Transport Committee on Feb. 2nd, 2026

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

Is there any plan to look into that formally as an organization?

[Linda McAusland]

We look at insurance as a factor of the work that we do all the time.

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

Wouldn't you have an opinion, then?

[Linda McAusland]

I'm doing what my board has asked me to do, and we engage with the insurance sector regularly.

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

I would encourage you to ask your board to look into that, because it is something that this committee has heard over and over again, and it is causing all sorts of issues in a very good industry.

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

Quickly, Mr. Harper, thank you again for your testimony here today.

There are a number of family businesses that have been around in my area, the Okanagan, for decades, if not longer. It was, and shall hopefully be again, a place where you can work and raise a family.

I'll leave it to you to make any final comments with regard to the profession.

[Robert Harper]

That's a very good point. This has been a good industry for people to make a good living, and it is really impacting those people who have dedicated their lives to building a good business and treating their workers properly. Nobody likes to see scammers succeed at the expense of those who are trying to operate within the law.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Harper.

Thank you, Mr. Albas.

Mr. Kelloway, the floor is yours for the final round.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Again, we're coming close to the end of the testimony on this important topic. I mentioned that you've been following the testimony over the number of weeks we've been studying this issue. I'm really interested, at this point, in hearing from you.

During the testimony, have we missed anything? Have we not been asking certain questions that we should have been asking?

Mr. Harper, you tilted your head like you might have a thought or two on that. That question is for both of you.

When we write our report, we're going to make a number of recommendations. What are the recommendations that you would want to see?

That addresses so many different things, I know, from data exchange to enforcement and tax reform, but I want to get a sense from you of whether we have been asking the right questions. Have we missed certain questions that you think we should be asking?

When you go to your computer and you check the report when it's finalized, what do you want to see as the top recommendations to improve this particular study and, ultimately, make it more applicable on the ground?

Mr. Harper, we'll start with you.

[Robert Harper]

It's a very open-ended question. The reason I tilted my head was that I hadn't given it that broad a thought.

I would start by saying, as you've probably heard in the testimony, how many aspects of Driver Inc. are involved—insurance, tax fraud, employment fraud and health and safety—and how many different agencies are involved. In terms of the worst aspects of Driver Inc., it's certainly been a very big pathway to organized crime entering Canada and the trucking industry. The question is, do we have adequate laws to deal with such a nexus of a problem, as they do, I would say, in the United States, where they have racketeering laws?

That would be one of the things I would think the committee should probably consider. This is such a broad base. It attacks here and there. Do we have the tools in Canada to address something that is really a racket? They're doing not just one thing; they're committing a multitude of crimes, a little here, a little there and using people.

Do we have those tools in Canada to deal with such a complex network or scheme to defraud citizens and to abuse employees? When I think about it, if that's really a consideration, perhaps there has to be even more inquiry done, beyond the committee, into the industry, to try to clean up the bad actors. Again, it has bad repercussions for international trade, not just within Canada.

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

Thank you very much. Sometimes that's why I ask broad questions. I get some specific answers.

Ms. McAusland, what are your thoughts?

[Linda McAusland]

We're pleased to see that there's a committee at the federal level to address this issue. We've been talking to industry about it for some time. We didn't know whether the right agencies or the right departments were aware of the issue.

On building awareness, we'll be very happy to get your recommendations. The board is paying very close attention to the proceedings of this committee, and I think we'll continue to have the conversation with industry on the role we should be playing.

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

I appreciate that.

I'll just conclude by saying thank you to both of you.

To everyone who has come here to provide testimony, regardless of your political stripe, a transport truck doesn't know if you're Conservative, Liberal, NDP, Green or Bloc. It is a safety issue and an economic issue. It's about strengthening the rules and regulations. I think we've learned that there's obviously a role for the federal government to play, but it's also a joint enterprise with the provinces.

I want to thank you for this. I really appreciate your feedback.

I'll yield the floor on that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Kelloway.

Witnesses, I want to thank you on behalf of all members of this committee for your presence and your testimony on this very important study.

Colleagues, I'm going to suspend for a couple of minutes to allow our clerk to transfer over to our next round of witnesses.

This meeting is suspended to the call of the chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

I call this meeting back to order.

Colleagues, appearing before us for today's second round we have, from the British Columbia Trucking Association, Mr. Dave Earle, president and chief executive officer; and from the Ontario Trucking Association, Mr. Mark Bylsma, chairman, and Mr. Geoffrey Wood, senior vice-president, policy.

Welcome. Thank you for taking the time to appear before us today. We appreciate this very much.

We'll get right into it.

We'll turn it over to you, Mr. Earle, for your opening remarks. You have five minutes, sir.

[Dave Earle, President and Chief Executive Officer, British Columbia Trucking Association]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Chair and members of the committee, thank you for your continued interest and the invitation to appear this morning.

BCTA represents for-hire and private carrier fleets that operate all types of vehicles everywhere throughout the province of British Columbia. Thank you for addressing what is truly our most pressing concern.

You have heard extensively about Driver Inc. and the scam that it is. It's important to realize that we cannot overstate the scope or the impact of it, and I'm not talking about just the actual scam itself. Due to its pervasiveness and how it has been tolerated and allowed to exist for years, it has sent the message that regulation as a whole doesn't matter. It sent the message to operators—to the cheaters and the liars—that what they're doing not only is tolerated, but that this is how you get ahead. It has created an atmosphere of wilful deliberate avoidance and non-compliance, and that puts every Canadian at risk.

The trucking industry is not governed by regulation, but by minuscule profit margins. Regulation that prescribes dimensions to the centimetre and then is not enforced simply enforces that nothing matters. It is truly a case of if one thing doesn't matter, then how can anything matter?

Successive governments at all levels have been wilfully blind to this crisis. I have had the pleasure of working in this industry for eight years. Provincially and federally, successive governments have failed to take action on Driver Inc., and that has rewarded this behaviour. It has allowed and fostered a culture that has begun to seep into the corners of a very proud and successful industry. It has been incredibly difficult to watch, to try to work with and to work with decision-makers who weren't willing to deal with the problems.

It is only when we get to crisis points that decisions get made and difficult decisions get actioned. I'm deeply hopeful that we are at one of these points where we are actually going to see decisions made and steps taken to be actioned.

The business model—if we can call it that—of Driver Inc. is a direct result of regulatory laziness. If we want to get past this, if we want to get to where we need to be, there are a few things that our members are looking for.

One is that our national safety code is actually national. Next is that we have a system that works across the country for all carriers in all jurisdictions. It's also that we all understand what the rules are and who's a good player and who's a bad player, and that regulation is enforced consistently across the country. Be it taxation or be it road safety, whatever that regulation is, it needs to be enforced.

The most important thing from our standpoint in terms of changing this is that beneficial ownership of companies has to be transparent. We have to know. In British Columbia, we track assets when we get into national safety code certifications as to who owns and who doesn't so we know where the assets go, but what we don't know is who owns those companies. What is startling is that this information is readily available, but we don't collate it, we don't share it and we don't actually get into it. That is what we look at and what we say is really needed: a real bright light into the corners to know who is actually running these companies.

Members of the committee, thank you for your attention. We know what to do. We know how to do it. We just need your help and we can get there.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you, Mr. Earle.

I'll turn it over to both Mr. Bylsma and Mr. Wood for their opening remarks.

The floor is yours. You have five minutes, please.

[Mark Bylsma, Chairman, Ontario Trucking Association]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank this committee for its continued commitment to studying more deeply the issue around the changing landscape of truck drivers in Canada and for including the OTA in this discussion.

The Ontario Trucking Association is a proud member of the Canadian Trucking Alliance and is celebrating its 100th anniversary of representing our members' interests this year.

We support all the comments and submissions provided to this study by the CTA. Eliminating Driver Inc. and all that is associated with it is our members' number one priority.

It's important that we acknowledge two major milestones that this committee has already helped to achieve in the fight against Driver Inc. Number one is the lifting of the T4A moratorium by the CRA. Number two is commitments made by ESDC for widespread compliance blitzes and sustained program funding.

OTA commends both the committee and the ministers for making this happen. These actions have given the responsible segment of our industry a glimmer of hope in these challenging times. It will be critical for both the CRA and the ESDC to follow through on their plans.

The focus of our testimony, which Geoff will cover off for the remainder of our time, will be on the Driver Inc. issue, how it has further manifested itself in Ontario and what still needs to be done to correct the course.

[Geoffrey Wood, Senior Vice-President, Policy, Ontario Trucking Association]

Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. It's a privilege to have the opportunity to speak to you today.

As Mark mentioned, we have a number of outstanding issues with respect to the Driver Inc. file and how it's manifested. My goal for the remainder of my time is to provide you with the issues and the immediate solutions.

Let me be frank and up front: A lot has been done in the province of Ontario to address this issue. However, we as the Ontario Trucking Association feel that much more must be done. We're hopeful that the committee will incorporate our solutions today into your final report.

Being solutions-oriented and very direct, I'll get into the issues.

Driver licence integrity is an issue in Ontario. We've seen that in the media. The Ontario Provincial Police and the Ministry of Transportation are trying to get a handle on the situation. We don't know its full scope, but we do believe that work has been done. From our perspective, we'd like to understand what the situation looks like in the rest of the country and how we can get a handle on it. Our recommendation in this respect is that the Minister of Transport work with his provincial and territorial colleagues to understand the scope of the issue and how we can get a handle on it. It's important that we send a strong message to everybody that our driver licensing system and its integrity is intact. That includes our partners in the United States.

You've heard from committee members with respect to the illegal parking issues, particularly in Caledon. I can tell you that the issue is out of control in Ontario. It needs all the help it can get. Federal and provincial resources need to assist the municipal efforts. Where there are gaps or shortages in parking, we would recommend that federal lands be explored to be opened up for this. However, that has to be done under proper contractual and transparent relationships. The process that unfolded with the Greater Toronto Airports Authority should be strongly reviewed and not repeated if it is an option to open up federal lands.

There is an exponentially growing concern in the trucking industry about criminal activity, thefts and increasing levels of violence, especially in the greater Toronto area. We have three solutions, from our perspective. The police need to be funded properly on an annual basis, and the funding needs to meet the magnitude of the situation, which, as we've seen in previous press conferences, is out of control. Federal policing and CBSA's inland enforcement units need to be present at truck inspection stations across the province. As well, both CBSA and U.S. Customs and Border Protection need to re-regulate the border.

Forced labour and the misuse of our immigration programs are major concerns. It's unfortunate that we have to say that, but it's a reality in trucking. An immediate solution is to develop a “known employer” program for any trucking companies accessing provincial and federal immigration programs. The second component of this would be to develop strong industry awareness programs, like that of the Joy Smith Foundation, where there are appropriate whistle-blower protections and avenues to get information to the police.

Facility insurance is mandated by the Government of Ontario to be available to commercial trucking interests. It is enabling high-risk operations to exist. We need to look at serious limitations to the use of facility and we need to look at a restructuring of how facility is underwritten to bring it in line with the private market. We are transferring risk to other jurisdictions. We need to understand what that looks like and we need to stop it.

Fleet safety oversight needs a complete overhaul. In Ontario 80% of the fleets have never been inspected by MTO. What's the solution to this? We need to get rid of the satisfactory-unaudited safety rating category. We need to have regular audits and inspections of all trucking companies in the province on a regular basis. The caveat, at least from OTA's perspective, is that the carriers will pay for it. If it's a level playing field, it's a level playing field. We believe there are options to explore that.

On roadside and driver vehicle compliance, again, the answer from our perspective is to have 24-7 truck inspection stations and proper lawful authorities at those locations at all times to deal with all the non-compliance that is impacting the trucking industry.

Commercial driver training, as we've heard this morning and from OTA's perspective, needs an overhaul. We are working on that with the Ministry of Transportation. We are pleased with that progress. From OTA's perspective, the licence needs to match the configuration that you're driving in a graduated licensing-type situation that you've heard other committee witnesses speak about.

Finally, with respect to government procurement, government procurement contracts, particularly at the federal level but certainly at the provincial level, need to have labour compliance checks incorporated into them. We have significant concerns about the practices of a number of Crown corporations and how they tender contracts. We feel that this needs to be addressed.

Thank you for your time. I'd be happy to take any questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, both of you.

We'll begin our line of questioning in this round with Mr. Muys.

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

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

Thank you.

Given the number of B.C. MPs who are here today, I'll reserve my questions for the Ontario Trucking Association.

On November 25 the province had a news release that you were actually quoted in, Mr. Bylsma. There was a whole package of action in terms of licence suspension, fines, escalating fines, escalating vehicle impoundments and so on. Has that helped to change behaviour, or is it too early to say? I know there's lots more to be done.

[Mark Bylsma]

There's a lot to be done. This is the tip of the iceberg. In previous testimony, somebody mentioned that Driver Inc. is one branch of a very big tree. While we're starting to see some action, there certainly needs to be more done if we're going to stop this. It's out of control. Every time you put a finger in the hole in the dike, there's another hole drilled.

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

Certainly, Mr. Wood outlined a number of different immediate solutions or concrete steps to be taken, in addition to what has already been done. Many of those are under provincial jurisdiction, and you indicated a few areas where the federal government could weigh in. This model, of course, is still out there: As you said, it's a branch of a tree. What more can the federal government do immediately to address this?

[Geoffrey Wood]

I'll take that question.

With respect to the federal government's role, anything they could do to support and assist the provinces, whether it's on the policing or funding side, would be helpful.

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

The previous witness talked about temporary foreign workers. There are GST loopholes. Yes, there was the T4A moratorium, which was lifted, but there are still a lot of issues around that. Is there any action happening quickly enough?