International Trade Committee on Dec. 7th, 2023

[The Chair (Hon. Judy A. Sgro (Humber River—Black Creek, Lib.)), Liberal, Judy Sgro]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 87 of the Standing Committee on International Trade.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the Standing Orders. Therefore, members are attending in person in the room and remotely using the Zoom application.

I need to make a few comments for the benefit of the witnesses and members.

Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. For those online, please mute yourself when you are not speaking. This is a reminder that all comments should be addressed through the chair. If any technical issues arise, please inform me immediately. We will need to suspend in order to ensure interpretation is properly restored before resuming the meeting. I ask all participants to be careful when handling the earpieces, in order to prevent feedback.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Tuesday, October 17, 2023, the committee is continuing its study on the 2023 strike at the port of Vancouver.

We have, today, the Canadian International Freight Forwarders Association, Bruce Rodgers, executive director, by video conference; and Julia Kuzeljevich, director, policy and regulatory affairs, by video conference. We have with us the Canadian Meat Council, Lauren Martin, senior director, government relations and policy. Back again, from the Greater Vancouver Board of Trade, we have Bridgitte Anderson, president and chief executive officer, by video conference. Ms. Anderson will be with us for only the first hour of the meeting.

We also have the Freight Management Association of Canada, Robert Ballantyne, former president and senior adviser. From the Mining Association of British Columbia, Tim McEwan, senior vice-president, corporate affairs, is with us by video conference. Joining us also is Michel Murray, union adviser with the longshoreman union at the port of Montreal, with whom we're still waiting to connect by video conference.

Welcome to you all. We will start with opening remarks and then proceed with rounds of questions.

Mr. Rodgers, I invite you to address the committee for up to five minutes, please.

[Bruce Rodgers, Executive Director, Canadian International Freight Forwarders Association]

Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak with you today and to be invited to this panel.

I'm going to ask Julia Kuzeljevich to start, and I will finish the opening remarks.

[Julia Kuzeljevich, Director, Policy and Regulatory Affairs, Canadian International Freight Forwarders Association]

Good morning. Thank you for having us appear today.

Madam Chair, committee members, on behalf of the Canadian International Freight Forwarders Association, or CIFFA, we'd like to thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today.

Very briefly, for those who may not know, freight forwarders take control of shipments, be they imports or exports, and move them to the ultimate customer by whatever transport mode is most cost-efficient. We represent roughly 12,000 employees of member firms, and they handle approximately 80% of freight traffic in Canada. Also, as our association represents port truckers—called drayage operators—customs brokers and other services sectors, we can legitimately claim to represent all the key players in Canada's supply chain.

The labour disruptions at west coast ports this last summer were a fairly serious blow to our members and to our customers. We feel it was also a sign that we need to start moving beyond the traditional and wasteful pattern of labour confrontation that has characterized the Canadian port industry.

The year 2023 was certainly the year of labour disputes in ports. We saw strikes on Canada's west coast and on the U.S. west coast as well. In the southeast of the U.S., although negotiations are currently under way, the union stated that members should prepare to go on strike next October. Now, we are looking at a possible strike at the port of Montreal.

[Bruce Rodgers]

We canvassed our members in anticipation of this appearance, asking about the impacts of the west coast strike last summer, and got reactions such as members saying that the most frustrating part of the Vancouver situation seemed to be the complete lack of understanding of supply chains in Canada. Media coverage focused on the impact to B.C., without any understanding of the volume of cargo arriving via B.C. ports, destined for inland centres…most notably southern Ontario.

This underlines a point we want to make to the committee. The victims of strikes aren't the workers, who generally get their back pay upon settlement, nor the port and labour business managers. The victims are ordinary small businesses. Nobody compensates them for their losses.

As a specific example of impacts to a forwarder's customers, who were impacted by the Vancouver situation, an importer stated that due to the late delivery of seasonal import items, they had a customer miss a deadline and the resulting order. As these goods are seasonal, they were unable to find another buyer. This customer is sitting on this inventory, and because of the money tied up in this, is unable to purchase other seasonal goods and keep their business moving forward.

From an exporter's perspective, we heard from one who had a customer who dealt with an overseas buyer on longer contracts of sale, such as 90 days to a year. As a result of the continued supply chain issues that have been happening in Canada, this buyer is now sourcing the majority of the volume from elsewhere in the world; the Canadian exporter gets a small portion of the volume they carried, and contracts of sale are on a single shipment of limited basis, such as 30 days.

There should be no doubt in anyone's mind that disruptions divert traffic; nor should you doubt that those disruptions can lead to permanent changes in shipping routes.

In a November interview, a supply chain manager in Inside Logistics made the point that in the past two years, they’ve seen east coast ports steal import volume from west coast ports as shippers looked to avoid backlogs and delays.

Now, as we look forward to the possibility of another disruption at the port of Montreal, our members are seeing shippers beginning to move away and find more reliable routings. There is no telling if these moves are temporary or permanent. We believe that Mr. Miao was asking about this last Thursday, and this is one of the most worrying aspects of service disruptions.

Inflation-related costs have driven up worker demands, while traffic has begun a significant decline, a decline that continues to this day. We fear it's going to be a difficult negotiation.

To conclude our remarks, following the west coast debacle this summer, Minister of Labour O'Regan talked about an in-depth examination of the port industry, with a focus on the future of port labour. On October 19, he issued a statement confirming that Anthony Giles and Kevin Banks have been contracted to begin the first part of this review process. Their work is due by December 31, which may be a day too late for the port of Montreal.

We see European employers and unions co-operating to ensure competitiveness and decent wages, yet in Canada we seem condemned to strikes as a requirement of negotiation. We hope and believe it's time for a better approach.

That concludes our report. Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

We will move on to Ms. Martin for an opening statement of up to five minutes, please.

[Lauren Martin, Senior Director, Government Relations and Policy, Canadian Meat Council]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Good morning, everyone. I appreciate the invitation to appear on behalf of the Canadian Meat Council.

My name is Lauren Martin. I am the senior director of government relations and policy. We are pleased to provide comments regarding the strike at the port of Vancouver.

CMC represents Canada's federally licensed meat packers, meat processors and suppliers of equipment and goods to the meat industry. Our members process over 90% of Canada's pork and beef. Our members feed Canadians and the world with some of the highest-quality protein in the world. The Canadian red meat industry represents over $32 billion to the Canadian economy and supports 288,000 jobs across Canada.

As members of this committee well know, Canada's economy relies heavily on trade. With respect to red meat, Canada exports almost 70% of its pork and 50% of its beef to over 90 countries in the world, with lucrative trade relationships in Asian countries such as China and Japan, which are accessed via the western ports.

In 2022, Canadian processors exported $9.5 billion in red meat products, which include pork, beef, lamb and others. We could not efficiently or cost-effectively get these goods to market without reliable transportation infrastructure: ground, air and sea. Approximately 25% of Canada's total traded goods flows through the ports in western Canada. They are Canada's largest gateway, handling over 800 million dollars' worth of cargo, which includes red meat products, every single day.

Our members spend considerable resources creating and maintaining relationships with customers worldwide. When companies cannot fulfill orders reliably, this jeopardizes those relationships. As a result of our reliance on trade and the important markets accessed via the western ports, the impact of this dispute was far more profound than that of most other labour disruptions, though we did see an almost equally worrisome situation developing in the St. Lawrence Seaway this fall.

To position Canada as a competitive trading partner in the global economy, businesses must be able to get goods to and from market efficiently and reliably, as I've mentioned. Red meat cannot sit for days—let alone weeks—without spoiling. Given the nature of our goods, our supply chain is built to ship goods to market efficiently. We do not have the storage capacity to stockpile weeks of unshipped goods.

When our members are faced with an event that exceeds our storage capacity or even comes close to exceeding that storage capacity, they are forced to shut down production. Animals cannot move off the farm, which in turn has implications for farm families and their bottom lines, not to mention the implications for animal welfare. Events like this are felt in businesses and individuals along the supply chain, and gearing back up is not as simple as the flip of a switch.

I have now illustrated the challenging decisions that businesses must make when facing uncertainty. It is unfortunate that the strike happened when it did, with industries still struggling with the postpandemic fragility of supply chains, labour shortages, and inflation. It goes without saying that putting perishable products such as red meat at risk is also not in the public's best interests. These types of lengthy market disruptions add costs to businesses that put food on families' tables, impacting food affordability.

Canadians expected our elected officials to ensure that this labour dispute was resolved quickly. Instead, it dragged on for 35 days. The Greater Vancouver Board of Trade estimated that $10.7 billion in trade was impacted during the 35 days of strike action this past July. While we respect the workers' right to strike, those interests must be balanced against the public interest.

In the future, the federal government must be willing to intervene much sooner than it did this past summer and use all the tools it has at its disposal to bring parties to the table. Additionally, it should consider solutions such as maintenance of service provisions, which have been granted for grain, for all perishable products, such as red meat. We strongly recommend such measures, which will protect red meat's critical paths to market, our nation's trading reputation and food affordability for all Canadians.

That concludes my comments. Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, Ms. Martin.

We'll go on to Mr. Ballantyne, please.

[Robert Ballantyne, Past President and Senior Adviser, Freight Management Association of Canada]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

The Freight Management Association of Canada has been representing the freight transportation interests of Canadian industry to all levels of government since 1916. Despite appearances, I wasn't at the first meeting.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Robert Ballantyne]

The FMA is not an industry-specific association. It has a focus on freight transportation by all modes of transport—air, marine, rail and truck—that impact the supply chains of companies in all industries. We have agriculture, mining, manufacturing, food processing and retail companies within our membership. Some of our retail members are household names.

In addition, the FMA is the Canadian member of the Global Shippers Forum. Through that relationship, we are involved in dialogue with various UN agencies that impact global trade, such as the International Maritime Organization.

The term “supply chain” is a good metaphor for the complex relationships of all stakeholders involved in moving goods from origin to destination. With the growth of international trade, these chains have become ever more complex. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. If one of those links is broken, the entire chain is impacted.

As this committee is focused on Canada’s international trade, it becomes obvious that a work stoppage at a major “link” in the chain, like the port of Vancouver, will broadly impact the Canadian economy and Canada’s international customers. It can also have potential impacts on the health and safety of Canadians.

While the FMA respects the rights of workers, there has to be consideration of the resulting impacts of work stoppages in many industries that are critical to the functioning of the Canadian economy and Canadian society. How do we balance the rights of approximately 7,000 west coast port workers with the rights of millions of Canadians across the country, including other unionized workers?

The Canada Labour Code goes some distance in attempting to look at this conundrum. Here are a couple of the items.

The first is essential services. Subsection 87.4(1) of the Canada Labour Code requires that, during a strike or lockout, the employer, the trade union and the employees “must continue the supply of services, operation of facilities or production of goods to the extent necessary to prevent an immediate and serious danger to the safety or health of the public.” The second one is subsection 87.7(1), which requires the longshore industry to service grain vessels during a strike or lockout.

Regarding essential services, a case can be made that these should be expanded beyond the “immediate and serious danger to the safety or health of the public.” The major impacts on Canadian society of broken links in the supply chain caused by port and rail labour disruptions are such that Parliament should look at expanding the “essential services” definition to address these widespread and major impacts.

Also, while it's appropriate that grain vessels should continue to be serviced during a strike, it is time to consider extending this requirement to other commodities and industries, as my colleague Lauren already mentioned.

In preparing for this meeting, FMA reached out to a number of its member companies regarding the impacts they have experienced. Many of our importer members report that they have had to commence taking action in advance of a possible supply chain strike. This can add significant cost. If delayed products are seasonal or time-sensitive, it can result in lost sales and revenues.

Canadian prosperity depends on our international trade, and labour disruptions are one of several issues impacting Canada’s reputation as a reliable trading partner. In addition to strikes, we have seen floods and fires in western Canada that have impacted rail and trucking services in some areas. There have been instances of blockades of rail services by people protesting various issues across the country.

FMA obtains information each year from the Canada labour program on expiring transportation labour agreements. The 2023 list includes the west coast longshore agreement and the St. Lawrence Seaway agreement, which both expired on March 31. As mentioned, these agreements were not settled without strikes. It's also worth noting that, on December 31—about three weeks from now—the longshore workers contract at the port of Montreal ends, as do five railway agreements with CN, CPKC and Ontario Northland. Those will be expiring at the end of this month.

FMA is pleased to see the committee looking at these important issues, and we think it would be useful for Parliament to extend its consideration of labour relations to all of the links in the Canadian supply chain.

Thanks for the opportunity. I'm pleased to try to answer questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you, Mr. Ballantyne.

We'll move on to Mr. McEwan, please, for up to five minutes.

[Tim McEwan, Senior Vice President, Corporate Affairs, Mining Association of British Columbia]

Good morning, Chair and members of the committee.

My name is Tim McEwan. I'm senior vice-president of corporate affairs with the Mining Association of British Columbia, or MABC for short.

I'm joining you today from the shared, traditional, ancestral and unceded territories of the Tsawwassen and other Coast Salish peoples.

MABC represents 17 operating mines, two smelters and more than a dozen development projects in British Columbia. Mining is a major user of Canada's west coast ports and is the largest shipping sector by volume using both rail and marine modes.

Most of British Columbia's production volume is shipped to international customers in Japan, Korea, India and others, and accounted for 28%, or $18 billion, of the total value of British Columbia's exports in 2022. British Columbia's mining industry employs approximately 35,000 people in our province, with an average annual salary of $139,000.

When mines and smelters curtail operations, the impacts are felt not only by our employees but also the 3,800 businesses and suppliers in communities across the province that depend on the industry for their economic livelihoods.

Last summer's strike occurred on the heels of unprecedented supply chain disruptions during the pandemic, record wildfires and atmospheric rivers that severed rail lines and highways. The strike had a major effect on B.C.'s mining and smelting sectors.

First, it disrupted the inbound delivery of key supplies and materials for our members' operations. This included new equipment and other inputs for capital projects and materials to support ongoing operations.

Second, from an outbound or export perspective, each mining operation in British Columbia was impacted differently by the strike due to factors such as the commodity being mined, the site location and the transportation mode used to ship the commodity. A few sites were able to divert shipments to other ports, albeit with increased costs, effort and time, but other operations did not have this option available. The inability to get products to international markets caused some mines to stockpile products on site or in railcars across B.C., all with physical and financial limits to how long they could do this.

With a prolonged strike or lockout, British Columbia's mining sector risks losing international customers to producers outside of Canada. Throughout the period, international customers were frequently asking about the strike and when it would end. The longer the strike continued, it was necessary for some MABC members to plan for shutdowns or temporary layoffs.

Beyond the immediacy of the strike, disruptions also caused significant congestion throughout the supply chain that took many weeks to fully resolve. Simply put, the longer a disruption persists, the longer it takes to clear congestion, while damage is done to customer relationships and Canada's reputation as a reliable supplier.

Given the size and scope of British Columbia's mining sector, the economic and reputational repercussions for our province and all of Canada—all of these—were substantial. The strike also had cascading consequences for workers, suppliers and communities, not only in British Columbia but also in mining communities across Canada. It's important to note as well that our industry has shared objectives with the governments of Canada and British Columbia to advance more critical mineral mines and to help with climate action and national and allied security imperatives.

The critical minerals opportunity includes billions of dollars of prospective investment, thousands of well-paid, family-supporting jobs, significant partnership opportunities with first nations and new contract and economic opportunities in communities throughout the province.

Secure, certain and predictable supply chains, including fluidity through west coast ports, are indispensable in our collective efforts to grow British Columbia and Canada as a low-carbon supplier of critical minerals to domestic and international markets. Moving forward, it's clear that, if Canada wants to strengthen trading relationships and grow our export economy, including critical minerals opportunities, the federal government needs more effective options to address labour disputes impacting the national economy.

MABC sees the review initiated by the Minister of Labour under section 106 of the Canada Labour Code as an opportunity to provide these solutions. We urge the federal government to balance meaningful collective bargaining with solutions that safeguard British Columbian and Canadian supply chains and our international reputation as a preferred and reliable supplier for low-carbon critical minerals and metals.

I want to thank you today for the opportunity to provide some insights on last summer's strike at Canada's west coast ports.

I look forward to the question and answer session.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, sir.

I'm going to suspend momentarily to do a sound check for Mr. Murray.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Mr. Murray, you have up to five minutes for an opening statement.

[Michel Murray, Union Adviser, Longshoreman Union in the port of Montréal, Syndicat des débardeurs, section locale 375 du Syndicat canadien de la fonction publique]

Good morning. I represent the Syndicat des débardeurs du Port de Montréal, a union that was founded in 1902 and therefore has been around for over 100 years.

Pursuant to House of Commons Standing Order 108, I appear before you to discuss the impact of the Port of Vancouver strike last summer. At the Port of Montreal, we're well placed to speak to the right to strike, since we exercised our right to do so in 2020 and 2021.

I feel a bit like a skunk at a garden party, as all the previous speakers talked about the supply chain and Canada's international reputation. I have to tell you that Canada signed an international agreement on the right to organize in 1972. The right to organize recognizes the right to strike and its counterpart, the right to lock out for the employer, as a foundational element. I must also remind you that the right to strike is recognized under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as confirmed in the Saskatchewan decision.

With respect to restriction of the right to strike under the Canada Labour Code, I must once again remind you that the right to strike has been restricted before. In the late 1990s, further to the Sims report entitled “Seeking a Balance”, the Canada Labour Code was amended to restrict the right to strike by requiring both employers and unions to give 72 hours' notice before exercising the right to strike or lock out.

At the Port of Montreal, if we were to give 72 hours' notice before a strike, the ships would be off the coast of Newfoundland. So the supply chain wouldn't be interrupted. The 72 hours' notice gives time to find a temporary alternate route and maintain the supply chain. So I'm very surprised that all the speakers are talking about restricting the right to strike in any way, shape, or form.

We also talked about essential services, section 87.4 of the Canada Labour Code. Essential services have already been established.

On June 8, 2020, the Canada Industrial Relations Board issued a landmark decision on the Port of Montreal. He said that there was no essential service to maintain, since there was no imminent and serious danger to the public. Of course, there is an economic impact. Who would go on strike without there being an economic impact? Of course, the right to lock out also has an economic impact on workers. The balance already exists.

If you are to look at what is happening in the longshore industry, we think you should focus on section 34 of the Canada Labour Code. How are employers' organizations composed? Why were there strikes at the port of Vancouver last summer? Why were there strikes at the Port of Montreal two years ago? Perhaps because the real decision-makers weren't at the table. When we negotiate, we talk to human resources representatives. Shipping operators and shipping lines are not at the bargaining table.

That's what I understood during the most recent conflict in Vancouver, which I followed closely. Shipping lines and shipping operators were not at the bargaining table. So before we talk about the supply chain and international reputation, we should eliminate the danger at the source and ensure that the real decision-makers are at the bargaining table.

We believe that the committee should instead look at labour relations, see what that consists of and determine who sits at the table to bargain. At the Port of Montreal, we're currently negotiating with the employer's organization, and no decision-maker is sitting at the table. Even the president of the employer's organization is not at the bargaining table. Conciliation ended two days ago, and we're now in a mediation period. The employer has not even submitted its wage offers yet.

Before we talk about supply chain and reputation, the committee should really look at labour relations and who's sitting at the bargaining tables.

Thank you very much for your attention.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, Mr. Murray.

Ms. Anderson was at a previous meeting and was invited back. Would the committee like her to have five minutes again to repeat her opening statement?

Ms. Anderson, the floor is yours for up to five minutes.

[Bridgitte Anderson, President and Chief Executive Officer, Greater Vancouver Board of Trade]

Thank you very much.

Good morning, Chair, vice-chairs and members of the committee.

I'm presenting today from the traditional territory of the Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh nations.

On behalf of our membership of over 5,000 businesses, I thank you for the opportunity to discuss the significant economic impacts of the 13-day strike this summer at Canada's west coast ports. This strike, the longest in almost four decades, unfolded against the backdrop of years of challenges in the supply chain, largely, outside of our control. The cumulation of these events impacted Canada's image and role as a stable partner in the global supply chain.

In March of 2020, the pandemic's effect began a tidal wave of imbalances in container trade as factories around the world shut down, leading to shortages, scarcity and hoarding. In July of 2021, wildfires damaged rail lines and brought train shipments to a grinding halt. In November of 2021, an atmospheric river caused billions of dollars in economic damage to two class I rail links and highway systems, which have been heroically rebuilt. These events highlight the extreme pressure that fuelled inflation and caused economic stress, some of which we were able to control and some of which we were not.

We know that we need to build climate resiliency into the supply chain, and our members are investing to do just that. These investments in our resiliency and growth will mean good-paying and often union jobs.

Against this backdrop, we were concerned in the months leading up to July 1 about what the short-term and long-term economic harm of a strike at the ports of Vancouver and Prince Rupert could be. We communicated to government and port-reliant industries about the damage that could occur if the strike shut down the ports. Regrettably, those fears came to fruition with a coast-wide strike on Canada Day.

During the strike, we launched a port shutdown calculator, a tool designed to visually depict the magnitude of trade disruption. The numbers were staggering, with 800 million dollars' worth of trade being disrupted each day. Our calculator estimated the value of trade disrupted to be a remarkable $10.7 billion.

This disruption reverberated across critical sectors nationwide, from manufacturing and retail to agriculture, energy and automotive dealers. Small businesses ran out of building and construction materials needed to build homes for Canadians. Local car dealers were awaiting shipments of vehicles and parts. Exporting industries lost their ability to move their products to market, making it more difficult to secure the global contracts that drive investment and employ Canadians. Pulp mills stood silent. Mining operations, as you heard, were curtailed, and businesses across Canada faced increased costs and prolonged wait times for goods. Moreover, the rerouting of goods destined for Canada to alternative ports not only incurred additional costs and delays for businesses but also needlessly amplified the environmental footprint of our trade.

While the strike unfolded in B.C., the effects were felt nationwide. We think of the port of Vancouver as “Canada's port”, for it moves as many goods as the next five largest ports combined, single-handedly accounting for approximately 25% of Canada's total traded goods. This means that long-term disputes like the ones we experienced this summer have far-reaching consequences that affect the entire nation.

Billions of dollars in goods bypassed Vancouver for other ports, especially Seattle and other U.S. and Mexican ports, as port swaps and diversions increased. All of this cost Canada. Businesses were unable to adequately plan their operations and staffing without knowing if the ports would be open from one minute to the next. This was made worse by the back and forth of strike action.

Throughout the strike and the aftermath, we consistently urged the federal government to explore additional tools to facilitate lasting agreements during labour disruptions that affect the entire economy. The review initiated by the Minister of Labour, under section 106 of the Canada Labour Code is a key opportunity to do this.

In conclusion, I thank you once again for the opportunity to share insights into the impacts of the strike. We look forward to collaborating with the government to ensure that meaningful collective bargaining can take place without causing detrimental nationwide consequences to our economy and our reputation as a reliable and stable trading partner.

Thank you. I look forward to the questions and answers.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, Ms. Anderson.

Mr. Seeback, go ahead, please, for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I just want to state for the record, especially for Mr. Murray, that no one here is disputing the union's right to strike for better wages. That's unanimously supported by all parties in the House of Commons, but we do want to look at the economic impact of this strike. That's the whole point of this study.

I wanted to quickly follow up. I'm going to ask all three to answer—the freight forwarders association, the board of trade and the Freight Management Association of Canada.

There have been many sorts of reports on what the economic impact has been. I think the $10 billion is the value of the goods that were disrupted. What I want to talk about is the economic impact to the small businesses and others, because I don't think we have a good understanding of what that actual impact is, which includes the fact that these businesses may lose customers because their supply of product is now unstable. Therefore, companies go elsewhere to have those goods supplied.

Could all of you comment on that and whether or not you think that's been captured in any of the calculations of the economic impact?

Mr. Ballantyne, why don't you go first?

[Robert Ballantyne]

I'm not aware if that specific information has been captured anywhere. We've certainly reached out to a number of our member companies. Most of them are fairly large companies, so there really aren't very many small companies that were impacted.

The general information is that there are impacts. There's the business of losing access to commodities and products that may be time-sensitive, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, so you're either a small or a large retailer and you have....

One mentioned, and this surprised me, that they had Halloween commodities that got caught up in the port of Vancouver strike. That's probably pretty small. This was one instance where they lost commodities that were very time-sensitive. That was one issue that one of our members brought to us, but I don't have any statistics on it.

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

I'll jump to the other two, if they want to give me an answer.

[Bridgitte Anderson]

You're quite right that the calculator factors in only the value of goods. The Royal Bank did some analysis and found that 63,000 containers were impacted.

When we look at the broad economic impact, though, the calculator didn't take in the lack of inventory affecting small and medium-sized businesses around their sales, production or the other kinds of impacts that really come to bear, including the catch-up time it took after.

When we look at some of the sectors that we have heard from among our members at the Greater Vancouver Board of Trade, they include mining—my colleague Tim can speak specifically about mining—potash, forestry, car dealerships, trucking and agriculture. All of these industries did speak to the economic impacts, which were significant.

As far as I know, our calculator took in the value of traded goods and not the full economic impact. I don't know if that work has been done yet.

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

Go ahead, Mr. Rodgers.

[Bruce Rodgers]

I'll speak on that as well.

I provided in our opening remarks two examples, specific examples, one from an importer perspective and one from an exporter perspective.

The importer was affected because, when you have a 13-day strike or labour disruption, we have to understand that one day of a strike takes about seven days of recovery to get the goods ultimately to where they were going because of the backlog that's created. It's not just the 13-day impact. It's up to two or three months of impact overall.

I provided two examples. One was an importer whose seasonal goods did not arrive in time. They're sitting on the product. They can't move it. They won't be able to move it for a year. They're impacted financially due to the fact that they have this product and, again, for a small importer, that's a significant impact overall.

The other one I provided was an example of an exporter and, again, it's due to Canada's unreliability in the supply chain that the overseas buyer is now sourcing from other countries. Again, somebody who had regular product, regular inventory, is leaving the country and outsourcing elsewhere, and they've been impacted overall.

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

Would you say that any economic impact analysis that we've heard so far undervalues the actual economic impact to small businesses and others? That's the sense I'm getting.