Thank you.
Ken Adams recommended that we set up a federal-provincial body that brings together all the actors involved, including Transport Canada, the Canada Revenue Agency and various partners, to pool data on repeat offenders. Once again, this recommendation comes from a former police officer who is used to crackdowns. We could easily find ways, among ourselves, to crack down on offenders in that area. The more that get caught, and the more compliance is improved, the more trucking companies will want to stay on the right track and become reputable businesses again.
We have a rare opportunity to catch up, and we can't address the causes of the Driver Inc. phenomenon without finding good recommendations. We want to implement measures to ensure that we have safe and reliable roads and to solve the issues that have been raised to us in committee.
Trucker training falls under provincial jurisdiction, but I'm prepared to get involved, and I'm convinced that this suits the Bloc Québécois, since some of its recommendations also fall under provincial jurisdiction. Trucker training is a provincial responsibility, but public safety is a federal responsibility, and I believe in that very strongly. Working together, the provinces, the federal government and the trucking industry can harmonize standards, support schools and ensure that every trucker on our roads is well trained. That's my takeaway from Ken Adams' testimony. He's a man of integrity who worked for the Toronto Police Service and came here to sound the alarm. He deserves to be heard by this committee and have it ask its analysts to make the necessary recommendations to complete this study.
We also welcomed Mark Seymour, who is the chief executive officer of the Kriska Transportation Group. I like to hear from independent businesses that have integrity. He gave us an alarming statistic that over 50% of candidates want to work only as contractors. At first, it may seem more appealing to work as a contractor, since, even if the costs may be a little higher, it ultimately costs less. First, you don't have to pay all the fees, and you're independent. You can drive however many kilometres you want. The driver is responsible, not the company. If drivers cut corners when inspecting their vehicles, they're the ones responsible. Often, the truck doesn't even belong to them. This has an impact on the profitability of companies, and Mark Seymour tells us that candidates are the ones asking to work as contractors. That's concerning.
We have heard women and police officers talk about their experience, but Mr. Seymour has 40 years of experience in the sector. He runs a family-owned trucking business that was founded 47 years ago. It went from three trucks to 800 trucks, and it did so within the rules. He knows what he's talking about, then, and he told us outright that the Driver Inc. model weakens the system. The result is a hidden economy that shouldn't be there. It creates unfair competition for companies that are compliant.
All the witnesses we have heard from have said the same thing, including the representative of an independent company, passed down from one generation to the next, which he has continued to manage. The Driver Inc. model has direct impacts on his company. In three years, he has voluntarily reduced its activities by 25%, for reasons we all know. Recruitment is a problem. We were talking earlier about the labour shortage. It's less and less prevalent in many fields, but it persists among truck drivers. He told us that he's limited in terms of the workforce he can hire, which is causing difficulties on the recruitment side. There are also limitations on investments in equipment renewal. Yes, maintenance costs are higher. Truck prices have skyrocketed. I'm thinking in particular of the full purchase of a truck.