Transport Committee on Oct. 16th, 2023

[Serge Bijimine]

There are a couple of things on how it promotes private sector investment.

In the first instance, what we are trying to do in Bill C-33 is promote the right type of private sector investment. There is a proposal in there to reduce the current threshold for review from $93 million to $10 million. I would just note that reducing the threshold does not impact our trade agreements with the EU or the U.K.

What we are trying to do is put in place a system that allows more of these projects to be scrutinized to make sure that they meet our national economic security objectives, given the fact that ports are strategic enablers of the Canadian economy. That's the rationale behind that.

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

With this change in threshold, and recognizing the strategic value of our ports and the constraints we would have with international agreements, do you feel that this will help create some efficiencies in the supply chains so that we're not going to see a repeat of what we saw coming out of the pandemic, when there were some bottlenecks?

[Serge Bijimine]

I do think that, combined with the investment framework and also combined with the triennial review for the borrowing limit, it should lead to more timely decisions when it comes to investing in ports. That's what we think.

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

I know the question about the very slim provisions for rail safety in the bill was already asked. Of course, one of those was with regard to rail blockades, which you talked about. From what I understand, those provisions are there already. If there is a rail blockade, there are already tools available to address that, so what's new that actually addresses that problem?

[Lisa Setlakwe]

In the provisions that were there before—and I'm not a lawyer but I guess the language matters—the language was more around trespassing. This just makes the legislation clearer around acts like vandalism, and we do see some of that, or compromising security, so it's—

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

So that didn't exist under—

[Lisa Setlakwe]

Not in that way.

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

So law enforcement couldn't act on those things.

[Lisa Setlakwe]

Right.

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

Obviously it could potentially jeopardize people's health.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Muys.

Finally, for this round of questioning, we have Mr. Badawey.

Mr. Badawey, the floor is yours. You have five minutes, sir.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

This is a pretty robust bill. When we look at it and we read the whole bill, we see the changes and the contemplations in relation to the Canada Marine Act and the modernization, the alignment with the supply chain study and hopefully soon-to-be strategy, the multimodal networks and the alignment of the different methods of transportation: railroad, air, and water. There are capital investments and the expectation that assets will be managed in a more disciplined manner, versus what was in the past with a lot of ports in my area, including the St. Lawrence Seaway. There's port competitiveness and managing traffic, developing possible inland waterways and expanding the strategic planning of different ports, implementing their strategic plans and once again aligning themselves with the different aspects of the business. There's governance and working with indigenous groups, as well as environmental sustainability, railway safety and security, and transparency. Then there's adaptability, and the list goes on.

Once again, it's a very robust bill. What I like about it is that it really takes a whole-of-government approach and concentrates on something the government has to do more of, which is concentrating on the business of government versus concentrating on the business of politics—I have another word for it, but I'll be polite. I like that.

The expectation from this study will be that once the bill goes back to the House for a third reading, it will take into consideration a lot of the testimony that's coming out of this, because although it's a very robust bill, there's still a bit of work that has to be done to it, and I'm hoping a lot of that work will come out of both committees, as well as when it goes back to the House for third reading.

I have two questions. This is definitely going to add a lot of capacity, a lot of opportunities for the economy. I know that in my area, in Niagara, this is what we depend on. This alone is what is rebuilding our economy. The challenge, however, is recognizing the capacity that we need in order to fulfill what this bill is trying to do.

My first question is for Mr. Hamilton with respect to CBSA. In terms of the capacity of CBSA, there's no question that this is going to place a burden—I won't say “burden” but there's a pressure—on your organization to really pick up in areas that may not exist now, container ports that don't exist right now, in different parts of the country. In the Great Lakes, we have the cruise ship industry, which didn't exist before.

Are you going to have the capacity to fulfill those obligations and meet the increases within that sector?

[Graeme Hamilton]

Mr. Chair, I would just like to say that CBSA has undertaken a variety of modernization efforts across both our traveller stream and our commercial stream to drive home some increased efficiencies.

We can look at redeploying some of the frontline border services officers who are currently either working on transactional, low-value processing of travellers or working with commercial importers and redirecting them to growth areas where we're seeing increased traffic coming in, either commercial traffic or traveller traffic, but then also, importantly, having them work more on intelligence-driven reviews of containerized traffic coming in so our targeting efforts are going up.

With some of the data that we're going to be able to receive—not only what's being provided through this bill but also new data systems that we're investing in at CBSA—we will be able to increase the efficiency of our targeting processing as well and make sure we're protecting the supply chain by making sure that goods that are prohibited from entry into Canada are being caught and stopped at the border.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Just to be clear, this bill will be an enabler for you.

[Graeme Hamilton]

Yes, absolutely, this bill will be an enabler for us. The provisions that are referenced in the bill, specifically in the Customs Act, will provide the ability for CBSA to prescribe the amount of time a shipper is provided to transfer to us a container for examination. Right now, there is no set service standard for that process to happen. Sometimes it can take up to 16 days for CBSA officers to identify to a port operator that we'd like to see container x, and it will be upwards of three weeks before that container is provided to us. That provides a lot of time for nefarious actors in the ports to remove contraband before we're able to examine it, so being able to regulate the time it takes for those containers to be delivered to us for examination will be a great enabler to us and will strengthen port security.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Hamilton.

To Department of Transport staff, with respect to capacity and infrastructure, how do you see this bill being, once again, an enabler to really bring up to date our different methods of transportation and the infrastructure that's attached to it, specifically marine and rail?

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Give a 30-second response, please.

[Serge Bijimine]

I think it will set the groundwork to allow certain ports to increase their borrowing limits in a much easier way. I think that's one. Combined with that, the NTCF, or the national trade corridors fund, has provided quite a lot of funding to the port project. I believe it's $745 million to 40 or 45 different sorts of projects.

I fully expect that if there is another recapitalization, that, combined with a more streamlined approach to borrowing limits, could help unlock capital and access to the CIB as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you both.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all of our witnesses from the CBSA and Transport Canada for being with us and for sharing their testimony.

With that, I will suspend for two minutes, although I'm sure my colleagues would like me to adjourn.

We'll suspend for two minutes to change over the witnesses. I'll see you in two minutes, folks.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

I call this meeting back to order.

Appearing before us for the second half of today's meeting, we have, from the Amalgamated Transit Union Local 279, Mr. Clint Crabtree, president and business agent. Welcome.

From the International Longshore and Warehouse Union Canada, we have Mr. Robert Ashton, president. Welcome.

From the Syndicat des débardeurs, of the Canadian Union of Public Employees, local 375, we welcome Michel Murray, union adviser.

We'll begin with you, Mr. Ashton, for your opening remarks.

You have five minutes, sir.

[Robert Ashton, President, International Longshore and Warehouse Union Canada]

Thank you.

My name is Rob Ashton. I'm the national president for the International Longshore and Warehouse Union Canada, which represents approximately 8,000 longshore workers who work in the ports of Canada's Pacific coast, including the Vancouver Fraser, Prince Rupert, Nanaimo and Port Alberni port authorities.

Bill C-33, which purports to be legislation for marine security, favours the economic interests of corporations and businesses over the rights of workers, who are essential to the productivity of the ports. In order to maintain a balance between the interests of employers, business and workers, ILWU Canada urges Parliament to promote labour stability by ensuring that a representative of labour is included on the board of directors for each port authority and, in amending the Canada Marine Act, recognize the rights of workers.

On the composition of the board of directors, Bill C-33 proposes to increase the maximum number of directors of a port authority from 11 to 13, increase the number of directors nominated by municipalities from one to two, and increase the number of directors to be appointed by provinces, as set out in the letters patent of the port, to two.

ILWU Canada encourages the government that Bill C-33 should include an amendment in section 14 of the Canada Marine Act that would include a representative of labour in the ports.

Port authority boards of directors favour business. For example, the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority board is heavily represented by directors with business interests. Catherine McLay is the former CFO of TransLink and a former senior executive of Canfor and Howe Sound Pulp and Paper. James Belsheim is the current chair of the Coal Export Terminal Operators Association, the former president of Neptune Terminals in metro Vancouver and the former director of BCMEA. Bruce Chan is the director of BC Ferries and Kinetrex Energy. He was formerly in senior positions for almost 20 years with Teekay Corporation, which is one of the world's largest marine energy, transportation, storage and production companies. Craig Munroe is a labour lawyer representing employer interests. His law firm represents port users, including the coal terminals Westshore Terminals in Vancouver and Trigon Pacific Terminals in Prince Rupert. Mike Corrigan is the CEO of Interferry Incorporated, which is a global trade association representing ferry employers. He's the former CEO of BC Ferries and a former senior manager at Westcoast Energy.

Creating a requirement that a port authority's board of directors includes a representative of labour ensures a voice for labour, which will minimize potential future disputes, such as the expansion of the Roberts Bank terminal in the port of Vancouver.

Port authorities on the west coast of the United States have representative port workers on their boards of directors and they function quite well. At the Port of San Francisco, the five-person board of commissioners includes Willie Adams, who is the international president of the ILWU, and Gail Gilman, who was a CEO and activist for the homeless and social enterprise.

At the Port of Los Angeles, the five-person board of commissioners includes Diane Middleton, who is a labour lawyer and worker advocate, and Michael Muñoz, who is an organizer for the Teamsters and an activist with the Warehouse Worker Resource Center.

The next point I want to talk about is the recognition of the rights of workers. ILWU Canada's concern is evidenced by the recent collective bargaining experience on the west coast, which was that the economic interests of the ports are eclipsing the fundamental rights of workers to engage in free collective bargaining.

Our concern is magnified by the proposal in Bill C-33 to add resilience in supply chains as a purpose of the Canada Marine Act. Supply chains are important to trade, but the economic interest in supply chains cannot be permitted to override free collective bargaining, which the Supreme Court of Canada has recognized as a fundamental freedom protected by section 2(d) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

If Bill C-33 is amended to recognize the role of supply chains as a purpose of the Canada Marine Act, ILWU Canada submits that the CMA should also include as its purpose the recognition of free collective bargaining. The Canada Labour Code sets out this goal in the preamble to part I:

Whereas there is a long tradition in Canada of labour legislation and policy designed for the promotion of the common well-being through the encouragement of free collective bargaining and the constructive settlement of disputes;

Including the same language in the Canada Marine Act would send a message that Parliament does not intend business interests to outweigh fundamental rights.

In conclusion, labour organizations are stakeholders in port security. Amending Bill C-33 to ensure that ports are governed with worker interests as a consideration is necessary for Parliament to maintain consistency with international obligations such as the ILO and IMO port security codes, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and security legislation.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Ashton. You were perfectly on time, and we always appreciate that here at the transport committee.

Go ahead, Mr. Murray. You have five minutes.

[Michel Murray, Union Adviser, Syndicat des débardeurs, Canadian Union of Public Employees Local 375]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to thank the committee members for having us here today.

I fully agree with what my colleague Robert Ashton said.

I represent the Syndicat des débardeurs du port de Montréal, a group of nearly 1,400 men and women who work in longshoring at the Port of Montreal. Our concerns have already been raised in questions prior to our arrival here, but I will highlight them anyway.

Our biggest concerns were with the Marine Transportation Security Act and some of the clauses that the bill seeks to add to it to give new powers to the Minister of Transport. These are subclause 6.1(1) on interim orders, on page 38 of the bill, and subclause 17.4(1) on emergency injunctions, on page 44. We were wondering whether these new powers concerning emergency directions and interim orders could contravene the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, specifically section 2, because it would affect unions' freedom of association and the right to strike, as my friend Mr. Ashton said. This right is recognized as essential for unions to negotiate with employers on an equal footing every four or five years.

Earlier, in response to a question from Mr. Barsalou‑Duval, Mr. Bijimine said that these provisions would not affect the unions' right to strike or their bargaining power. There was also a lady who said that these provisions were intended to give greater powers to the minister in exceptional circumstances such as the COVID‑19 pandemic. However, that's not what's written in the bill, which makes no reference to COVID‑19. Therefore, I respectfully submit that these powers would not be limited to such circumstances.

If granting such powers doesn't disregard the Charter and the unions' freedom of association, and if it doesn't contravene the Canada Labour Code or the rights it recognizes for both employers and unions, and if it doesn't contravene international treaties that Canada has signed, the bill should mention that. These provisions must not affect the Charter or the Code, and they must not contravene international treaties that Canada has signed in the past. The International Labour Organization's Freedom of Association Convention was adopted in 1948 and ratified by Canada in 1972, and the supervisory body for that international convention specifies that ports are not essential services. If there is no desire to interfere with our right to strike, the bill should mention that.

Finally, I'd like to share with you, once again, our concerns about the minister's appointment of the port authority chair. The Montreal Port Authority and our boss, the Maritime Employers Association, are buddy-buddy. When the association takes legal action to delay the bargaining process or our right to strike under the Canada Labour Code, the port authority and the association are as thick as thieves. They're represented by the same law firm, which is fighting the longshore worker's union to take away our rights.

When I see that the minister could directly appoint a port authority chair, I'm concerned. In fact, it would be a “political” appointment that would interfere with our labour relations, since the Montreal Port Authority interferes in our labour relations with our employer association. So, I'm concerned about that possibility.

Thank you for listening. Mr. Ashton and I look forward to answering any questions you may have.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Murray.

Colleagues, Mr. Crabtree is not present, unfortunately.

Mr. Crabtree has not presented himself to provide testimony today.

With that in mind, we will move immediately to our first line of questioning. That six-minute slot goes to Mr. Strahl.

Mr. Strahl, the floor is yours. You have six minutes, sir.

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Hope, BC]

I think we'd better go to Dan Muys.