Transport Committee on Jan. 28th, 2026

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

Yes. I just wanted to thank my colleague across the aisle for his wonderful collaboration. I hope this is the beginning of a year of collaboration that will continue.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

That’s perfect, thank you very much.

Mr. Albas.

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

It sounds as though we have unanimous consent, but I want to clarify that if we do not have someone from Canada Post present—or the CEO from Canada Post present—we will then issue a summons at the call of the chair. Is that correct?

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Yes. Are we all on the same page on that?

Mr. Greaves.

[Will Greaves, Liberal, Victoria, BC]

Is the second invitation specific to the president of Canada Post, or would the committee be satisfied with some other senior official from Canada Post coming? This is a question for clarification because the motion doesn't currently specify an individual.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Mr. Barsalou-Duval.

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

In fact, in the discussions we had earlier, I noted that the intent was to receive the CEO of Canada Post. If he wants to be accompanied by someone else, I don’t think there’s any objection. We understand that other people may know the details of the activities better than the CEO and that they can accompany him.

That said, I believe that comments from the CEO would carry much more weight than those from someone else who doesn’t have such a pivotal role or doesn’t hold a position of such great authority in the organization.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

I see that Mr. Albas has his hand up.

Mr. Albas, you have the floor.

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

I [Inaudible—Editor] reflect on it, so I appreciate MP Greaves' intervention and friendly amendment, and certainly Conservatives will accept it.

However, I want to point out one thing we should not accept as a committee: the fact that we received a letter from Canada Post. Of course, letters are its specialty. Unfortunately, its letter was not signed by anyone. This is not accountability. I thank my colleagues for agreeing to bring the CEO; that is accountability. Either we're a parliamentary committee or we are not, and I think Canada Post owes this committee a visit.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you, Mr. Albas.

I think there is consent for this. I like the idea that Mr. Barsalou-Duval put forward, which is to say the CEO and accompanying team members, who may be more equipped to answer certain questions. Does that work for everyone?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Okay. Do we have unanimous consent for the motion?

(Motion agreed to)

Thank you very much, colleagues.

If it's okay with everybody, we'll go back to our line of questioning.

Mr. Albas, I know that you are very keen on continuing, so I'll turn the floor over to you for five minutes, followed by Ms. O'Rourke, and then we'll conclude for the day. The floor is yours, sir.

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

Mr. Tarantini, thank you for your testimony and for the work you do to drive our economy. Your description of a truck being a missile, I thought, was quite apt because there is a safety.... We heard very clearly from our witnesses at the last committee meeting how tragic and deadly those missiles can be when they're not driven safely, so I appreciate your being here.

We've heard a number of questions around facility insurance, and that does seem to be an Ontario issue. I don't hear the same things coming from British Columbia. Do you believe that the federal government should put...if you're going to be an extraprovincial carrier, that there should be minimum requirements for insurance from a reputable company?

[Vince Tarantini]

Yes, and that's been in play. From my understanding, the minimum requirement has never not been in play. It's the structure of how it's done. There are insurance brokers now advising carriers with bad records that, rather than going to the open market to get pricing from a legitimate insurance company, they should price immediately with facility insurance. They select from a menu and very specifically select liability insurance at a lower cost than we would pay in the open market and then buy the other items of insurance coverage on the open market and aggregate that. This is because, simply put, on the open market, they would not survive.

Facility insurance wasn't meant to be penal; it was meant to change behaviour, and behaviour doesn't change when it's not monetary, unfortunately. If the people being targeted specifically with insurance issues.... During my time in an insurance captive that I'm part of, we have seen many try to enter our group of insurance coverage simply because they can't afford insurance coverage, but they're not willing to change their safety practices. They're not willing to increase their hiring or training criteria; they simply take drivers with fresh driver's licences and employ them. That is an industry problem; even if someone does get a driver's licence, most trucking companies won't take a new driver, because they don't have the two years' minimum insurance requirements that a lot of insurance companies want.

It's a very convoluted insurance issue.

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

One question I would ask is this: We've had many witnesses talk about a national database, including the CTA first and foremost. Do you believe the database should also allow for the instant verification of current insurance at the minimum level and standard?

[Vince Tarantini]

Yes. We heard testimony earlier with regard to freight brokers. Insurance companies will issue certificates of insurance, and the purpose of this is to notify the related parties that insurance is active. Should the insurance go away, you'll get notification from the insurance company that there's no insurance coverage on the company. I don't see why that couldn't be enacted in other areas, as we've just been describing.

More importantly, there is the reconciliation that goes on between an insurance company insuring a bunch of equipment, whether it's trucks or trailers—it doesn't matter what it is—and the database.

In our case, the MTO—the Ministry of Transportation—has a record to reconcile. Fifty trucks need 50 insurance policies, but that simply doesn't happen, so there's never an opportunity to reconcile that and hold anybody to account.

I have never understood why those two agencies simply can't reconcile and align themselves so there's no fraud in the marketplace in this regard.

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

Okay.

I'd like to go back to the Quebec association for tow trucking.

What does it mean if this continues with your industry? You said earlier that the MOUs...your companies would leave that. What does it mean for the province of Quebec, and will this happen in other provinces if the same problem continues?

[Mike Burstall]

Are you talking monetarily—money-wise?

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

Yes.

I imagine any business that has losses and can't reclaim its fees will go out of business.

[Mike Burstall]

Yes, but it ties in with.... I think this committee is also really focused on the safety of the people on the road. If I'm not going to get paid for what I'm doing, there's a good chance I'm not going to send our equipment to go clear the road. Unfortunately, I have contracts with the ministry of transport and the City of Montreal, and I have time delays to respect; otherwise, I'll be fined.

When I go to a job, I want to get paid, but now the big problem is with Driver Inc. As we discussed before, we're not getting paid. It's now coming to the point at which we're asking to be paid before we go to the job, and we're not going to clear the roads if we're not paid. That's a safety issue for the fire trucks and ambulances; it's a big safety issue. This is where we are right now because, as you just said, we have to get paid for what we do.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you, Mr. Burstall.

Thank you, Mr. Albas.

Finally for today, we have Ms. O'Rourke.

Ms. O'Rourke, the floor is yours. You have five minutes, please.

[Dominique O'Rourke, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Thank you very much, Chair Schiefke.

I was stunned to learn recently that the MTO doesn't oversee the operation of driving schools, but the ministry of colleges and universities is responsible for the trucking schools. Frankly, that is astounding. The testimony we've heard over the last two hours has pointed to a number of areas of provincial responsibility, so I'm curious to know this: Is it your recommendation to this committee that provinces urgently invest in additional resources for enforcement, training, audits and staffing of weigh scales, etc., yes or no?

[Vince Tarantini]

Yes.

[Dominique O'Rourke, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

I have another quick one. Do you support and welcome the steps the federal government has proposed and that are before the House to tackle this issue? These are T4As and increased ESDC audits. Would you urge all members of this committee to support them?

[Vince Tarantini]

Yes.