Transport Committee on Nov. 3rd, 2016

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

How much time do I have?

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

You have two minutes.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Okay, thank you.

As we have been saying from the beginning, Bill C-227 only applies to the contracts of Public Services and Procurement Canada.

Mr. McDonald spoke about drinking water or aqueduct projects, but they are excluded from this bill. He also mentioned that this was a first step. In my opinion, it is a rather dangerous step.

We all want federal government projects to provide significant local benefits. The government is presenting a minor bill that does not force the other levels of government to do anything but a study. Isn't there a risk that someday it may mention the fact that it adopted Bill C-227 as an excuse, and say that it has done its part for local benefits, and that we should come back to see it in four years? That is what I fear.

Local benefits are very important to the economy of all of our communities. I too was mayor, and I am familiar with the importance of those benefits, both for training workers and for the community. By tabling such a small, weak bill, are you not afraid that we will only be delaying the file, whereas we should demand a real piece of legislation on local benefits?

Mr. Varone, you could answer first.

[Toni Varone]

My simple answer is, if you don't start somewhere, you're still nowhere.

[John Cartwright]

I guess I'm somewhat of the same mind. We are working and negotiating here in Ontario, in Toronto, around setting very tangible goals, but again, the advice we've had from colleagues who have worked at this for decades now is to start small, make sure you have it right, and then you can build on that.

To my mind these are first steps. The regulations can help frame some of the things that are sought, but I don't think the federal government can stretch so far as to require the provincial and municipal programs as well to step up to this when they haven't had a track record yet of success.

That's what we're trying to build, a track record of success. Then we can go back to the provincial and federal governments and say, “There is no reason to say no because it has succeeded. Look at the amazing opportunities that young people have had. Look at their pride in saying they've now learned a skill that they can take with them for the rest of their life.”

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Allow me to interrupt you...

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

I'm sorry, Mr. Berthold, but I—

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

I can't interrupt you, it is the chair who is interrupting you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

I'm sorry. I try to give you as much leeway as I can.

Mr. Fraser.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

I just have a quick question before I pass it off to Mr. Hardie.

I think it was you, Mr. Cartwright, who, in your opening remarks, made a comment about the benefits reaching all communities.

I represent an area that's defined by small towns and rural communities. Not every community I represent has a federal government property; in fact, some of them have very few assets, generally speaking.

Is there any danger going down this kind of a road that we give more to those who already have, and exclude rural communities that may have young people who want to work but can't stay in those communities?

[John Cartwright]

That's an interesting question. As our country tries particularly to respond to the crisis of climate change and looks at the infrastructure investments around that, I think there is an opportunity in every region to ensure that infrastructure is in place. Whether it's adaptation or mitigation or future climate change work, that has to happen in communities large and small. I think that's part of the long-term goals that this government and any other government should be committed to.

[Sean Fraser, Liberal, Central Nova, NS]

So the answer is to invest in rural communities, too.

I'll pass it off to Mr. Hardie, who has a few questions for you.

Thank you.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Thank you, Sean.

The message I'm getting is that we have to start with something that can be managed, something that we can move forward and build on.

We heard from construction people in our last meeting. What they would really like to see is something where the proponent has an apple-to-apple comparison, where there are no subjective pieces in there where you're going on faith that somebody is going to actually deliver something over and above the essential elements.

Obviously, what you're talking about is getting to a process where the factors, the consideration of community benefits, is so in the culture of the builders, the people actually doing the work, that they will provide this kind of input to the proponent at the bidding stage.

Where do we start? Do we start more toward “Here is exactly what we want, and we want you to bid on it”, and then build on that over time, or do you think we're a little further along that continuum to the point that you talk about, where it's ingrained, it's in the DNA of the construction industry to provide this? Where are we now, and what's the process for starting off and then building on it?

[Toni Varone]

I think it starts with your definition. Bill 6, in the Province of Ontario, is a limited definition. The City of Toronto, through section 37, is another definition.

If you want to engage the bidders, you want to have a definition that accounts for all aspects of community benefits, and not just jobs, not just environment, not just limited in scope, but something that gets them to being as entrepreneurial as they are in delivering a community benefit that fits the need of that project. That comes in a maturation process in terms of an evolving definition, something that is static and can change over time.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Mr. Cartwright.

[John Cartwright]

I like that phrase that Mr. Varone used, a maturation process. When I look at the capacity of the trades in Toronto to supply job-ready folks from these different communities, it's based on 20 years of work. We've had partnerships with first nations organizations, with inner-city youth organizations, and with others. We've had a series of programs in the training centres that have already done that.

However, my hometown of London, Ontario, hasn't had that same history, and you would be starting from a different place. I'm sure in the north it's a different reality as well. As we've heard, whether it's Atlantic Canada or the west coast, those are different starting places.

That's why I don't think you can create a one-size-fits-all requirement early on. I think you need to be able to respond to the realities of each region and each area. Let's set some goals and engage the contractor community by saying, “We want to see those benefits, and we need to work together to be able to raise the standards here.” I think that's the most successful approach.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Do you think this bill starts us in the right place?

[John Cartwright]

Yes, I absolutely do.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, Mr. Hardie.

It has been a very interesting morning. I thank Mr. Cartwright and Mr. Varone very much for taking the time to come and share the information with us. I think the intent of the bill and of the questions you're hearing around the table is how do we make Canada better, and how do we use every opportunity we have as we move forward. Thank you both very much for being here.

I would like to mention that the minister made a very important announcement this morning regarding an issue we're working on with respect to a national transportation strategy. I believe it would be the consensus of this committee that we ask the minister at the first opportunity to appear before the committee and give us an update. Is everybody in agreement with that?

Ms. Block.

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

Madam Chair, I actually had come prepared with a motion asking the minister to do just that based on what we heard this morning. I only have it in English, and I won't take the time to speak to it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Is anybody objecting to inviting the minister to come and talk about his national transportation strategy announcement? I think we have consensus already, Ms. Block.

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

Can I read the motion into the record?

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Go ahead.

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

It says:

That the Committee invite the Minister of Transport to provide additional details on the transportation strategy announced at the Montreal Chamber of Commerce on November 3rd 2016, that the Minister appear before December 31st 2016 and the meeting be televised.

I will provide that. I know we don't have to discuss the motion today.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

I'm going to suggest we change where we were going. I thought we had a consensus. You have tabled that motion. We will choose to deal with that motion at our next meeting.