Transport Committee on Feb. 23rd, 2026

[Olga Farman]

That's a great question.

This is clearly not a local management problem because, since the creation of the Port of Québec, all of its funds and revenues have been devoted to rebuilding or maintaining assets. It's just that, after 100 years or 125 years, the wharves are coming to the end of their useful life. Above all, as I mentioned, they are made of wood, so we can well imagine that after 100 years, we have no choice but to rebuild the structure to deal with climate change. There are challenges related to the positioning of the Port of Québec with respect to the St. Lawrence River—that is to say its elevation relative to the river.

So we have invested and stretched the useful life of our infrastructure. However, we are at a point where we need to rebuild the infrastructure outright, hence the request to the government.

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

If I understand correctly, you applied for an investment in the neighbourhood of $380 million. Have you received a response from the government yet?

[Olga Farman]

Last November, we presented the entire 10‑year project to the public and the government. The government has confirmed to us that we should submit an application under the trade diversification corridors fund. I emphasized that earlier in the hope that the fund will be launched very quickly.

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

What will be the consequences for the Port of Québec if the Canadian government does not grant the money?

[Olga Farman]

This question hurts because we will then be talking about wharf closures. I mentioned that wharf 25 unfortunately ended up at the bottom of the river on January 4. That is a concrete example of what happens when a wharf is at the end of its life. We are talking about a disruption of supply chains, a loss of competitiveness, which is important, and of international attractiveness. We estimate that about 25% of port traffic could disappear over the next 10 years if the Port of Québec does not begin its infrastructure rebuilding plan this year.

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

We understand that this investment is very critical for the Port of Québec.

You say that 25% of what goes through the port could be at risk if no investment is made. Did I understand correctly?

[Olga Farman]

Absolutely, as it targets three different critical sectors that are commercially very active. The estimated loss could be downright disastrous for Quebec if it were to occur.

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

If I understand correctly, this investment is not optional, but mandatory.

I would now like to discuss another topic with you. Earlier, you mentioned a project with a partner, QSL. First, could you tell the members of the committee exactly what this is about? Second, what is the role of the Port of Québec in the context of this project?

[Olga Farman]

For a number of years now, the Port of Québec has felt that it must become an international container terminal to enable complementary access to these containers on the St. Lawrence.

Two years ago, the Quebec company QSL, whose head office is in Quebec City, set up an international container terminal project to complement the activities already under way on the St. Lawrence. We're talking about economic benefits estimated at more than $55 million for a capacity of 200,000 containers per year. We're relying on spaces that are already available and that don't require encroachment on the river. They have little or no environmental impact. In addition, no dredging is required.

To give you a more concrete answer, I would say that we are currently waiting for the designation for the Port of Québec, as is Hamilton. This designation will enable QSL to submit its project. We will then be able to assess it and consider the impact on everyday life with the company and the public.

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

What about the relationship with the community? I understand that there have been significant tensions in the past between QSL, the union and the community about air quality. Where does the port stand on that?

I would actually like to help people understand better, as they don't always make the distinction between the port and the operators. Where do things stand in terms of social acceptability? Do you think people are ready to move forward with this project as it stands right now?

[Olga Farman]

Mr. Barsalou‑Duval, your question is very appropriate. To me, it's a matter of value. It's also part of our strategic plan. A lot of waves have been made over the past few years. Either we communicated poorly or we didn't necessarily take the time to properly address the concerns raised by the public. The Port of Québec has developed a plan for these communities. We meet with them on a consistent basis and we address those concerns. We have a plan to support the various communities affected by project-related concerns.

We distinguish between our port partners and ourselves, but we also invite our partners to join us in these meetings with citizens. We announced the Vision Ville‑Port—city‑port vision—with the mayor of Quebec City a few weeks ago.

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

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Ms. Farman.

Thank you, Mr. Barsalou‑Duval.

Ms. Kronis, the floor is yours. You have five minutes, please.

[Tamara Kronis, Conservative, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Thank you so much, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Marr, I'm always delighted when our colleagues in Ottawa get to hear about the contributions our west coast can make to Canada's economy. I really appreciate the thoughtful framework you set out in your introduction around the need for an integrated network of infrastructure supporting the new trade patterns that we hope to see in Canada, including, of course, short-sea shipping from the port of Nanaimo. I was also glad to see you elaborate in one of your earlier answers on the nature of that infrastructure, including access to railhead that would most help unlock that potential, including short-sea shipping from our west coast.

My colleague talked about the budget and the negative consequences of not passing it. I actually want to ask the inverse question. In dollar terms, what do we need at the port of Nanaimo from that budgetary pool to avoid those negative consequences and to realize the potential and the opportunity we have at the port of Nanaimo?

[Ian Marr]

Thank you for your question.

We need to look at the positive aspect of the numbers. We definitely have a long-term plan to develop. We see the whole project. There are a million people, almost, on Vancouver Island, and no commercial port, per se. Everything moves by truck. Therefore, we're looking to re-establish rail on the island, combine that with the port activity and then move it by short sea to Vancouver. Based on our initial assessments and initial costings, it is under $1 billion to re-establish rail on the Lower Mainland and provide an additional capacity of some 1.2 to 1.4 million TEUs a year on the island. We very much see ourselves as freeing up that capacity to allow Vancouver to better move exports out of the country.

[Tamara Kronis, Conservative, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

In your introduction, you talked about the ballooning costs that came from the delay in receiving the money for the last phase of the project, the $105-million allocation. How quickly do you need those funds to come through in order to avoid the same consequence for the future plans?

[Ian Marr]

For those future plans, what we need is something to be happening within two years. I don't see it moving any faster than that, by the time you put everything together. You have to get orders out there and get those prices fixed. Otherwise, they will continue to grow in the marketplace.

[Tamara Kronis, Conservative, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Especially in the context of recent job losses on the island due to the closure of mills resulting from the trade situation with the United States—which the government hasn't yet succeeded in addressing—can you talk about how your plans would help mitigate some of the negative impacts coming from the government's inaction on the forestry file?

[Ian Marr]

Obviously, construction would bring more jobs and revenue to the communities that are affected. People move and find new jobs. The people in the forestry industry are skilled labour and able to move around. They are desiring to move around to make that happen.

Also, on a long-term, ongoing basis, as we build a new facility, there will be additional employment for longshore labour, moving ahead. I think this is very important in our communities. It has been there for a lot of years and is respected in the community.

[Tamara Kronis, Conservative, Nanaimo—Ladysmith, BC]

Before I get red-carded, I'm wondering if you could elaborate a bit on how important it is to get government out of the way in order to make these projects move as quickly as possible and realize the benefits.

[Ian Marr]

I think it's very important.

If we look back through the NTCF process—where we got some funding for the last piece of infrastructure we built—it's been very successful. We've gone above our weight, I would say.

However, it needs to move. It needs to be cohesive. There are multiple departments involved whenever you're doing anything in the water and around ports. There needs to be a central processing facility that allows it to move more quickly so that you're just speaking to one person at one time who is going to make the decisions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Marr.

Thank you, Ms. Kronis.

Next, we'll turn the floor over to Mr. Greaves.

The floor is yours for five minutes, sir.

[Will Greaves, Liberal, Victoria, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning, colleagues.

Also, welcome to my honourable colleague from Nanaimo. We have a veritable surplus of Vancouver Islanders on the committee this morning. It's wonderful, although Mr. Marr had the good sense to stay on the west coast.

I'll ask a question of Mr. Marr.

Thank you for joining us, sir.

I'd like to ask you to continue to sketch out this big-picture vision for the port of Nanaimo in the near and medium-term future. As you've already alluded to, we understand that Nanaimo plays a critical role not just for that community but also as the major port for Vancouver Island. We also know that the west coast ports in this country are absolutely critical to our trade diversification efforts, in particular for opening new markets and accessing the Asia-Pacific region.

Could you give us a sketch, please, Mr. Marr, of how you see the port of Nanaimo's role changing over the next decade, beyond just moving more containers?

[Ian Marr]

We definitely see the role changing from where we traditionally have been with the forest industry and things like that. We've already adapted. We're now moving autos from our existing structure downtown in central Nanaimo that we repurposed. We've maintained those facilities, similar to Quebec. They're 60 years old and they're made of wood, but we keep maintaining those. We've created a good short-sea shipping business with that auto industry.

What we're looking at in the long term is the container business on the island, to move goods to and from there and across the country. We feel that when we look at it, you could call us an inland port on the ocean that allows the flexibility to hold and move. We have more industrial land available. We're creating logistics parks. We're joining partnerships with first nations up and down the rail corridor that can create business opportunities along that corridor for manufacturing and moving ahead.

The long-term vision is to complete that corridor from the south, where you are, to the north up Campbell River and out to Port Alberni to make that a wholly integrated system on the island that can move goods that need to be exported but also move imports across the country.

[Will Greaves, Liberal, Victoria, BC]

That's great.

Let's stay on the topic of trade corridors for a moment.

Mr. Marr, as you know, in budget 2025 the trade diversification corridors fund is proposed to ensure that our transportation systems across the country can keep up with this desire to grow our exports.

If you had the opportunity to leverage that fund to its full potential in the port of Nanaimo, can you tell us the single most transformative upgrade you would prioritize to help transform Nanaimo from a regional gateway to a larger-scale international shipping hub?