Transport Committee on March 28th, 2023

[Robin Guy]

There's a lot in that statement.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Robin Guy]

Definitely, what we saw in terms of the commitment to regulatory alignment was not new. The Canadian Chamber of Commerce and our members talk about accelerating the regulatory modernization process, and I think there's already a commitment from government to move on this agenda. What we're saying is, how do we figure out how to move this faster?

There are certain pieces we will never compete on with the U.S. How do we figure out how we make our Canadian supply chains competitive? How do we make sure they're reliable and efficient? It's a massive piece that we can get done.

In terms of the supply chain task force, I think there's a massive amount of information in that report. I think there was a lot of good stuff, but again, where do we start? I think we need to start figuring that out very quickly.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Guy.

Go ahead, Mr. Hall.

[Christopher Hall]

I might have some different views.

A binational strategy does sound interesting and is probably worth pursuing to a certain degree, but we have to be careful that we don't.... In trying to change our regulations, we should focus on streamlining regulations to make business more achievable here in Canada and not on alignment with other jurisdictions just for the sake of alignment. There are some things, frankly, on the regulatory side in the U.S., that we would not want to see here in Canada at all, like some of the new rules that were put in place by the Federal Maritime Commission in the U.S. within the last 12 months. Those types of practices here in Canada would create a lot of restriction and a lot of stress in the shipping sector. We would have to approach that very carefully.

I think there are certainly good things that could probably be taken from the American model. The way in which they fund ports and port infrastructure might be one area to look at. Funding in that sector has a different model than the one we have here in Canada, as you know, so it's definitely worth looking at that. However, as to mirroring regulations for the sake of alignment in itself, we would not be in support of that.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. Paquin, go ahead.

[Jacques Paquin]

Thank you for the time you are giving me.

I agree with those who spoke before me.

It would be interesting to work more closely together across the country and to integrate ports and transportation modes. We certainly need that in Canada. Doing that across North America might be ambitious though.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

What I was looking for in terms of the response was really an integrated effort toward our capital investments. We talked a lot about infrastructure investments, whether it be road, rail, air or water, especially as we share some of these resources such as the Great Lakes. How do you feel we can actually integrate a lot of those capital investments, whether it be through the St. Lawrence Seaway system, the Asia-Pacific, our rail with CN and CP, air and/or, again, our roadways? The border doesn't act as a wall. It should act to strengthen fluidity.

I'm going back to Mr. Guy again to talk about how we can, in fact—and should we—integrate and discuss with our American partners those capital investments so that we create more fluidity within our supply chains.

[Robin Guy]

Granted, I'll point to the government's Indo-Pacific strategy as a prime example of why we need to be focusing on some of these issues. At the end of the day in order for us to re-engage with the region and in order for us to increase trade with the region, without building general infrastructure here in Canada, we won't be able to do that.

I would say other programs as to how to make sure we are facilitating trade between the two countries become very important. We need to ensure that things like the FAST program, which is in essence the NEXUS version for commercial trucks—a critical issue—is there and strong.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Badawey.

Thank you, Mr. Guy.

Next we have Mr. Lewis.

The floor is yours, Mr. Lewis. You have five minutes.

[Chris Lewis, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses for your testimony.

I'm going to start with Mayor Pond.

I thought I heard last week or perhaps the week before when I met with the unions, the longshoremen, that in Prince Rupert about one-third of your population works at the port. Is that true?

[Herbert Pond]

It would be in that neighbourhood, if not greater. One of the pieces that drives my slightly different view on all of these issues is that the port is so huge relative to the size of the local community. Certainly a third would be conservative.

[Chris Lewis, Conservative, Essex, ON]

I have a follow-up, then, to your request with regard to long-term sustainable funding, specifically for infrastructure. On water, sewers and the number of houses, can you put your finger at all on how much money, year over year, that looks like to begin this funding project to allow for an expansion of more jobs in Prince Rupert?

[Herbert Pond]

Thank you.

I'll give a multiple piece answer. We have a backlog that is going to require significant investment. For us to participate—a lot of programs require one-third, one-third, one-third—the municipality needs to come up with a third. For example, should we receive matching funds from the federal government on the $65 million the province has put forward, we've committed to coming up with another $65 million, so we need to borrow to do that. We'll need a significant revenue stream to be able to borrow against that.

Once we get past that, now we're talking about how to maintain it and what level of funding is needed to maintain it. I would suggest, in the short term, we need a lift in the $5-million-, $6-million- or $7-million-a-year range, and then to allow ongoing maintenance it would be somewhat similar. We're in the process of coming up with those hard numbers now.

[Chris Lewis, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Thank you, Mayor Pond. I appreciate that.

Mr. Hall, I'd only ever heard “cash is king”, but you mentioned “cargo is king”. That's a new one for me, and I like it.

We spoke a lot about strategy this morning. You were talking about automation. With regard to labour, without putting words in your mouth, it's somewhat of an elephant in the room, but I think it's an elephant that needs to be addressed.

I was in Taiwan, last fall, and I visited the port of Taipei. Basically, it's completely automated. They went from 44 workers on the port per shift to 22 workers on the port per shift. That would raise flags, you would think. However, they actually doubled their workforce at the port, because they were moving so many goods that they had to get the goods off the port.

It's something that definitely needs to be talked about, because I truly do not believe we're going to lose jobs. As a matter of fact, I met with some folks from the Embassy of Japan on Thursday night of last week. They said, “How do we get access to your ports? We need access to the ports.” I know a lot of the conversation is about getting the goods—our grains and commerce—to the ports, but I think we need to be looking larger and realizing that we are walking past opportunities. As opposed to losing cargo capacity, we should be gaining it.

All of that said, on the strategy you talked about this morning, knowing where we've come from and knowing our shortfalls, if you had to give direction to the government for a new strategy today, what would the top three things in that strategy look like, sir?

[Christopher Hall]

To address that elephant in the room, or the sacred cow of labour, as much as we—us included—don't like to talk about it that much, we find ourselves speaking about it now in somewhat muted terms. That needs to be part of the discussion, for all the points you mentioned. Labour is having a difficult time recruiting, like all sectors. From a sustainability standpoint, how are we going to maintain the volumes, or grow the volumes, at our ports if we don't include technology as part of the solution?

As I mentioned earlier, we're only utilizing a portion of our terminals, because they only operate a certain number of hours a day. They don't operate 24-7, because we don't have the will to go to that kind of model or employ the processes that would be needed to ratchet up to that level of productivity.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Hall.

Thank you, Mr. Lewis.

Next, we have Mr. Chahal.

Mr. Chahal, the floor is yours. You have five minutes.

[George Chahal, Liberal, Calgary Skyview, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses for providing testimony today.

I also want to thank you, Mayor Pond, for your warm welcome in Prince Rupert. It was a great trip. I learned a lot about your community and the opportunities your community and port provide for the rest of our country. Thank you for providing the great hospitality.

I have a question for you, Your Worship.

In regard to the consultation work done between the port and your community, how well does the port consult your community? Do you support moving forward with the port expansion projects that are being contemplated?

[Herbert Pond]

Thank you very much.

It was great to host you. You're welcome back anytime. I enjoyed our conversations so much.

First of all, I absolutely support port expansion. As I say that, I'm increasingly pinched every time they expand. We want the growth, but the challenge is.... As I described earlier, we eventually get taxes from that finished project, but we endure three, four or sometimes five years of construction activity in which no extra taxes flow to the community, yet we're required to make all kinds of moves, whether it be in our landfill or on our roads and streets. Certainly, housing gets pinched, pinched and pinched.

We embrace it. We want more. I think the Prince Rupert advantage is that we have a lot of undeveloped land in the port complex, and congestion is very low. There's a massive strategic advantage for Canada in developing this port. We want to be part of that.

[George Chahal, Liberal, Calgary Skyview, AB]

Do you have a good consultation process?

[Herbert Pond]

The consultation is not, I think, what it could be. Sometimes the issues get in the way. We talked, earlier, about the challenges around arriving at a number on the payment in lieu of taxes. That becomes an adversarial relationship, and it spills over into other things.

There's room to improve. I'm looking forward to it. I'm very hopeful, but there's definitely a need to improve that consultation in the shorter term.

[George Chahal, Liberal, Calgary Skyview, AB]

Thank you.

I want to go to the Port of Trois-Rivières and ask the same question, but from a port perspective.

How do you consult with the local communities and municipalities in your region, and are they supportive of the projects that you're contemplating or bringing forward?

[Jacques Paquin]

Without the city's assistance, we would certainly never have been able to complete our development projects.

The relationship we have built with the City of Trois-Rivières is almost symbiotic, even though we have not created a standing committee or anything like that. The members at all levels of our organization have created ties with their counterparts at the city, in urban planning, public works and the mayor's office. Each sector of our respective organizations has forged ties with a resource person. So we work closely together to complete the projects we have developed together.

The City of Trois-Rivières even amended its urban plan to accommodate the development plan presented by the Port of Trois-Rivières. For our part, our development plan also takes account of the city's development ambitions so we can set the schedule and work plan together. This then trickles down within our organizations. People work closely together. Further, people from one of our services meet almost daily.

[George Chahal, Liberal, Calgary Skyview, AB]

Thank you.

Mr. Guy, I have a question for you and not a lot of time.

I'm in Calgary, and we have an inland port. Very critical to the work being done in Vancouver and Prince Rupert are the impacts of Edmonton and Calgary. What else do you think we can do to enhance the capabilities of those inland ports?

We have a tax-point structure in certain jurisdictions. What other recommendations do you have for inland ports so that we can help them grow and create opportunities in our municipalities?

[Robin Guy]

I think you have another example in the neighbouring province in terms of another inland port that has actually done a very good job at being able to help facilitate trade within Canada. In terms of the inland port piece, again, I think the faster we get goods onto rail or onto trucks and moving away from the ports, the better. I will leave it at that.