Evidence of meeting #16 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was lauzon.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Bloc
Xavier Barsalou-Duval Bloc Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC
Is it possible to ask for more resources to continue past that time?
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
We have people available until noon.
Taking into account the 30 minutes we suspended the meeting for, that brings us to 10:45 a.m., but we can extend the meeting. Hopefully we can come up with a solution.
Bloc
Liberal
Stéphane Lauzon Liberal Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC
Mr. Chair, I was talking about the potential snowball effect this request for information could have on other departments, because departments had to deal with other departments. This motion is too broad. It doesn't just impact one department. Every reference to another department in an email will force that department to do a parallel search.
Let me explain how this works. Many departments have frontline workers. When a department receives a request for information, it has to analyze it. Every department's frontline workers receive a lot of training, depending on—
November 25th, 2025 / 9:15 a.m.
Liberal
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
Okay.
It looks like we have the thumbs up.
I'm being told that the English interpretation is working properly.
You may continue, Mr. Lauzon.
Liberal
Stéphane Lauzon Liberal Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC
Thank you.
Every department that has to search for that information must work with other departments to do so. Let me explain how I saw this during my cross-country tour as Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Citizens' Services. Once again, hats off to all the dedicated public servants who represent us on the ground. We need them to serve the public, not to redact documents. I'm all for the democratic right to request information, but we're not talking about specific information here. We're asking departments to share every document related to this issue since 2018.
When we ask public servants why they can't solve the issue, they say it's all about training. Every public servant receives training to vary their portfolio or to specialize in a field. In many departments, some receive training on the Driver Inc. file. Frontline workers must have access to all the training they need to handle inquiries. I'm thinking, for example, of someone working at a Service Canada counter answering a driver's question regarding employment insurance, the Canada Pension Plan or a lost social insurance card.
Public servants must meet the needs of citizens, but they must also receive ongoing training during working hours. Often, this training is given online by their superiors or an outside company. It allows us to have good employees with as much knowledge as possible. What we want to avoid is not being able to answer a driver, whether incorporated or not, because no one's available, or because the employee handling the request doesn't have enough experience.
When a public servant is unable to handle an inquiry, they have to escalate it, as we say in the public service, which simply means the inquiry is put back into the system so a more experienced employee can handle it. The more we escalate, the longer it takes, and it increases the administrative burden. If these more experienced employees aren't available because they're writing reports, doing research or working with legal services on the legality of something, then we find ourselves with our backs against the wall unable to meet the public's needs.
When I say that it might affect multiple departments, I'm also thinking of duplicate documents, since many departments may have the same information. These documents would have to be sorted out to avoid duplicates. Departments will have to talk to each other. Time management will be a huge task. Hundreds of employees will have to be mobilized. We know that a change in time management undermines an organization's operations. Any MP who's been in business before knows exactly what I'm talking about.
Let me give you an example. If you are supposed to receive a steel order at 10 a.m., but you get a call to tell you the delivery is delayed because a driver is unavailable, it changes your whole order receiving process. The dynamics change, employees get reassigned to other tasks, which leads to a waste of time. Every minute counts for a private company. I understand the Conservatives and the Bloc Québécois don't care about this, but we, in government, do. We want to be proactive, provide as much detail as possible and meet the new witnesses, the grieving families, and do so with dignity, giving them the choice of appearing in public or in camera.
We especially want to avoid mobilizing the entire public service with a document production request. All these teams will have to be reassigned to tasks they're not used to doing. It'll be difficult to process all the trucking companies compliance audit requests. Moreover, provinces and municipalities will have to wait longer to get support for their road projects, and improvements to inspection standards for public safety will have to be set aside, which will undermine how the temporary foreign worker program is managed, which is also a hot topic.
The committee has created this diversion, but citizens and businesses are the ones paying the price. There are needs to be met, and we have to make recommendations to meet our goal. Given the urgency of the Driver Inc. file, asking for documents dating back to 2018 doesn't make sense. We think it's unacceptable, and that's not going to change. We're more than willing to co-operate to find solutions.
The last thing we want to do is delay implementation of the compliance measures announced earlier. Quebec followed Ontario's lead and announced that two mandatory training courses will be needed to get a class 1 licence. This new requirement, based on the Canada Safety Code, and we are proud of that, will come into effect in 11 days. We don't want to stand in the way of improving programs we provide to provinces. We want to increase our co-operation with provinces. Ontario took action a long time ago, but other provinces have adopted some fairly advanced measures in this area. Quebec was a lagging a little behind, but recently took steps to change that.
Furthermore, if the motion is too broad, it could prevent us from reaching our common objective, which is to make recommendations. The Conservatives, the Bloc Québécois and the Liberals need to renew their co-operation, to a certain extent. Together, we chose the witnesses we wanted to hear from. We even unanimously decided to add the Association des professionnels du dépannage du Québec to the list.
We're in a waiting pattern. We're all eager to work with the analysts, who are doing an exceptional job, to produce a report. We've seen it in other studies. We've seen the work being accomplished very quickly on some projects proposed by the analysts. We want to include in our report the striking statistics we received. I gave a few examples this week, and I can give you more later. What struck me the most was hearing that businesses that stay on the straight and narrow are seeing their profit drop by 20% to 30% every year. It's still very difficult to understand why.
We also put a lot of emphasis on the return of the T4A slip. Even Mr. Barsalou‑Duval recognizes this is a major step forward. We can already agree on that. The government is not close-minded. We simply want to co-operate in a targeted way, rather than emptying departmental servers. Let's not misuse the public service. We do need to promote transparency, but we shouldn't create an administrative burden that would cause delays, cost taxpayers a lot of money, and take the public service away from the essential work it does to keep our roads safe. That's basically what we're saying this morning.
I really care about this issue for the many reasons you already know. However, there are many aspects of road safety that affect us and that we must consider. Witnesses have also shared some frightening statistics with us. Today, we also received figures from other witnesses, and I'd like to share a few of them with you.
First, I want to talk about Quebec. In Quebec, the Société de l'assurance automobile du Québec, or SAAQ, is a reference. However, neither the SAAQ nor Transport Canada keeps statistics by driver category. We looked at those figures, but nothing stood out, and none of the witnesses gave us any statistics on discount drivers or drivers who take part in the “Driver Inc.” scheme.
Every witness recommended we improve information sharing, but we didn't have all the information to start with. There are several categories of drivers, such as discount drivers, drivers who take part in the “Drivers Inc.” model, drivers who obey the law, self-employed drivers, or drivers who own a business, but work with several companies, and therefore comply with the law. I could talk later on about the various driver statuses, but the database I'm talking about has data on the types of vehicles. It could be heavy trucks or tractor-trailers. However, the data does not include driver status, discount drivers or illegal drivers. The data on the number of accidents and fatalities does not include the employment status of the drivers involved. There are only general statistics. Moreover, some 2025 statistics have yet to be compiled. In short, we have no issue documenting collisions involving heavy trucks, but the official data doesn't allow us to determine exactly how many accidents involve discount drivers. Some witnesses may have said a few things, but there's no official data on that. Therefore, one of the committee's recommendations should be that such data be compiled.
To solve the “Driver Inc.” issue, we need the capacity to catch the offenders. Provinces, territories and the federal government need to share information so authorities can more easily target these offenders and reprimand them. I believe in cracking down. As the former chair of the Gatineau Public Safety Commission, I can tell you that repression works. At the time, Gatineau was the first Canadian city to use photo radar. We installed them in sectors where we had complaints. I can tell you that every time they were set up, speeding tickets declined, because people were slowing down. Also, there has been a lot of progress in urban planning with sidewalk development and road realignment to give drivers the impression the road is narrower. They slow down, and the number of tickets goes down. However, there's nothing to slow trucks down on the highways. You can't impose road bans. You can't put speed bumps on a highway, or modify the highway to slow heavy trucks down. Therefore, to crack down on this issue, provinces and territories must have the necessary tools to improve statistics and co-operation.
Let's start by taking action as members of the committee and making recommendations directly to the provinces as quickly as possible to improve the lot of drivers working under the Driver Inc. model.
In 2024, there were 379 deaths on the roads in Quebec, all types of users and vehicles combined. I have to consider the statistics as a whole for accidents involving heavy vehicles, such as heavy trucks, school buses, buses and tool vehicles, because there are no statistics devoted to heavy trucks with a trailer, including loads and an illegal driver, a temporary foreign worker or someone who doesn't have the skills. There are no specific statistics, but there were 100 deaths in 2024 in accidents involving heavy vehicles, including school buses, buses and tool vehicles, compared to 74 deaths in 2023. That's an increase of 35.1%, the highest count in the past 15 years. It's a significant increase in the number of motor vehicle casualties on our roads. We're here today to talk about it and to get things done. Producing documents will not change those statistics. Of those 100 fatalities, 77 were caused by collisions with a heavy truck or road tractor, up from 57 in 2023. That's the data we need to retain.
I'll put it in simple political language to make sure I'm clear: The number of deaths involving heavy vehicle collisions shot up by 35% between 2023 and 2024. My colleagues can use that data on social media. The number of deaths in accidents involving a heavy vehicle went from 74 to 100, and 77 of them were caused by collisions involving a heavy truck or road tractor. Is that enough for this committee to make recommendations and move forward?
We're talking about deaths. Many accidents have taken a severe toll and involve collateral damage, because the deaths involve fathers, mothers and even children. Families are grieving and they are directly affected by these deaths. The number of people who got into an accident involving a heavy vehicle rose to 2,514. Imagine the amount of financial compensation provided by the Société de l'assurance automobile du Québec, or SAAQ, the Commission des normes, de l'équité, de la santé et de la sécurité du travail or private insurance. Imagine the consequences that that number of mild or serious injuries and that number of deaths is having on the economy, on drivers and on businesses. The driver who didn't deliver the steel order to a company at 10 a.m. may have been in an accident, or they or their children were too sick for them to come to work. Those waiting on the order don't know why it hasn't arrived, but they hope that driver wasn't one of the 2,514 people who were in an accident, were slightly or seriously injured, or died in 2024. Those 2,514 people represent about 9% of all people injured on Quebec roads in 2024. In 2023, 2,788 people were involved in an accident.
In 2024, 1,870 drivers and passengers in heavy vehicles got into an accident, compared to 2,005 in 2023.
The SAAQ also calculates the number of deaths from crashes involving people in collisions with heavy trucks or road tractors, for every 1,000 heavy trucks and road tractors in circulation. In 2024, it was 0.4. The overall accident rate for people involved in a collision with a heavy truck or a road tractor is 10.3 people in an accident for every 1,000 heavy trucks in circulation.
This is serious. These statistics are frightening.
As I said in my introduction, initial partial data for 2025 only includes statistics from January to August, since the data has not yet been compiled for the months following. However, according to interim data, 235 people have died on our roads in Quebec this year alone. Some of those deaths occurred on the highway I drive every day. Again this month, there were two major accidents on Highway 50. During the same period, fatal collisions fell from 227 in 2024 to 235 in 2025.
Also from January to August, since we don't have the statistics for the subsequent months, eight heavy truck or road tractor occupants died. That's eight too many. During the same period in 2024, there were 10, so that's fewer than last year. That's an average of five deaths per year. I don't want to trivialize that number, but five families are directly affected by those deaths. Every death is one too many.
We have to consider all the people involved in accidents, including heavy truck or road tractor occupants, as well as the severity of the accidents. From January to August 2025, 323 people were involved in accidents, compared to 291 in 2024. That's a significant increase. From 2020 to 2024, the average number of people who were involved in an accident and injured as a result of heavy truck or road tractor occupants was 319. While the January-to-August period saw a slight decrease in fatalities among heavy truck occupants compared to 2024, the total number of heavy truck drivers and passengers involved in accidents is on the rise.
I'm more familiar with the Quebec data, but there is Canada-wide data. The Canada-wide data is released in a national dashboard by Transport Canada within 18 months, because it's pretty heavy data to compile. I'm sure my colleagues have gone to the Transport Canada site and seen the impact it had on our preparations for this committee. Before we hear from the witnesses, I looked at some statistics. The last complete dashboard available, which I'd like to talk about, is from 2023. There are no official statistics yet for 2024 and 2025, because public servants are delaying service to our constituents, working on various programs and compiling programs. Imagine another requirement to produce documents being added to that 18-month wait time. It's the same people and the same departments, but if the wait time to get all documents and all communications from all departments is added on, that brings the 18-month wait time up to maybe 36 months. However, we want data so we can base ourselves on facts, and we want to see the reviews so we can make better decisions.
The 2024 and 2025 statistics for the entire country are not yet available, but I can speak to the 2023 statistics. At the federal level, fatal collisions involving commercial vehicles are calculated based on another definition. They are called commercial vehicles. In 2023, there were 399 deaths in commercial vehicle collisions. This category of vehicle includes heavy trucks, buses, and so on. Of the 1,964 fatalities on the road, 20% were caused by collisions with commercial vehicles. In addition, 29 heavy truck occupants died. That's 29 too many heavy truck occupants—those trucks weigh over 4,530 kilograms, approximately. We're talking about the carriers who feed the supply chain across Canada.
Heavy truck or road tractor occupants have been in 29 fatal collisions, so 58 heavy truck drivers or passengers are involved, because they use a team driving strategy, a two-person travel strategy for heavy trucks. The passenger is not necessarily responsible for the accident, but they are affected. Therefore, in 2023, more than 58 heavy truck drivers or passengers died in commercial vehicle collisions. These collisions have been on the rise since the pandemic. There were 336 fatalities in 2020, 362 fatalities in 2021, 376 fatalities in 2022 and 399 fatalities in 2023. The number was going down, but then it started going up again. To date this year, according to the latest statistics, there have been about 400 fatalities in collisions involving commercial vehicles.
In this context, how can Driver Inc. drivers, truck drivers using the Driver Inc. model, be targeted? I'm talking about actual statistics released by Transport Canada. As committee members, how can we target Driver Inc. drivers, truck drivers using the Driver Inc. model?
Our goal today is to issue recommendations to solve the Driver Inc. problem. This point deviates from the statistics. We'd like to have a database and official documents like those the SAAQ provides in Quebec and those produced by the Canadian government through Transport Canada. Can we keep a record of truck driver irregularities on our roads? Can we work with data to establish recommendations through the analysts, and contribute to the sharing of information founded on data that truly relates to the Driver Inc. matter? Can we work with the departments?
A total of $77 million has been invested for that purpose. The Conservatives and the Bloc voted against that $77 million in the budget, when those funds can be used to improve the situation related to Driver Inc. We're blocking this committee so we won't make any progress drafting the report, but we're ready to hear from witnesses and from the grieving families with respect and dignity, by giving them the option to testify in camera or in public. We're ready for that. All we want is not to undermine the public service and not ask that thousands of documents be written for political purposes, requiring thousands of hours of work by public servants.
We want data, because it's impossible to find the exact reason Driver Inc. is causing accidents based on the official data I just told you about. We can blame it on immigration or we can blame it on incompetent companies that cut corners to save money by doing fewer inspections or by hiring somebody after giving them their permit within 24 hours. We can blame whoever we want, but if we don't stop Driver Inc. drivers and move forward, the problem won't go away.
The provinces have realized that and have started to step up to the plate to support us. In 11 days from now, Quebec is going to start requiring that future truck drivers take two courses, one of which will lead to a diploma of vocational studies, or DEP. The second training is a program involving a form of vocational training other than that of the DEP to obtain adequate equivalent training so drivers can get behind the wheel.
According to a Journal de Montréal article, between December 20, 2024, and March 22, 2025, 142 collisions or incidents involving Driver Inc. drivers were recorded. I don't know where the data comes from, but the article from a Quebec media outlet says there were 142 incidents or collisions involving drivers at fault, Driver Inc. drivers. We have the law enforcement response site and roadside police checkpoints. That's not a SAAQ statistic. Although it's neither a statistic, a journalistic compilation of reports or a science-based article, road traffic controllers in Quebec really did tell me there's been a significant increase in the number of Driver Inc. drivers and reminded me in particular of the 35% increase in the number of deaths related to heavy trucks between 2023 and 2024.
Frankly, this official database doesn't distinguish between drivers on salary and Driver Inc. drivers, the drivers who are incorporated. Canadians driving our trucks who are in good standing, who have gone through the training and who have experience, are sometimes involved in an accident. It's called “an accident”.
Mr. Lawrence, you've been in the insurance business for quite some time. You have represented people involved in accidents. So you know very well that people of good faith who have received the training and who drive well can still be involved in an accident. That's why they get insurance. Good people have suffered accidents, so they shouldn't be included in what we're studying today. As a committee—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
Mr. Lauzon, I would remind you to address your comments to the chair, not to other members of the committee, even if it's to say something positive.
Thank you.
Liberal
Stéphane Lauzon Liberal Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC
Mr. Chair, I apologize. I'm addressing you to say that, as a lawyer, Mr. Lawrence knows a great deal about this because he's worked for insurance companies. I can tell you that, for me, talking—
Liberal
Conservative
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Clarke, ON
On a point of order, while the chair is 100% correct, I'm more than willing to indulge this informality. If Mr. Lauzon wants to address me directly, I'm fine with that.
Liberal
Liberal
Stéphane Lauzon Liberal Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC
Thanks, Mr. Lawrence.
Mr. Chair, I apologize for my misconduct. I think it's important to talk about the people who have been singled out undeservedly throughout this study.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna, BC
I have a point of order on relevance. He hasn't mentioned the motion. A good filibusterer will make sure that they refer to the motion at least every three and a half minutes. I really want Mr. Lauzon to be his best self.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
Thank you very much, Mr. Albas. It's duly noted.
I'll remind all colleagues, once again, that when you're speaking to the motion, you should address the motion and bring your remarks back to the motion as much as possible for relevance.
Monsieur Lauzon.
Liberal
Stéphane Lauzon Liberal Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC
Mr. Chair, I'm happy to explain where I'm going with this. The main motion really talks about the victims. This goes back to the first part of the motion, and it talks about finding solutions to the problem.
The testimony heard indicates not only that 35% of collisions involve fatalities, but also that there are concerns for compliant drivers. All testimony included a heartfelt plea from companies that came to see us to ask if they could continue to be compliant, to pay their fees, to make revenue and to be financially healthy while remaining compliant. That was the plea we heard.
If we want to get that done, we really need to know the situation of those companies and drivers who drive for them. I mentioned Quebec because I have a bit more experience with it, and I mentioned Transport Canada because it's directly related to the drivers we're studying and it's the Canadian government's responsibility.
Unfortunately, things are no better in Ontario. In 2023, according to the Ontario Ministry of Transportation, there were 106 fatalities in collisions involving large trucks. The definition has changed again, because here they call them “big trucks”. Accidents involving big trucks account for 17.2% of all traffic fatalities in Ontario. A lot of roads in Ontario are built for road transport and big trucks. In 2022, the Ontario Provincial Police recorded 9,110 accidents involving heavy trucks, the highest number in over a decade, with 71 fatalities. As I told committee members earlier, the main cause is speeding, unfortunately. That's why I spoke earlier about the best way to reduce the number of accidents, which is to crack down on speeding.
The leading causes of accidents are excessive speed and dangerous lane changes. That's what I experience on Highway 50. On a number of occasions since 2015, I've seen vehicles go outside their lane on my way home. It's often trucks. I have no idea what the drivers are doing in their truck, but two wheels of the truck are in my lane. On Highway 50, somebody who is daydreaming is liable to get into a head-on collision. If I were not careful on Highway 50, my children would be fatherless, and my wife would have no husband, because trucks put two wheels in my lane on my way home. Dangerous lane changes are the second most frequent cause of accidents.
In addition, people think it's easy to make a truck come to a stop. Vehicles cut off and squeeze trucks on the road. Drivers don't understand how trucks behave. Truck drivers have said that they're increasingly afraid of one another. They're afraid of other truck drivers. Truck drivers have come to tell us that they're afraid of their colleagues at other companies, because they're at risk of having an accident due to the incompetent drivers on the road.
Who better than a truck driver on the road for hundreds of hours a year to testify that truck drivers are extremely dangerous on the road? Experts from Ontario have said that an inadequate space cushion between vehicles is the third leading cause of death involving heavy trucks.
I'd like to end this point with some very interesting statistics that say the number of deaths involving heavy vehicles in Quebec in 2024 increased by 35% compared to 2023. There were 74 fatalities in 2023, versus 100 in 2024. We need to retain that data. My colleagues can use it on social media to say that this committee is here to make a difference in people's lives and find a way to solve the Driver Inc. problem. That's the highest number of heavy-vehicle fatalities in the past 15 years. Transport Canada has stated that there's been a steady increase in fatalities involving commercial vehicles. In 2020, there were 343 fatalities; in 2021, there were 381 fatalities; in 2022, there were 390 fatalities; and in 2023, there were 399 fatalities. I urge all my colleagues to remember that, and to read Transport Canada's 2023 motor vehicle collision statistics and its statistics for 2012 to 2021 on collisions involving commercial vehicles in Canada, as well as visit the websites of the Société de l'assurance automobile du Québec and the Ontario Ministry of Transportation. In Quebec alone, 100 people lost their lives in 2024 in collisions involving a heavy vehicle, and 77 of them were in accidents involving heavy trucks or road tractors. I'm very interested in the 35% increase over 2023, even before distinguishing the portion of this data that falls under the Driver Inc. model.
That's why, today, through our recommendations, it's important that we give the provincial governments and all stakeholders the tools they need to find the solution. Therefore, we have to work with the analysts and the clerk to achieve our ends, because road safety is extremely important. Governments invest millions of dollars in back-to-school advertising. They run commercials about speeding on highways like the 417. The commercials say that cellular phones are deadly and that people shouldn't text while driving. In Quebec, they show photos of people similar to the ones intended to show the risk of cancer on cigarette packs. There are posters in Quebec showing what happens when someone gets into an accident because they drive too fast. We're very concerned about road safety, and we have the opportunity to improve one aspect of the study directly related to the Bloc Québécois motion.
I would like to thank the Bloc Québécois once again for introducing this motion. This issue is very close to my heart, and everyone agrees with the first part of the motion. We could so easily pass this motion and complete the study by agreeing to exactly what we're asking for to preserve the dignity of the families of witnesses who are victims of accidents, which is to give them the option to come and testify in private at an in camera meeting, or in public.
Our goal is social justice and tax fairness. We've talked a lot about finance, so let's talk more about social justice and tax fairness for truckers.
The witnesses, the truckers who have come to this room are affected by the measures put in place in the 2025 budget, by provisions of the Canada Labour Code, and by political commitments to ensure social justice and tax fairness for them. We are in a political context at a parliamentary committee. Through its investments, the federal government has committed to protecting workers' rights and ensuring tax fairness in the trucking sector. Everyone stands to gain if the government invests wisely. We can therefore achieve tax fairness through recommendations. We can give the departments the tools and funding they need to hire the right people, the experts, to recover money from illegal drivers.
The Driver Inc. scheme is founded on misclassifying drivers as self-employed when they shouldn't be. It's not true, drivers can't define themselves as a supplier for a single company. They can do it their first week thinking that, as a company, they are going to drive for other companies, but today we know that's not how it goes. The company gives the driver a truck, dictates their routes and tells them that they won't look into the safety and maintenance of the vehicle. The company is going to cut corners and want the driver to drive as much as possible so that it's profitable. It says that the driver is going to be self-employed. We've even had witnesses tell us that some drivers ask to be self-employed. It pays off at the time, when they're healthy, when they haven't had any accidents, when they're willing to commit fraud and have two logbooks. It pays until drivers make a blunder and find they don't have employment insurance, protection from the Commission des normes, de l'équité, de la santé et de la sécurité du travail or health care. After they get into an accident or are no longer employed for whatever reason, it's very difficult for drivers to justify that incorporation was profitable.
The Driver Inc. scheme is founded on self-employed workers. We need to find ways to stop it and issue recommendations. Essentially, the goal is to put an end to abusive practices and ensure a level playing field.
From the beginning, I've always said the same thing. I've often asked witnesses how the government could better level the playing field. I have always been in favour of compliance with standards and proper driver's licences, and of fairness for families, workers and companies that want to have a business with sound financial conditions.
Now, the key measures in budget 2025 are not complicated.
First, it talks about lifting the moratorium on T4A slips. We've done that, and officials are working on it. That will have a direct impact on the trucking industry.
Then, we need to provide the tools to help the departments talk to each other and find the wrongdoers to recover money. Funding of $77 million over four years is earmarked for that. With the passage of the budget, we now have $19.2 million per year on the ground for compliance inspection.
There's also a legislative amendment to strengthen enforcement of the Canada Labour Code and information sharing between the Canada Revenue Agency and Employment and Social Development Canada.
That's the key to the recommendations we should make, because we really need to recommend a set of measures to give our government the necessary tools not only from a tax standpoint, but also from a moral standpoint and a business management standpoint. We need to make recommendations to the Government of Quebec and the other provinces to work together to improve the lot of businesses in the heavy truck driving sector that want to do the right thing.
Social justice and tax fairness are linked by the fact that they both guarantee truckers access to the minimum protections provided under the law, under the Canada Labour Code. The Canada Labour Code already contains pre-established standards and has certain rules around paid leave.
Conservative
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna, BC
Mr. Chair, what does the current topic about minimum wage and the Labour Code have to do with this particular motion? I know that many of us are probably passively doing other duties, etc., but his job is to actually be relevant, and your job is to make sure he's on point.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
Thank you very much, Mr. Albas.
Mr. Lauzon, I would once again remind you to speak to the motion at hand.
Colleagues, I think this is a good opportunity for us to suspend for five minutes and take a health break.
When we reconvene, Monsieur Lauzon will have the floor.
The meeting is suspended.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
I call the meeting back to order, and I turn the floor back over to Mr. Lauzon.
You have the floor, Mr. Lauzon.
Liberal
Stéphane Lauzon Liberal Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
When I spoke to the motion, I talked a lot about the workers affected by the Driver Inc. phenomenon. I explained the nuance between social justice and tax fairness, because, in the budget, we have a solution to improve things and meet the needs of those who work in this field. I outlined a number of measures in the budget, including the T4A slip measure, the $77-million investment, and how to share that amount between social justice and tax fairness. It's really about ensuring access to the minimum protections under the Canada Labour Code, so it's directly related to the needs of drivers and it's a very good avenue to at least give some recommendations to the analysts.
When we were hearing testimony, I often said that the rules have to be the same for everyone, both little and big players. I believe every driver has to be in good standing. The minister, Mr. MacKinnon, made that clear in his testimony. He advocated for a collaborative approach with industry. I also liked when he told us that it was a matter of putting an end to fraud. The minister wants to fix the problem and says that his priorities are safety, fairness and competitiveness in the transportation sector, so I think his comments are directly related to the needs of this committee and those of the Minister of Jobs and Families.
I named those two ministers, but we also heard from the secretary of state. We heard from a number of witnesses. The Minister of Jobs and Families has clearly expressed her support for strengthening inspections and penalties to protect workers. Those two measures go hand in hand. The ministers came together to talk about solutions. I think it's important to focus on employer responsibility and fighting precariousness. Companies that are sounding the alarm must also be given certain responsibilities. We've heard heartfelt pleas from businesses on the right track that must comply with standards and meet the needs of their businesses and their drivers.
In our recommendations, we must therefore include responsibilities for businesses. What's important are the companies that promote the infamous Driver Inc. model. Companies that circumvent the system in one way or another will be subject to audits and penalties. That's what I'd like us to recommend, and I'm willing to work to recommend audits and penalties for wrongdoers. The solutions we've heard will ensure not only tax justice, but also social justice.
Companies that play by the rules shouldn't be penalized. On the contrary, they even need to be recognized. Why not set up a registry of companies recognized for their good behaviour, as suggested by witnesses and the Bloc Québécois? The Bloc Québécois has already recommended that certain registries be kept.
Can we work on this? Can we achieve our ends so that the analysts can tell us whether unveiling the names is in order, in line with the rules, and if we can do it? The ideal place to make such requests is in all the recommendations made through the analysts and the clerk.
Yes, it can be about messages. I agree again. I'm often agreeing with Mr. Barsalou‑Duval today. I think we're on the verge of grabbing a bite together. I can tell Mr. Barsalou‑Duval that our strategic message is to get to where we want to go and finish this study by issuing recommendations similar to those in his press release to move forward. We can examine them with members of this committee, the analysts and the clerk before tabling them in the House, but we have to get to that stage. We have to hear from the witnesses on the list, but we also have to respect the families' choice to testify with dignity and give them the option to testify in camera or in public.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Peter Schiefke
Just a moment, Mr. Lauzon.
Mr. Albas, on a point of order, the floor is yours, sir.
