Transport Committee on Oct. 21st, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

You've moved the motion. We can debate it at the end of this meeting or at the beginning of the meeting on Thursday morning.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna, BC]

Do we want to have a quick vote? If people want to debate, we could always just wait until later.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Do you want to come back to it?

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

I don't see a problem with postponing the debate, because we have witnesses here. I think it would have been preferable to vote right away because it would have been simpler, but I don't want to prevent the witnesses from testifying.

At the same time, even if people are afraid of being targeted by government agencies, the government already has access to all the information. It's easy for the government to find out the names of the trucking companies. The Canada Revenue Agency already has all that information and knows whether these companies have employees or not. Government agencies don't need this motion to get that information.

I asked for the information because, as a rule, the other organizations that appear before us tell us openly who their members are and whether they have a board of directors. When you go to the website of any organization, you can see the members it represents. However, in this case, no members' names appear. When someone claims to represent people, it would be good to know if that's really the case, if there really are people behind it and who they are. I think it's hard to claim to represent people without actually saying who they are.

The Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities is a serious entity. Parliament is a serious institution. We need to consider the testimony to be credible, but we also need to know on whose behalf the information is being presented.

I don't see a problem with postponing the debate, but I can assure you that we will come back to it. It's not a matter of postponing the debate and never voting on the motion. I'm announcing that we will come back to it at a future meeting.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you, Mr. Barsalou‑Duval.

Ms. Nguyen, you have the floor.

[Chi Nguyen, Liberal, Spadina—Harbourfront, ON]

Thank you very much.

I have some draft language that might get us to a friendly amendment that I think might be useful for us, if we want to do that quickly.

I also want to note that yesterday I had some phenomenal training about making sure that we treat witnesses with the kind of decorum and approach that is a bit more trauma-informed. If witnesses are saying that they can't come forward for various reasons and they feel like that might create exploitation or vulnerabilities, we should find some pathways there.

The following language might give us a slight amendment on that: that the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities request that all witnesses appearing at the transport committee on this study demonstrate transparency and good faith by providing the committee, within 15 days of the adoption of this motion, a complete and up-to-date list of their official representatives and contributing members.

It's just to capture that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Next I have Mr. Kelloway.

[Mike Kelloway, Liberal, Sydney—Glace Bay, NS]

I was actually going to say pretty much the same thing, so I'll defer speaking on it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you, Mr. Kelloway.

Mr. Albas.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna, BC]

I was hoping that we could move on so we can get to the witnesses, because I have questions still, but I would just simply say that the motion is out of order because it substantially changes the direction. If it had been an amending motion, perhaps....

I would just look to the sponsor. Maybe we can debate this at the end of this round.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Okay.

Colleagues, it looks like we want to move this debate off until the end so we can maximize the time we have with our witnesses.

There was no time left for Mr. Barsalou-Duval, so we will go next to Mr. Groleau.

Mr. Groleau, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon to our guests.

Mr. Vishwanth, you're the representative of the Canada Truck Operators Association and, today, you're here to defend the Driver Inc. scheme, which is heavily criticized by most experts.

What do you think about the report by the CBC program Marketplace, which unfortunately links the mandatory entry-level training, or MELT, schools to the Driver Inc. model?

What is your position on that?

[Arjun Vishwanth]

I'm sorry. What's the question?

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Did you see the CBC's Marketplace report?

[Arjun Vishwanth]

No, I have not.

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

You didn't see that. All right.

Road safety is a priority for us. Experts have told us here that you can get a driver's licence after two days of training.

Are you aware of that, Mr. Vishwanth?

[Arjun Vishwanth]

No, I'm not aware of that. I haven't seen any evidence to that effect.

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Okay.

Now let's talk about taxation and compliance.

Some argue that the Driver Inc. model allows certain businesses and workers to avoid paying their fair share of taxes by incorporating.

How do you respond to the criticism that this model encourages tax evasion rather than a true entrepreneurial spirit?

[Arjun Vishwanth]

No. That's a talking point for the lobbyists. In evidence, that doesn't pan out. I haven't seen evidence of that.

In fact, I'd like to refer you to my brief, the technical response to the costing model. I can take you through it. It breaks it down. Do you want me to?

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

No, it's okay. Thank you.

Some experts have told us that companies use the Driver Inc. model to exploit drivers.

Have you ever heard of that?

[Arjun Vishwanth]

I'm sorry. You will have to be specific. What type of abuses?

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

For example, they would have no protection or social safety net, would work more hours and would not have access to employment insurance.

Are you aware of that?

[Arjun Vishwanth]

No, I'm not.

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

You've really never heard of it?

[Arjun Vishwanth]

I've seen it in talking points, but I haven't seen any evidence of it.