Transport Committee on April 4th, 2019

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

It was February 26, 2016.

I've written notes on it, but I could table a fresh copy with the committee, if that's something the committee would like.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Yes, you might want to do that.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

I then tabled a petition on September 25, 2017. The petition number is 421-01658. The minister provided only a four-line response. I was looking for information about this review being done by Transport Canada. As far as I can tell, there was no response. It's not much of a response; it just tells me that the motor vehicle safety regulations will need to be amended in the future in order to make it possible.

If you're a regular Canadian citizen, you can't do this, but if you are a Canadian business, like U-Haul, you can bring American-plated vehicles into Canada and use them for an expressly commercial purpose. That is because they have an apportioned plate system that allows them to be moved across states and also allows them to be used in Canada. This apportionment system already exists, and it could be a model used for Canadian citizens. This is where I have a problem with how the current rules are and the responses I've been getting from Transport Canada. If there is a specific rule for business and a different rule for Canadian citizens, that seems patently unfair; citizens should have the same rights as business.

U-Haul can do this right now, and we see these Arizona-plated U-Haul vehicles. If you've moved in the last 10 or 15 years, you've noticed they're all plated in Arizona. They are being used on a regular basis in Canada.

If I had a Jeep that's plated in Montana, at my cottage at the lake or just in a friend's driveway, and it needed to be fixed up with perhaps new tires and I wanted to put it on a trailer and bring it into Canada, I would pay an import fee as if I'm trying to bring it into the country and keep it here, which is not something I want to do.

I've looked at potential avenues. I thought I could do a private member's bill, and this would avoid having to come to the committee here. I could just propose a fix for this. I asked the Library of Parliament how this would work and whether I could make it happen. Their response to me was that I'm not allowed to do this, because the tariffs come under the Customs Act, and it's a certain provision within it. It's passed by an order in council. Private member's bills are not allowed to interfere with the determination of a tariff and whom it applies to. It would have to be done by order in council, so I can't do a private member's bill.

I did table motion 197, which addresses this issue. I thought it was an elegant way of dealing with it, but unfortunately, because we're running out of time in this Parliament, with the potential election as late as October 21, 2019, I've exhausted the means of getting to a resolution through this motion that would have instructed two committees of the House to look at this issue.

This is why I'm asking this transportation committee to devote no less than two meetings to look at this issue. This is really for government officials who could come here and explain the mechanics of how an amendment to legislation could be done. I would need that information. The committee could then provide recommendations and a report on how to address the matter and the types of legislative changes that would need to be made so that Canadian citizens would have the same rights as American Canadian-based businesses that have this right. U-Haul has this ability right now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Can I interrupt for a second? I'm trying to figure out how to....

This is a suggestion to the committee here. If we could defer the voting on this motion until Tuesday and allocate another few minutes for you to speak to it, all of us would have the chance to give you all due respect and a full hearing on your motion.

I think there's a lot in here, and I'm not sure everybody's fully grasped it. Rather than not support it, we could hold it down and put a 15-minute slot on Tuesday's agenda so you can come back and speak to it again. We would vote on it at that time.

Is that something acceptable to the committee? Then we'd be able to get back to our witness here.

Mr. Badawey.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Madam Chair, I don't want to leave any false hope. I don't want to lead Tom on.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Okay, just a second.

Tom still has the floor.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

I just want to see clarity. I haven't ceded the floor, so I can continue.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

I thought you were here to get something done, so if you want to do that, may I suggest we expedite that?

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

Am I hearing agreement on a potentially—

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

I'm trying to work out some kind of.... I don't want you to leave with any false hope. The bottom line here is that we do have a full agenda going into the end of the session, so I'm not sure where we would fit this in. However, I think it's a great idea. I think you're bang on here. May I suggest that it possibly go to another committee that may have the time? Probably a more appropriate committee would be public safety versus transport. Frankly, it's probably going to hit on three or four different ministries: Public Safety, Transport and possibly even Global Affairs.

I don't want to lose it, because Tom is moving in the right direction here and, quite frankly, I agree with him. But there is a reality attached to the time that we have available, number one. We just had a debate with Mr. Aubin at the last meeting with respect to what he wants to see on the floor, which is also, by the way, in the queue, if we have any time. The agreed-upon queue was decided at the last meeting.

Having run out of time, in fairness to Tom, I think we should try to punt it over to public safety to see if they have any time. When we come back, regardless of what manner we come back in, we can then do it at this committee, when time allows.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Mr. Jeneroux.

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

I would like to clarify one point as a follow-up to Mr. Badawey.

There is no full calendar. We have, I believe, up to about April 11, and then it's a prospective calendar. We're not privy to a full calendar on our end.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

I might differ from that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

We have lots on the agenda, including the two ministers coming and so on.

I think the idea is to have a little more time to look at this before making a decision one way or the other. Possibly between now and Tuesday we might be able to find a solution to what you're trying to achieve. I'm not sure.

You still have the floor, Tom.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

I understand, Madam Chair, but I think Mr. Aubin wanted to speak.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Mr. Aubin.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Basically, I recognize the value of the motion, but I too think that our committee already has too much to do. We already have three or four studies under way that we are struggling to conclude. In addition, other topics are emerging that I believe will be of greater importance to the public.

I am thinking in particular of the charter of air passenger rights that the minister will table in the coming weeks. We put in very long hours of work on this issue, even before Parliament resumed. Since we have been involved throughout the process, we should review the proposed regulations and provide our advice to the minister. It would be the least we could do.

So I don't see how we could add what my colleague is proposing to our work by the end of June, even if the subject is relevant.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

Perhaps I can retake the floor then.

To address Mr. Badawey's point that public safety might be the better committee, or several other committees could look at this, it's actually the Motor Vehicle Safety Act that needs to be amended. I can list the subsections for you: subsection 7(1.1) to subsection 7(1.4) of the Motor Vehicle Safety Act. I have them here. They were amended in 2012. These are the subsections that allow U-Haul to more easily transfer their trucks across the border. They have the apportionment system, and this creates a temporary entrance into Canada. This is why only this committee can take a look at it, because you can seek clarity around here from officials on the government side on how this could be amended for temporary entry of American-plated vehicles by a Canadian citizen.

As I said, I looked at different avenues. It's not strictly an import or customs issue, because there should be an import duty on American vehicles that are coming into Canada. The issue is a Canadian citizen who is not trying to import the vehicle. They just want to put better tires on their Jeep and they're putting it on their trailer. Then they get blocked at the border by border guards, who are rightfully trying to apply the law by saying, you can't do that.

I understand it is a niche issue. On the other hand, niche issues almost never get taken care of, especially when they hit several different potential departments. This one is very complex. That is why it has taken me so long to sort out the best avenue for fixing it, once the avenue of using a private member's bill simply to amend the law was taken away from me.

I do think this is the committee to do it. If you're telling me that you would consider this for an extra 15 minutes at another meeting, or that perhaps you have an amendment you want to make, for example to reduce it to one meeting, I'm pretty friendly and easy-going. This isn't the finance committee. I don't want to blow up your committee. I'm more than happy to—

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

You're nothing like Ron, then.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

No, I'm not. I'm the nice one from Calgary.

I'm more than happy to entertain an amendment that could be brought forward at a different meeting on this subject, but it is the Motor Vehicle Safety Act that's applied here. I'm convinced that if amendments were made to those sections that I listed, Canadians with American-plated vehicles would have a means of bringing them in without paying an import fee for vehicles they are not trying to import.

Maybe you have 15 minutes at another meeting that you'd like to dedicate for this. I know that my committee, finance, is completely booked in May, every single day of the week from Monday to Thursday, because we're going to be doing budget. You can always schedule more meetings, I think. You are the masters of your own domain. You can do that. You have the power to do so—

[Jeneroux]

As long as it's in public.

[Kmiec]

—as long as it's in public, obviously. Thank you very much. That would be nice.

I could list other sections of other acts that apply, but those are all customs issues, and you could avoid that entirely by making amendments to those sections.

I'm going to cede the floor now and hope that we either have a recorded division on this motion now or, if there's agreement on this side to perhaps return to it in another meeting, next week on Tuesday, I'd be happy to return here.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

I'm going to go to Mr. Badawey before I comment.

Mr. Badawey.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

To his point, we could set some time aside, as you mentioned, Madam Chair.