International Trade Committee on April 16th, 2026

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

It won't surprise you, Mr. Lawrence. Of course I don't agree with that.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Clarke, ON]

I thought you were going to agree.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

You've simplified the promise.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Clarke, ON]

David Akin is here. He would have a great story on that.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

You simplified the promise. I get it.

I guess we could have had sort of a caveat at the beginning of the platform that Canada is a federation. There are sovereign governments with jurisdiction in different parts of the country. We can control what we can control.

All teasing aside, Mr. Lawrence, in the federation there is a great deal of common interest. Some provinces have been ahead of the Government of Canada for a number of years. Years ago, the premier of Alberta, former premier Kenney, passed legislation on mutual recognition in terms of labour requirements for different professions way ahead of any other province.

There's been a lot of common interest. It's come into focus with the election campaign, sure, but also because of the challenges with respect to the United States.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Clarke, ON]

I have just a couple of the other issues about the requirement for federal leadership. My belief and what we all know is that if all the barriers were put down tomorrow, the economy would benefit by tens of billions, if not hundreds of billions, of dollars. Oftentimes, removing regulations or removing the barriers can actually be against the province's self-interest.

Would you agree with me, Minister, so far as to say that we really require federal leadership in order to overcome some of the self-interest—rational self-interest, I might add—of the provinces?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Your question is a good one, Mr. Lawrence. I would agree that the Government of Canada absolutely has to play a leadership role in the federation. Two things can be true at the same time. We have to respect the proper provincial jurisdiction in this regard.

I have said this to premiers, and I've said it publicly as well. The first 75% of those barriers are the easiest ones to remove. The next 20% are a little harder. The last 5% will be, to your point, amongst the most difficult, politically, in provinces big and small. Everybody's thinking now of examples that we all know.

I am encouraged by the courageous leadership of a number of provinces, recognizing.... We hear premiers say that we need to be our own best customer and we need to have confidence in each other. If a province says that this good is safe for sale, then why wouldn't we have faith in one another and trust one another? The provinces are saying this to one another and publicly. That's why I'm optimistic that the final part can be achieved quickly, but you're right. The last elements will be harder than the first tranche.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Clarke, ON]

I have one quick question to end, Minister.

When will we have free trade in Canada?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

I'll speak to what we can control. I want to thank the Conservatives for having supported that legislation last June which eliminated federal barriers to free trade in Canada. We have achieved that by July 1. Coming back to the platform here, we're obviously pleased with our election platform.

Madam Chair, we will continue to show the leadership that Mr. Lawrence indicated, and work with our partners in the federation as quickly as possible. I wish it was all by July 1. We'll control what we can control. We'll be good partners and encourage and work with a lot of the goodwill that's in the federation to finish the job.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

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

[Steeve Lavoie, Liberal, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Minister, thank you for being here. Thank you to the witnesses. We're pleased to welcome you to the committee.

When the announcement was made last spring, my reaction was like that of some of my constituents: Why hadn't we thought of opening this market before? That may seem simple to some people, but, in reality, it's not, and there are many reasons why.

Today, almost a year later, I have a question. You may have started answering it earlier, but I'd like us to talk about more concrete things.

What concrete initiatives has the government come up with, in collaboration with the provinces, to facilitate, encourage and help businesses increase interprovincial trade?

Where are these initiatives at?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Thank you. That's a very good question.

I can give a few very concrete examples, and Ms. Ritchot or other colleagues can talk about others.

According to the internal trade ministers who were in Yellowknife for the meeting held in November, which was five months ago, the Canadian Mutual Recognition Agreement on the Sale of Goods should have been signed years ago. You're absolutely right.

I don't think Canadians were aware of that, but it wasn't deliberate. It's a bit like for Mr. Lawrence's question. Over the years, the provinces and territories, for reasons that were entirely legitimate and appropriate for them, put together a series of measures that got in the way of Canadian free trade. I would say that mutual recognition on the sale of goods is very important.

We took it to the next level, the sale of services, which makes up a larger portion of the economy than the sale of goods. We made this a priority.

I'll move on to another example. Again, this is in the hands of the provinces, but I find it very encouraging. Eleven of the 13 jurisdictions have agreed to allow direct-to-consumer sales of alcohol as of next month. If you own a vineyard in Nova Scotia and you want to sell your products in Quebec or British Columbia, or vice versa, you'll be able to do so. The provinces have agreed to make that possible by the end of next month. We don't have a horse in this race, but we encourage the provinces to proceed. We're quite happy that they've agreed to do this. That's another example. The other two jurisdictions are going to take a little bit longer.

Those were two concrete examples.

Another great example is trucking. It used to be that if you went from the Port of Halifax to Toronto to change the tires on your truck, you had to satisfy various requirements with respect to tires, first aid kits and fire extinguishers. All of that has been vastly improved thanks to such an agreement.

I tried to cover everything.

[Steeve Lavoie, Liberal, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

That's perfect.

We studied the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement. Now we're looking at Mercosur and the agreements that were signed in Asia.

There's a lot of talk about going to Europe and doubling strategic infrastructure for that part of the world. I would like to compare that to infrastructure within Canada.

In Canada, what infrastructure investments are needed to increase and foster internal trade?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

That's a very good question.

We can all think of something. For me, what comes to mind is ports, such as the ones in Montreal, Vancouver and so on, which are very important.

[Steeve Lavoie, Liberal, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

There is also the Port of Québec.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

There are also the ports in Saint John, New Brunswick, and, yes, Quebec City.

It goes without saying that a lot of those goods are transported by truck, so highway infrastructure is very important. For Newfoundland and Labrador, ferries are obviously very important. There has to be a ferry system to support trade. When the cost of crossing the Confederation Bridge between my province and Prince Edward Island dropped from $50 to $20, that directly benefited the people of Prince Edward Island and the people of other provinces who wanted to exchange goods.

Regarding rail, I'm not an expert, so I don't know all the details. However, I've attended a lot of meetings during which the major rail companies talked to us about their intermodal stations.

Some areas have huge ports. In Winnipeg, my colleagues are talking about an inland port. At the end of the day, logistical infrastructure is what makes trucking or rail efficient and prevents delays. For example, a rail car might be idle for two weeks, or it could be idle for only two days.

It's kind of the same thing as for international trade, but it's for local trade and internal trade.

[Steeve Lavoie, Liberal, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

We'll go to Monsieur Savard-Tremblay for six minutes.

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Minister LeBlanc, Ms. Ritchot and Mr. Moen, thank you for being with us.

I don't think anyone has a problem with removing barriers per se. Of course, we have to remember that we're not talking about tariff barriers. There aren't any, and interprovincial tariffs are illegal. However, I worry that the term “barriers” could be used to refer to any policy, program or regulation that may be bad but is still legitimate as long as it is implemented democratically by one of the provincial legislatures.

Minister, I know you're a francophone, so you care about the French language. One thing that often comes up in conversations about interprovincial barriers is professional associations.

Do you feel it's important not to interfere in any way in the primacy of French as implemented by the Government of Quebec or the knowledge of French requirement for professional associations operating in Quebec?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

That's an excellent question, Mr. Savard‑Tremblay.

I want to make sure I grasped the question correctly, because I don't want to say “yes” if the answer is actually “no”.

I can assure you that, in our past and future meetings and conversations with the Government of Quebec, we would never undermine the province's rightful and essential duty: protecting the French language.

That's a roundabout way of answering “yes” to your question. If the question is whether we made a commitment to our partners in Quebec, as witnessed by the other provinces, to do nothing that will diminish the ability of the Government of Quebec to make necessary decisions on such matters as protecting the French language, then the answer is absolutely “yes”. We supported that. We said that. I think I was there when Mr. Carney said the same thing to Mr. Legault a few months ago.

You don't have to worry. We agree with you on that.

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

Quebec's distinct character is still being respected, then.

Is that correct?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Yes.

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

Nevertheless, you have come to a decision about Quebec's place in the free trade agreement with Canada and in the agreement on trade with the other provinces.

If I understand your government's rationale correctly, given Quebec's importance in this regard, you would negotiate an economic and trade agreement with a sovereign Quebec.

Is that correct?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Okay. I see. You want us to talk about all kinds of hypothetical situations.

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

Of course.