International Trade Committee on April 28th, 2026

[David McKenzie, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

After we do that, what's next? Where do we go from there?

[Ryan Manucha]

The big, exciting announcement was about the spread of this concept of mutual recognition. When I drive with my driver's licence in Ontario, it is recognized in Quebec. It's activating that across the economy. Right now, the focus is on construction and manufacturing when it comes to modular home codes or when it comes to building product material recognition across the country, and having focused attention and leadership from the centre, where you have the committee on internal trade driving that path forward....

The most important thing is the federal government, in conjunction with its first ministers across the country, coming out of the Council of the Federation.... They're not at it, but that body of first ministers needs to be setting very specific KPIs for the internal trade community. We need to know what the agenda is, and it can only come from the top, because internal trade touches on fiefdoms and turfs. It gets very touchy, so you need the muscle from first ministers on this.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. McKenzie.

Next is Madame Lapointe, please, for six minutes.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Welcome to all the witnesses and thank you for joining us.

Ms. Senneville, you said earlier that the CSN has 330,000 members in Canada.

How many of them are in Quebec?

[Caroline Senneville]

There are about 300,000. We have Canada-wide unions, and also have unions in Ontario and New Brunswick, but most of them are in Quebec.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

I asked that because you said that you need to make sure there is mutual recognition right across Canada.

Obviously, there are a lot of differences from province to province. I'm thinking of professional rules, operating mechanisms and the recognition of workers' positions. In construction, in particular, that can be quite difficult to achieve.

How can we improve labour mobility in Canada while respecting regional realities and ensuring worker protection?

By the way, I agree with what you said earlier about recognizing French.

[Caroline Senneville]

There is a labour shortage in the construction industry. We're already having trouble recruiting people. We would like to have local workers to be able to meet demand within a province.

For example, when workers come from outside the country for major construction projects, that creates problems in terms of logistics and housing. It also shuts down the local economy because, if the projects are very big, the contracts will always be awarded to outside companies, not local ones. Why would I go out and buy a crane? Why expand my business if the contracts are going to be awarded to outsiders? That might be an obstacle, but we have to strike a fair balance.

There's a certification seal for construction workers in Canada. I forget the name of it. That industry is about the most integrated of industries.

We have to be careful when talking about workers. A lot of things have happened. We've seen what the removal of barriers in the trucking industry has done in terms of health and safety. There have been deaths on the roads.

What scares us is creating a situation where whoever has the weakest regulations will prevail. As I said earlier, construction workers accounted for half of the 257 people killed on the job this year in Quebec.

It's very important to speak the language, because if you don't speak it, you won't understand the safety measures. There was a death at La Grande Roue ferris wheel in Montreal. The instruction manual from La Grande Roue had not been translated into French, so the worker didn't know what to do.

Some rules are unnecessary, while others save lives.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

That's for sure. Thank you.

I'd like to ask you more questions, but I'm going to turn to Ryan Greer.

Mr. Greer, you spoke earlier about a patchwork of systems. You said we have to be careful not to recognize just parts of them. We often hear about the duplication of regulations, different standards or certifications from one province to another.

In your opinion, what would be the most realistic and quickest steps the government could take in the next few years to simplify these processes without compromising the health and safety standards we talked about?

[Ryan Greer]

For the federal government, we really ought to take an all-of-the-above approach in trying to incentivize continued provincial momentum. The federal barriers themselves are minimal, and the government has, to its credit, made movements to remove a lot of its exceptions and tried to eliminate strictly federal barriers. The federal government has an important role as a convenor, but also to help create the right incentives.

As the other Ryan noted, there's a really important role for generating and sustaining momentum that must come from the federal government. There's too much political variability, and there are different regional dimensions and prioritization, whether it's with the minister of a province who's in charge or a particular regulator that may not be willing to play ball.

There needs to be strong political momentum from first ministers to continue to ensure that the momentum we have achieved doesn't get lost and we don't end up in a hybrid patchwork where we've made some progress, we have to implement mutual recognition, we still have a wide variety of approaches to labour mobility and we still have a number of professions that are stuck outside of it because of provincial certifications and other things. We need to be very sober in assessing progress and being proud of it, but we really need to be doubling down on trying to continue that momentum.

The federal government plays an essential role. There may be some statutory measures around the Competition Bureau. There are going to be other ways around...some sort of public reporting or a scorecard. There will a celebrating of those that are moving the furthest and fastest and perhaps a naming of those that aren't.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Do you think there's a real willingness to co-operate with the provinces?

What are the main obstacles?

[Ryan Greer]

I think there's a genuine interest in collaboration. We've seen that from first ministers. The roadblocks are the systems. We are talking about dozens of regulators across every province, which all have their own interests in preserving some of the work they've done.

The biggest challenges are structural, so it's about ensuring that that political momentum continues.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, Mr. Greer.

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

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

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for being here. I also thank them for their presentation.

Ms. Senneville, your presentation was interesting. You clarified some of the things we hear very often. In your brief on Quebec's Bill 112, you also said that exports to the United States are primarily commodities and energy products. In your opinion, domestic demand would not be able to absorb that. So that's the end of that.

You also said that there are not enough companies to process those products.

In other words, there is an expectation that trade barriers will be lifted, and we support that. I am part of a movement that has always been in favour of free trade, whether domestically or with other countries, but not at any cost. We don't have to take a rigid approach.

I would also say that there won't be a miracle. That's obvious. Studies show that it will never replace the American market, even in the best of all possible worlds. It's not possible.

That said, even if the concept is desirable in itself, aren't you afraid that it could be a kind of Trojan horse?

Last year, for example, a bill to remove interprovincial trade barriers was passed by the House of Commons under a “super gag order”. I'm referring to Bill C‑5, under which energy projects can now be approved by order in council.

Are you also afraid that this Trojan horse could ultimately threaten some of the things that make Quebec distinct?

When you think about it, language laws, the rate of unionization and the fact that we want to regulate our own securities can be considered barriers. It's a very long list.

I'm not saying this will necessarily be the case, but do you see it as a potential threat to the Quebec model?

[Caroline Senneville]

Quebec is, of course, the only province whose official language is French. So there are some vulnerable aspects. We support ongoing work on the regulations. We are in favour of the federal government being able to play a coordination role. Of course, it's not a done deal.

I visited the Alcoa aluminum smelter in Baie‑Comeau a few months ago. Aluminum is one of our strengths in Quebec. It's one of our strengths in Canada. People there told me they make ingots and send them to the United States, which come back to us as beer cans and aluminum foil. So I asked them why we don't do that in Canada. They said it would take a mill, which would be very expensive. They have done studies and, even if we had a single mill in Canada, no matter where, with a population of 40 million, it would not be cost-effective. So, yes, efforts must be made, and we agree that work needs to be done, but there won't be a miracle.

As to the unionization rate, it's about 40% in Quebec. It's about 20% in the other Canadian provinces. That is important to us. Freedom of association is also included in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

I would also say that political choices have been made, with respect to alcohol, for instance. So it might be good to liberalize certain things. However, one of the reasons that the boycott of U.S. alcohol is working in Canada right now is that it's being led by publicly owned corporations. That's not just in Quebec. It's also the case in other provinces. That's why I say you have to look at the rationale underlying regulations. We need to work on that in greater detail.

I agree with the official from the C.D. Howe Institute that sustained effort is needed to get the right regulations in the right place.

That said, if we take the approach that there are too many regulations and that we have to remove some, we run the risk of throwing the baby out with the bathwater, as the saying goes.

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

You're talking about alcohol. That's a good example, the Société des alcools du Québec, or SAQ. As much as Quebeckers debate whether they should keep it or privatize it, partly or fully, we can also agree that it should not be imposed by Ottawa. That is crystal clear.

But what barriers have you heard about with regard to alcohol, other than the very existence of publicly owned corporations such as the LCBO and the SAQ?

[Caroline Senneville]

One example mentioned by the official from the C.D. Howe Institute was not being able to walk from one province to another with alcohol. That is indeed a rule that I think is unnecessary.

There are also railway tracks and trucks. Apparently, nine out of ten Canadian provinces have the same rule when it comes to the bar at the back of trucks.

Looking at these examples, the answer is easy. It's when you drill down that it becomes more difficult. Canada is a federation, and we have to remember that. That is true for Quebec, and also for the other provinces and territories.

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

Could you clarify that last point? What do you mean?

[Caroline Senneville]

Let me give you the example of Alberta, which comes to mind entirely by chance. There might be things that province would like to put forward.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Groleau, you have five minutes.

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Good afternoon, dear guests.

I'll start with you, Mr. Greer.

My question is quite simple. Is there free trade in Canada?

[Ryan Greer]

No, there's not free trade in Canada. As Mr. Manucha alluded to, it's unlikely that Canada will ever achieve that goal, but we're certainly hopeful that we can move further along the scale towards free trade through some of the steps that have been taken by governments over the last 18 months.

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Manucha, is there trade free in Canada?

[Ryan Manucha]

My answer is the same as Mr. Greer's.

No, there isn't, but that is not the end state of Canada, and I don't think we would want that.

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Back to you, Mr. Greer.

Are interprovincial trade barriers costing our businesses time and money?

[Ryan Greer]

The short answer is yes. They cost money and time, and time is an important one. There is a major opportunity cost to.... For example, if you have facilities in Alberta and Ontario, there are different working at heights regulations, so you can't transfer one employee between the two to do the exact same job. You need to recertify them to work at heights. That is a small distinction that doesn't just create complexity for the business, but creates cost and time trying to do what you want to do.

There are certainly actual costs, but there are huge opportunity costs to our entire economy in creating that kind of confusion, especially for small and medium-sized businesses and individual workers who have to consider what they are attempting or would like to do and how that measures across a dozen different jurisdictions.