Transport Committee on Oct. 18th, 2018

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

This is a government that's willing to spend on infrastructure but hasn't necessarily done so in those areas, so that's a good ask.

The oceans protection plan's anchorages initiative is something that has been announced and it's looking at this very situation. What are your impressions of that program's effectiveness?

[Chris Straw]

Our key focus of engagement with Transport Canada is through the anchorages initiative. I will point out that when it was announced we were surprised that the overall budget allocated for this three-year review of the entire anchorage system across the country was only $500,000. I think members of this committee would know you can't do much studying of anything for that amount. Our main concern is that the study actually takes a detailed look at the situation to not only investigate all the available options but also to figure out exactly what's going on.

With respect to the economic side, there's also the impact that they're having, and the anchorages initiative has agreed that it should be looking at the environmental, social and health impacts of these anchorages as well. Our concerns are that they're not well placed to be able to do that with the resources they have, and we're finding that they're already way behind in the timelines that have been proposed.

[Sheila Malcolmson, NDP, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Another initiative of Transport Canada was an interim protocol for the use of southern B.C. anchorages, which was, I think, announced in February last year. Recently, they surprised us with a one-year extension. Can you talk about what the impacts of that program have been from your community's perspective?

[Chris Straw]

This is a voluntary protocol that was extended for another year, and it has two components. The first component is that the port of Vancouver is actually reassigning or allocating ships to different anchorages. Before the protocol was in place, ships would just arrive and they could go to whatever anchorage they wanted. As a voluntary measure, the port of Vancouver agreed to move the ships around at some sort of an equal pacing, but there's no control for the number of ships coming or the amount of time they're waiting. It has really just spread the problem around to even more communities and has added to the impact on communities.

The other component is to ask ships to voluntarily consider local residents and to try to keep the volume down for the noise they generate and the number of lights they have on display. We're finding that ships have to run generators 24-7, because that's how they keep the oil circulating and power all their equipment, so there is actually not a lot that can be done. Some ships seem to comply more than others.

I receive copies of complaint emails from communities across the country and it seems bizarre to me the way this situation is being managed. Someone has to write to the port of Vancouver and ask them to tell this ship to turn down their lights or try to mitigate the noise, and then they have to wait for a possible answer in a voluntary system. We think it should be regulated.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

We're on to Mr. Badawey for five minutes.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I have to give kudos and appreciation to Minister Garneau for establishing a process that is all about strategic government versus strategic politics. That said, I appreciate the comments made by Mr. Veldman with respect to strategic corridor planning, which is in fact what we're trying to establish here.

I also want to mention that we just got back from Vancouver and seeing the port of Vancouver and the port of Seattle, and we tried to get to Prince Rupert but we ran out of time. It would have been nice, because I know how successful you folks are and how much you're adding to the overall supply chain.

I have a question for you, Mr. Veldman. We have CETA, the CPTPP and the USMCA all coming online as we speak. Besides the Asia-Pacific market, I'm looking at product that's coming to and from the midwest and going through Prince Rupert. Where do you see that going? How do you see yourselves participating in that supply chain now with those trade agreements in place?

[Ken Veldman]

Obviously those trade agreements certainly open up opportunity. For us, as I mentioned, over 80% of our goods right now are related to Asian countries. We expect that we're probably going to see a further expansion into the more emerging economies within Asia. We're reaching into the southeast a bit more. Overall, I think they're also seeing some shift in manufacturing centres in Asia.

It's going to be a very dynamic region as we go forward. I think it has significant opportunity for all sorts of sectors in Canada when it comes to an export level. It's important to know from a supply chain perspective that, even though we seem a very long way away, we have a very direct connection with the midwest both in Canada and the U.S., and as we see exporters taking advantage of those opportunities, we think the world will continue to see increases in volume.

We also see that coming the other way, as is the nature of free trade, and we believe there's very much a win-win to be had there. Certainly we've experienced that primarily with the growth in China over the last decade. We think that serves as a pretty good case study as to what we can see in other markets as they continue to grow and as the opportunities continue to grow for Canadian business in particular.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Thank you.

I'd like to go now to Mr. Gooch with the airports. We heard from the Port of Montreal yesterday, and we heard from some witnesses today from Niagara and Labrador with respect to land, rail and road. How do you see air fitting into the overall supply chain in terms of the movement of goods?

The Port of Montreal stated yesterday that to grow, it must be supported by reliable and efficient land trade corridors. What are your comments on that in terms of where you see airports in Canada fitting into that overall supply chain and the movement of goods, not just domestically but also internationally?

[Daniel-Robert Gooch]

I can answer in a few different ways. From a revenue perspective, airports make most of their money from passenger traffic, but here is where the economic development mandate that airports have as non-share capital corporations comes in. Cargo is tremendously important for many regions. Even though it may represent a little bit of revenue, it represents big dollars in terms of goods shipped. Atlantic Canada presents a good case. Shipping lobsters out of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, for example, is tremendously important for the region.

When you get into the larger centres, it may be a little less obvious. I spoke to the role of light rail. We now have a light rail link that connects Toronto Pearson to downtown Union Station. There's one in Vancouver that's been in place for quite a few years, and other airports are working on it. Ottawa and Montreal have something coming, and it's in the long-term vision for Calgary and other airports.

What this does is, when we get people out of cars, whether they be travellers or workers, and onto transit to come into airports that way, it opens up space on the roads. Goods that need to be shipped by road have more capacity for shipment by road because more passengers have been displaced and are coming into the airport by rail.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Mr. Iacono.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I have a question for you, Mr. Gooch. You mentioned the national trade corridors fund in your opening remarks. Can you elaborate on the investments that have been made in the six airports?

[Daniel-Robert Gooch]

You may recall that our airports worked for quite a few years on the unique funding challenges faced by the six smallest NAS airports in terms of their traffic volumes. There were six airports on the lower end of the volume spectrum that were designated as NAS airports but did not have access to ACAP for similar-sized airports. As a result of that work, the national trade corridors fund was opened up to NAS airports for the first time. A component of that was set aside—I'm probably not speaking in technical terms, but it was at least virtually set aside—to meet the needs of those six smallest NAS airports.

We understand that it's intended to be a one-off. Those airports in another decade, when it comes time to look at their infrastructure again, might find themselves in the same situation if their traffic volumes haven't gone up. The program was designed to alleviate traffic bottlenecks, so that particular situation didn't really apply, but the money was set aside.

Our other airports are applying for funds through that program. My understanding is that there was some money put on road access to Calgary International Airport. There was a project in Iqaluit, I believe. Some of the other programs did not get approved for funding, but there are other projects that airports are looking at that are perhaps more consistent with how the program was designed in terms of alleviating traffic bottlenecks.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

My next question goes to Mr. Veldman.

To come back to innovation, officials from the Port of Montreal talked about the need to make the digital shift.

What is the impact of the digital technology supercluster on the development of the Port of Prince Rupert?

[Ken Veldman]

I'm not familiar with the term “supergrappe”, but what I can say is that the availability of data is incredibly important to the supply chain. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, whether you want to call it a digital revolution or to refer to blockchain, at the end of the day this comes to availability of data and how we use it.

There are two significantly important aspects to this. One is forecasting. I mentioned that we are expecting to get to 55 million tonnes over the next decade. That directly relates back to the previous question in terms of where we see growth in Asia-Pacific markets and how that ties back to particularly Canadian growth. Our ability to forecast that only grows with better data, and being able to have access to more data and analyze it properly is key to that.

Also important is real-time availability to data. I talked about adding value for shippers. Shippers are demanding more and more flexibility within their supply chains. They view supply chains as moving warehouses, if you will. From a moving warehouse perspective, often a shipper will have goods leave Asia or go towards Asia without even knowing its final destination yet. They demand the flexibility to be able to divert that cargo to its final destination based on real-time needs.

If they don't have visibility as to where their cargo is and what their ability is to adapt within the supply chain, we aren't able to add the value that they require. If we can't add the value, we lose the competitive edge. Within the west coast there are many gateways and options, and it's certainly important for Canadian ports to be able to take advantage of that. That's where the importance of digital data really comes home to roost.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

How can we better that?

[Ken Veldman]

I think there are many examples, but certainly one is to take a look at CBSA. CBSA is an organization that's been set up very much as a security and regulatory body. The reality is that it's very much the holder of key information as it relates to international trade. Being able to open up that data and use CBSA as an economic instrument in terms of being able to create a common data portal that still respects security concerns but also makes it something that supply chains can access would be a significant step in the right direction. It would require a real look at the mandate and regulations that surround that agency, for example.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, Mr. Veldman.

We'll go to Ms. Block for five minutes.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and I do appreciate hearing from our witnesses today.

I am going to use my time to introduce a motion that I put on notice back on September 18. Lest this action of putting this motion forward during my time compel any of my colleagues on the other side of the table to apologize for me after the fact, I would like to provide some rationale as to why I feel it's important that I put this motion forward today.

The motion states:

That the Committee undertake a study of no less than three meetings on the impact of transportation moratoriums on the investment climate in Canada and that the Committee call on the Minister of Transport to appear.

I will provide some rationale. There is a quote that was made famous by the head of the L.A. Fire Department or was attributed to that individual and then made famous by the president at Ford. It says, “Culture eats Strategy for breakfast”. While we are in the midst of a transportation corridor and logistics study, I believe it is important that we understand how government policy and subsequent legislation impact on a strategy. It is one thing for us to undertake a study looking at the challenges and the opportunities that we have in our transportation system. I know this is an irritant for my colleagues when we raise things like a tanker ban, legislation like Bill C-69 or a carbon tax, but I think it's important for us to marry the two when it comes to looking at challenges and opportunities.

In fact, the president at Ford would go on to say that any company disconnecting the two are putting their success at risk. In fact, I understand that my colleagues, when they were touring the port of Vancouver, would have heard this time and time again in regard to Bill C-69 and the impact it would have had on the growth in that port had it been in place.

That's one of the reasons why I think it's important that we consider this motion at this time during this study. I think we have to have a really good understanding of the impact that these policies and this legislation are having on our ability to do the very thing that we're studying.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Ms. Block has moved the motion:

That the Committee undertake a study of no less than three meetings on the impact of transportation moratoriums on the investment climate in Canada and that the Committee call on the Minister of Transport to appear.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Madam Chair, can we have a recorded vote, please?

(Motion negatived: nays 6; yeas 3)

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Ms. Block, you have a minute or so left.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

On a point of order, is Mr. Oliver a parliamentary secretary? He's not the parliamentary secretary here. Okay, thank you.

I would follow up with a question for the folks at the port of Prince Rupert and just ask for a comment on the potential impact of a tanker ban, the moratorium on tanker traffic, and the impact on the port of Prince Rupert.

[Ken Veldman]

I guess the most obvious answer is that it eliminates the ability to ship the products that are impacted by the moratorium.

As I mentioned earlier, we're hyper-focused on adding value to Canadian exports. Right now, that moratorium essentially precludes conversations within that cargo sector, but we remain focused on other products within the petroleum sector that are facing the same economic challenges and the same price gaps that were earlier referenced, whether they be methanol, LPG, or refined products such as diesels and gasolines. Those products are still able to flow. We're trying to ensure that we have the right infrastructure and the right services, which are able to deliver value to those sectors and those cargoes within a time frame that makes sense.