Transport Committee on March 23rd, 2026

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Mr. Rivest, we've already talked about this in the past, and I'd like you to explain it to me in a bit more detail. You've told me that there should be support for sites that permit industrial development for secondary and tertiary transformation. I don't really understand that, so can you give me some details?

[David Rivest]

Certainly.

Our focus right now is port facilities. For many of them, import and export is the first step in subsequent distribution by rail or other modes of transportation. Our recommendation is to look at which port facilities could be developed to support heavy industrial secondary and tertiary transformation in the vicinity of port facilities.

One example of where that could apply is the Bécancour Port, which is involved in transshipment and servicing heavy industrial activities within the industrial park. What it does is complementary because the primary clients, the aluminum smelters and other processors, use the port facilities. However, the facilities are also used for staging other types of cargo and coordinating shipments to Canada's Arctic.

To sum up, these port facilities are becoming multi-purpose. They can pivot over time in response to changing supply chain needs. The government should focus on these types of port facilities, and not just on developing ports themselves, but also on developing everything that can gravitate around them so as to create long-term jobs and industries.

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Now let's talk about another region: the Far North.

The planet is experiencing a lot of changes right now. In other words, there's instability everywhere. For our sovereignty, don't you think we should be investing more in the Arctic, in the Far North, in ports and marine facilities? Don't you think that would be an excellent investment?

[David Rivest]

Absolutely.

Desgagnés Transarctik Inc. serves more than 50 destinations in Canada's Arctic, including communities and mine sites. Investing in infrastructure is essential. Do we need deep-water ports everywhere? No. We need ports at key locations, but we need them to have infrastructure that can handle all of the goods being offloaded from ships.

The same principle applies to what the Canadian Armed Forces are currently saying about major sites, secondary sites and hubs for subsequent distribution. We recommend continuing to expand that. I think they're on the right track. However, there has to be infrastructure to receive cargo, there has to be a presence, and there has to be traffic. That's critical to developing the Arctic not just in one specific place, but everywhere.

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

How much time do I have left, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

You have 30 seconds left.

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

That's not much.

Lastly, Mr. Rivest, how can the government help Desgagnés Transarctik Inc. develop that market? There are lots of assets in the north.

[David Rivest]

What we need is agility within the regulations. We also need proactive, regular dialogue.

We know the Arctic well. We've been operating there for 60 years. We plan to be part of its development in the years to come. We're looking for proactive dialogue around smart, harmonious development. With all the resource development going on, Canada's Arctic has huge potential. We're on the right track, but we need ongoing dialogue.

[Jason Groleau, Conservative, Beauce, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Rivest.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you, Mr. Rivest.

Mr. Lauzon, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the witnesses for being here.

I will ask my questions in French.

Mr. Gooch, in 2023, the committee produced a report entitled “Addressing Port Infrastructure Expansion in Canada”. One of the recommendations was that the government should help facilitate greater data sharing. We've talked a lot about small, medium-sized and large ports. Large ports are using best practices.

Do you feel that, since those recommendations were made in the report, communication about best practices being employed across Canada has improved?

[Daniel-Robert Gooch]

I'm not sure I'm familiar with that report. Would you please ask the question again?

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

Here's my question: Is there good collaboration between large ports and small and medium-sized ones? I'm hearing that there are two categories. As a member of this committee, that's not music to my ears. What I like is collaboration and information sharing.

Mr. Rivest and Mr. Uberoi, I'd like your comments on this too.

Mr. Gooch, I'd like to know how you collaborate in the area of sharing best practices to foster an equitable system across Canada.

[Daniel-Robert Gooch]

I think there's good collaboration. Our organization is made up of 17 port administrations, and the CEOs get together four times a year to discuss challenges the industry is facing.

Obviously, I can't be sharing commercial information, but we operate technical committees where our members get together to talk about things like security, environmental best practices and operational best practices. There is a lot of collaboration and not as much competition as I think we hear about. There seems to be a bit more of a perception of fierce competition. It's not like Air Canada and WestJet. It's very different.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

Or Air Transat; yes, of course.

Mr. Rivest, I'd like your perspective on large ports sharing information and best practices with small and medium-sized ports.

[David Rivest]

Sure. We're at various ports across the country, but we're not really at the large ports like Montreal and Halifax. That said, medium-sized ports can benefit from data sharing too.

As ship operators, what's important to us is fleet efficiency. We want continuous operation with ships arriving at the port at the right time to be loaded and unloaded and to depart. Essentially, the ship must always be moving.

Where data sharing might help us in the future is for route and itinerary planning. There's not much transparency there at this point. Planning for ships coming into port and terminating their activities happens mostly manually, through written correspondence and phone calls.

Other than for route planning, data sharing would help all of the support services, such as mooring ships and arranging for tugs if needed. It could make things run more smoothly. It would enable us to adjust the speed of the ships so they arrive at the right port the right way at the right time.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

Mr. Uberoi, given the current global economic context, we're stimulating the Canadian economy with Canadian products.

If you had one recommendation for the committee that would enable us to give you the tools you need, what would it be?

Our government wants to be better so it can do even better in the Canadian economy. We want to become less dependent on certain countries, such as our neighbours to the south, who shall not be named, but we have to distance ourselves more, especially when it comes to manufacturing. Steel is one example. We produce the basic material, which then goes through secondary and tertiary transformation in the United States. Then we receive the goods and redistribute them.

In your opinion, how can we do a better job of improving that supply chain?

[Mike Uberoi]

I think it's a matter of looking at the entire port network in collaboration instead of isolation. There are opportunities to do a better job in certain circumstances or certain areas. There tends to be a disconnect between the larger Canadian port authorities and the privately owned ports. I think there's an opportunity to work closer together.

In the Melford situation, we believe opening up Melford by constructing the wharf will actually broaden the base of trade. It will give us access to the logistics park, which will have more economic activity than the actual terminal itself.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Lauzon.

Next we'll go to Mr. Barsalou‑Duval for two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Rivest, earlier you spoke of the importance of medium-sized ports, the regional ports. You even went so far as to say that certain ports needed investment, if I am not mistaken, because their handling capacity infrastructure was limited.

In fact, this is something we have also heard in other committees, whether about the port of Quebec or that of Matane. The port of Quebec, however, is not a small port, but it has century-old infrastructure, part of which has recently collapsed. I know that you also operate in the regions, if I am not mistaken. How have we reached a point where there are ports all across the country whose carrying capacity is declining? This situation is jeopardizing our economies.

New funds have been announced by the government to diversify economic trade. On the one hand, what assurance do we have that the money will go to these ports? On the other hand, is there enough of it, and how can this be achieved?

[David Rivest]

I would say that regional ports or medium-sized ports play a critical role in the overall port network.

Very often, goods arrive from overseas at a major port, such as Halifax or Montreal. These goods will be unloaded, but subsequently consolidated at other sites so that they can be distributed to smaller regions.

Smaller and medium-sized ports are an integral part of the overall port network, and we must not lose sight of that. As regards the distribution of funds, it is important to remember that it is not just the major ports that should benefit, but also the smaller ports.

Why do we need to invest in infrastructure? Investments were made in port facilities 40 or 50 years ago, but their maintenance has been neglected. We therefore find ourselves with regional sites in smaller communities that are essentially falling into disrepair.

We must ensure we target the right areas to determine which port sites are important. We must have not only a short-term vision, but also a long-term vision. When building infrastructure and making massive investments such as those anticipated, we need to look 20 or 40 years ahead. We need to determine how the region will develop and how a port site can benefit from this. We also need to act with agility. We must not simply say that a port must serve a specific product today. We need to determine how investments can be made so that a port site can adapt over time, in line with evolving supply chains.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Rivest.

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

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My question is for Melford Atlantic.

I was struck by a couple of figures you indicated in your opening statement. I think you said that east coast volumes had dropped from 7.3% to 2.8%. Why is that? What are the factors behind that?

[Mike Uberoi]

I think a big piece of it is the infrastructure that's available. When you look at the west coast, at Prince Rupert and Deltaport and the whole history, it started with Centerm and Vanterm in the city. It went outside to Deltaport. Then Rupert was built, providing that big-ship infrastructure and allowing them to triple their market share on the west coast. When you look at the east coast, those same investments haven't been made in new and efficient terminals.

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

Just for context, what is the span of time for those figures?