why we've been calling on the federal government to bring in some changes to the Canada Labour Code so that the federal government.... These are federal jurisdictions, and we in Alberta stay in our lane when it comes to jurisdiction.

On Bill C-69, the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government was unconstitutional in allowing a federal impact assessment into provincial jurisdiction. Even if, as a transport minister, I had wanted to have a provincial road built, it would have fallen under the federal impact assessment, but thankfully the Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional.

We're staying in our lane, which is why we've been calling on the federal government, whether it be on border crossings, on issues with rail or on critical infrastructure at the ports, to make sure it takes that seriously.

Again, to the point of the Montreal port, it was one day, and the same federal government introduced back-to-work legislation. We called for that same urgency to be used on the west coast port strike this last summer.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, Minister.

Thank you very much to all of our witnesses.

We will be going in camera to deal with the draft report on non-tariff barriers.

I will suspend for a moment while our witnesses exit.

Thank you.

[Proceedings continue in camera]