House of Commons Hansard #36 of the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was union.
Julian Fantino ConservativeMinister of Veterans Affairs
In fact, Mr. Speaker, I am proud of our government's demonstrated support for our veterans and their families, such as home visits and nurses' care, case managers, grass cutting, snow clearing, home cleaning, opening 17 operational stress injury clinics, 24 integrated personnel support centres and over 650 service locations to assist veterans.
While that member and his party engage in useless rhetoric, we on this side of the House are actually delivering for our veterans and their families.
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives' panic on the Keystone pipeline issue is becoming a real problem on the eve of President Obama's state of the union address.
It has become a serious irritant in our relations with our largest trading partner, a situation entirely created by the Conservatives. With Keystone, the Conservatives have no intention of promoting long-term job creation in Canada.
Why do they want to export 40,000 well-paying jobs to the United States?
Joe Oliver ConservativeMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, it amazes me how much the member opposite misunderstands the benefits to Canada of this great project, which would create tens of thousands of jobs in this country and billions of dollars of economic activity.
The vast majority of Americans are in favour of this project. So is the majority of senators, the majority of congressmen and every one of the governors of the states to which this project would go.
This is an excellent project for both our countries. The member opposite should get on the side of Canadian workers.
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Mr. Speaker, we are on the side of Canadian workers all right. We do not believe in shipping jobs out of the country.
We believe in projects that are in the best interests of our communities, our environment and our economy.
Conservatives are panicking on Keystone XL just as President Obama is about to deliver his state of the union address. Even the Minister of Finance admits Keystone would send tens of thousands of jobs south of the border.
Conservatives are spending millions of taxpayers' dollars promoting this project. Why do Conservatives always want value-added jobs to be in some other country than Canada?
Joe Oliver ConservativeMinister of Natural Resources
Mr. Speaker, the U.S. State Department has said that this project would not have a negative impact on the environment and, in fact, this pipeline would be safer than existing pipelines.
As to this preposterous allegation of exporting jobs, the fact is that jobs would be created in Canada in the tens of thousands. That is something that the unions in this country understand and support.
The member opposite should speak to the construction union workers who are very upset with their alleged supporters. This is not a position that will garner support among Canadians.
LaVar Payne Conservative Medicine Hat, AB
Mr. Speaker, recently some have raised concerns about the practice of putting two convicted criminals into one prison cell. The Correctional Investigator expressed his fears over the diminished privacy and dignity of rapists and murderers. While it is important that the correctional system actually corrects criminal behaviour, my constituents are more concerned about the rights of the victims than the rights of criminals.
Could the Minister of Public Safety tell the House why college students and members of the Canadian Armed Forces can share accommodations but some others think it is wrong for convicted criminals to do the same?
Steven Blaney ConservativeMinister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Medicine Hat who reminds us that double bunking is a totally normal practice in western countries. Indeed, unlike the Liberals and the NDP, we do not believe that prisoners are entitled to their own private cells.
Our policies are working. The crime rate is dropping. We are closing prisons and putting victims back at the heart of our justice system.
Ralph Goodale Liberal Wascana, SK
Mr. Speaker, for the Minister of Transport, grain shipments to the west coast are months behind; 40 ships are stalled at English Bay, costing millions in demurrage; and grain handling and transportation failures have driven prairie prices down by 40%.
Would the Minister of Transport require the railways to lease additional locomotive power and rolling stock for grain? Will she require grain companies to publish their export volumes and justify their grain cheque deductions? Will she take direct responsibility for getting some coordination into a chaotic system that has clearly failed?
Gerry Ritz ConservativeMinister of Agriculture and Agri-Food
Mr. Speaker, let me recap what the member opposite did during his time when there were logistics challenges. Nothing. Absolutely nothing. What we have done is continue to work with industry, with the grain sector, with the railways and so on. We told everyone that they have to step up their game. Of course, we have the largest crop in history. Thanks in part to the changes at the Canadian Wheat Board, farmers seeded two million more acres of wheat than ever before. There is global demand.
Yes, there are logistical challenges, but the Minister of Transport and I have talked to all of the proponents throughout the supply chain, saying they have to pick up their game. We are expecting those negotiations to bear fruit very soon.
Carol Hughes NDP Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON
Mr. Speaker, for 100 years the Algoma Central Railway has moved passengers and freight between Sault Ste. Marie and Hearst and helped develop remote tourist destinations. Last week, Transport Canada quietly announced that it would cut the modest funding that supports the rural passenger line, leaving hunting and fishing lodges inaccessible, hurting tourism and damaging the local economy.
Why is the government unilaterally abandoning the communities, businesses and tourists who rely on the ACR? Why will the government not stand up for northern Ontario?
Lisa Raitt ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, my colleague, the member for Parliament for Sault Ste. Marie, is working with me on the matter. However, that being said, we did tell CN that we would not be subsidizing this rail line any more. The reality is that CN is a $9 billion company and hardworking tax dollars from the Canadian public should not go to subsidize a company of that size.
Randy Hoback Conservative Prince Albert, SK
Mr. Speaker, today our government tabled the legislation to implement the Canada-Honduras free trade agreement. With that agreement, Canadian exporters, service providers and investors will benefit from enhanced market access, which will create new sources of prosperity for Canadian businesses of all sizes and their workers.
Could the Minister of International Trade please update the House on the government's ambitious trade plan?
Ed Fast ConservativeMinister of International Trade
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Prince Albert for his question and for all his hard work on behalf of his constituents. In 2013 our government reached an historic trade agreement with the European Union and concluded a record 10 foreign investment protection agreements. It was the most successful year for trade and investment in Canadian history.
Canadians can count on this government to use trade to keep delivering jobs and growth in this country in 2014.
Denis Blanchette NDP Louis-Hébert, QC
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Quebec and CN have just reached an agreement regarding the use and maintenance of the Quebec Bridge.
In Quebec City, everyone agrees that that agreement is a step in the right direction. Now the federal government stands alone against CN in the courts.
After nine years of inaction by successive Liberal and Conservative governments, does the minister intend to take a new approach in order to ensure the safety of the Quebec Bridge?
Lisa Raitt ConservativeMinister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, as the member opposite knows, CN is the owner of the bridge and has responsibility for it. In August 2013, Transport Canada inspected the rail; the rail is safe. It is the responsibility of the province to inspect the road associated with it. Of course, the bridge is CN's responsibility and it too has indicated, after inspection, that the bridge is safe.
Dean Del Mastro Independent Peterborough, ON
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to jobs and job creation, this Prime Minister and Minister of Finance have an unparalleled record compared to their international peers.
A few weeks ago, following meetings with his provincial counterparts, the finance minister quite correctly asserted that increasing payroll taxes, by doubling CPP premiums, would harm Canada's economic recovery and job creation during these fragile global economic times.
Can the finance minister confirm for this House that his priority remains economic growth and job creation, and that he will continue to keep payroll taxes or taxes on jobs low for Canadians and Canadian employers?
Jim Flaherty ConservativeMinister of Finance
Mr. Speaker, I agree with the member for Peterborough. We are going to focus on jobs, prosperity and economic growth. We have built a track record in this regard as a government, and we intend to stay on the same path and get back to a balanced budget in 2015.
The House resumed consideration of the motion.
Hoang Mai NDP Brossard—La Prairie, QC
Mr. Speaker, I am so proud of the motion that my colleague from Trinity—Spadina moved that I will read it:
That, in the opinion of the House, door-to-door mail delivery is a valuable service provided by Canada Post, and that this House express its opposition to Canada becoming the only country in the G7 without such a service.
As the deputy critic for transport, I have been following this issue closely from the beginning. I am very proud to have worked on it with my colleague, our transport critic, and with the hon. member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie. He has also worked very hard on this file and has talked about the adverse effect this change might have on postal workers.
Canada Post made the announcement after the House adjourned. This gave the Conservatives the chance to hide a bit and not talk about this issue.
The government is being criticized for allowing this to happen without any consultation. That is why we asked the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities to hold an emergency meeting on this subject. I am very pleased that the committee granted our request. Before the holidays, we had a meeting to discuss some of the issues.
I want to come back to the announcement and its direct consequences. First, the announcement said that Canada Post would stop door-to-door mail delivery. That affects more than 5 million Canadians.
We are told that two-thirds of Canadians do not get their mail delivered at home. However, when we take a close look at the numbers, we see that is not true. Two-thirds of Canadians still get their mail delivered at home. When we are talking about multiple dwelling units or delivery in rural areas, this affect 5 million Canadians, as I explained. This will have a tremendous impact.
The motion says that we will be the only G7 country without a door-to-door mail delivery service. That is disgraceful and it makes no sense.
The government is being guided by Conference Board of Canada studies, one of which shows that Canada Post will ultimately run a deficit. I agree that Canada Post is facing challenges. We know that the mail has changed. The Internet is now part of the scenery, and fewer and fewer letters are delivered to homes. That is a fact.
There are alternatives to slashing services and increasing costs.
A startling increase in postal charges has been announced. I have a small flyer that is now being distributed in the mail. It talks about an increase that would raise the cost of a stamp to a dollar. That is a substantial increase that will have a direct impact on small business and on charities that depend on postal services.
We see that the announcement was made without consultation, even though the government claims that it did consult. Nevertheless, we know that in reality, it was a matter of invitations and online surveys.
I want to get back to the fact that in the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, we put the question to representatives of organizations that advocate on behalf of all people in Canada with a disability. These people are directly affected by this, and they were not consulted. We are talking about people with reduced mobility, people who will have difficulty getting to the new mailboxes. The problem is that organizations that represent all Canadians were unfortunately not consulted.
Seniors were neither consulted nor represented. We know that they are very concerned about the issue. On the very day that Canada Post made its announcement, I received a call from a citizen in my riding of Brossard—La Prairie. He told me that this was a horrible announcement for him and his wife, who are both retired. He used the word “horrible” because he realized the consequences this announcement could have for them.
When the CEO of Canada Post says that this decision will be good for seniors because it will help them to get more exercise, we see that he is truly out of touch with reality and lacks sensitivity.
First, the government must stop blindly supporting this decision by Canada Post. The NDP's proposals must be considered. We know that there are challenges and that Canada Post is facing changes. However, Canada Post does have an advantage with parcels. I will come back to that later.
With respect to our proposals, other ways must be found to modernize the services provided by Canada Post. Online services should be used. Many countries in the world are facing the same difficulties as Canada Post. Not only have they modernized, but they have also turned to online banking transactions. That has enabled them to increase their postal revenues and expand their services.
The Conservative plan seeks to cut services to the public and increase costs. In reality, this will lead to the disappearance of Canada Post. We want to save Canada Post. That is why NDP members are standing firm.
I was very proud to be there on Sunday, when more than 2,000 people showed up in Ottawa to express their dissatisfaction. We distinctly sensed the people's frustration. Indeed, postal workers were not the only ones there. People had come from everywhere. There were seniors and persons with reduced mobility. They wanted to shout out their dissatisfaction and tell the government to watch out and to reverse course. We still have time.
The decision to increase rates will unfortunately be made very soon, although home delivery will be phased out over five years. The government must reverse that decision and realize it is not considering all the disadvantaged people. When it uses figures indicating that two-thirds of Canadians already have their mail delivered to mailboxes, it knows that is false. The numbers are different. In fact they show instead that two-thirds of Canadians still have home delivery service. Mail delivery to residential buildings is a home service. The decision is therefore premature.
I asked the CEO of Canada Post in committee why he had not considered the option to provide banking services, for example, or financial services, as other countries have done, France and Italy in particular. Those countries faced the same challenges and found solutions that saved certain elements. I am not sure whether I was really surprised by the CEO's answer.
As he himself admitted, he is a volunteer member of the Conference Board of Canada, the same organization that came to this decision. He clearly told us they had not considered that option because postal service was not the same as financial services and because there was already enough competition in banking services.
However, people have no choice but to accept increases in bank fees precisely because there is not enough competition. We launched the "Stop pay-to-pay fees" campaign because we think it is ridiculous to have to pay for the privilege of paying your own bills. That is why we are fighting this. This is all part of the same struggle, as we see it. In the throne speech, the Conservatives said they would be there for consumers. The first thing they did was to abandon consumers.
The Conservatives are also cutting postal service hours. They have cut the business hours of retail postal outlets even in my riding, in Saint-Philippe. People are getting even less service. Privatization is already under way. The government does not want to admit it openly. When we ask whether they want to privatize Canada Post, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport says the decision is up to Canada Post. The truth however, is that it is up to the government.
If you look at the facts, the reality is that more and more postal stations are private and therefore converted. Privatization is therefore already under way. The NDP will continue to fight.
My NDP colleagues and I receive complaints from our constituents, and I know our Conservative colleagues get complaints as well. There is an outcry among people living with disabilities, seniors, small businesses and community organizations, for example. We are asking the government to listen to Canadians and to respond. We are asking it to reverse course and to support the NDP's motion.
Opposition Motion—Canada PostBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders
Essex Ontario
Conservative
Jeff Watson ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport
Mr. Speaker, I just want to clarify something with respect to door-to-door delivery. I have lived in an apartment building. I have lived in an urban setting with a community mailbox. I have lived in a rural setting with a box at the end of a laneway, and I currently live in a small urban centre with door-to-door delivery. At my current address, I open my door and reach out to my mailbox on the wall. That is door-to-door delivery. If I were in an apartment, it would be like a community mailbox, but indoors. It would not be to my door. If we actually had to pay a postal worker to go door to door to door, that would be door-to-door delivery. If, for example, I lived with a post office box at the end of my laneway, that would not be the same as paying a postal worker to come to my door in a rural situation and put it in.
Let us be clear. What we are talking about is that only one-third of Canadian addresses actually receive door-to-door delivery, and that is the issue being dealt with.
I have asked this question about postal banking several times. Maybe the member can tell me what it would cost to capitalize a postal bank, what it would cost to operate a postal bank, and how Canada Post would capitalize that bank when it is running deficits.
Hoang Mai NDP Brossard—La Prairie, QC
Mr. Speaker, I have two comments on what the parliamentary secretary said.
First, 33% of households have home mail delivery, while in 25% of cases, mail is delivered to the entrance of a residential building. In 5% of cases, mail is delivered to a rural mailbox. So then, the numbers are higher. The figures quoted by the parliamentary secretary are not correct.
As for banking transactions, that is a good question. We know that Canada Post has been a profitable corporation over the past 17 years. It posted revenues of about $1.7 billion. Canada Post did not actually post a deficit until a new CEO was appointed in 2011 and the government and the corporation locked out the workers. Last year, it posted earnings of $94 million. It is still turning a profit, so there is no emergency. However, I do agree that there are some challenges to overcome.
To answer the question about banking transactions, why were these options not even considered? Why did the government and Canada Post not carry out any studies, as was done in other countries, instead of arguing that this would be too complicated? We are asking for a clear study to explore all options and the government and Canada Post are refusing to do that. They are unwilling to explore different options and ways of boosting revenues. They simply want to shut the door and cut services. This is unacceptable.
Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB
Mr. Speaker, to pick up on that particular point, in terms of consultation, there might have been some internal consultation Canada Post conducted, but we have no idea who that might have been with. Given the magnitude and importance of Canada Post to all Canadians, one would think there would have been some obligation for the Conservatives or Canada Post to work with Canadians and stakeholders, such as the letter carriers, mail sorters, and other Canada Post employees, to generate ideas and thoughts on what they felt was in the best interests of Canada Post. That is as opposed to going to the president who says that this whole exercise, at least in part, is about exercising our seniors.
Does the member believe that Canada Post did a disservice by not consulting Canadians thoroughly?
Hoang Mai NDP Brossard—La Prairie, QC
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for that very timely question.
It is precisely to study this issue that the NDP has requested an emergency meeting of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities. Clearly there has been a lack of consultation. When we asked the government who in fact had been consulted, we found out that it had either invited people to submit their comments, or that they had been consulted online.
However, large organizations that represent the majority of the population, namely those affected by this decision, were not consulted. That goes for municipalities as well. However, they are directly affected, in particular Montreal, Toronto and other large urban centres, where questions continue to be asked on where these mailboxes will be located. There have been no discussions or consultations with the persons affected, whether elected representatives or members of the public. The whole thing has been a fiasco and that is why we are asking the government to reconsider this decision.
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Don Valley West.
I would like to take this opportunity to address the subject matter. Last month Canada Post Corporation released a comprehensive five-point action plan, “Ready For the Future”, which was designed to realign how it delivers and prices postal services to meet Canadians' emerging and future needs while substantially reducing the cost for taxpayers. In all of this, we have to keep the taxpayers in mind and appreciate that the corporation needs to ensure that it is itself viable and that the services it provides continue to make it so.
Canada's national postal service is at a crossroads as we speak. Letter mail volumes have been declining since 2002, when Canada Post delivered one billion more letters than it did in 2012. The writing is on the wall. It shows a significant increase in one type of service and a specific decrease in letter mail volumes. The corporation estimates that for every 1% drop in mail volume, it loses $30 million in revenue. This is the reality. This is placing a huge strain on Canada Post's finances, as witnessed by losses of $129 million, before tax, in the postal segment alone, in the third quarter of 2013. It is clear that the services currently provided by Canada Post are no longer sustainable. Action is required and corrective steps must be taken.
There is, however, strength in the parcel delivery part of the business. An important component of Canada Post's proposed strategy is its intention to build on its current strength in parcel delivery, which has demonstrated solid growth over the past few years, thanks in large measure to the fast-growing market in online shopping.
It is clear that Canadians have become enthusiastic online consumers. Statistics Canada reported in October 2012 that the value of orders placed online by Canadians reached $18.9 billion in 2012, up 24% from 2010, when the survey was last conducted. More than half of Internet users, 56%, ordered goods or services online in 2012. Perhaps even more encouraging, most Internet shoppers, 82%, placed an order with a company in Canada.
Canada Post's parcel line of business currently offers a range of domestic and international delivery services and is the largest player in the Canadian parcel market, with more than 50% of market share. The corporation sees an unprecedented opportunity for additional growth linked to e-commerce as online business activity increases. Customers for parcel services include businesses, customers of all sizes, government, international and postal administrations, and other delivery companies.
According to a recent report by the Conference Board of Canada, residential and small business customers indicated that their demand for parcel service will continue to rise with the spread of e-commerce. Parcels are, in fact, the fastest growing line of service in the core Canada Post business. The corporation reports that overall growth in parcel volumes experienced a record-breaking holiday season, which runs between November 11 and January 4. Canada Post delivered 30 million parcels during this period, which was five million more than during the holiday season last year. The corporation delivered more than one million parcels a day on 10 different days. Weekend deliveries were also very successful, with Canada Post employees delivering a total of 1.1 million parcels over the six weekends of the holiday season, with the highest number of deliveries occurring on December 21 and 22. There were 317,000 deliveries.
The main reason for this growth is that parcels are the one postal product that is seeing growth driven by the digital revolution. Canada Post advises that its top 25 retail customers are making major e-commerce gains. January parcel volumes from these retailers shot up 35% compared to January of last year. This dramatic increase follows a highly successful holiday season in which year-over-year parcel volumes from this top performing group grew by 50%. These are the facts. This is the new reality Canada Post examined as it made its five-point plan. Overall revenue and volume growth reflect the strength of the fast-growing consumer-to-business e-commerce delivery market.
In 2013, Canada Post's increased revenues from parcel deliveries contributed to offsetting significant revenue declines from letter mail volume erosion. There is no doubt that we are in the midst of a changing postal environment. Canada Post must manage its business as a viable commercial enterprise that competes effectively in every product line. Even its traditional direct marketing business is facing digital rivals that use mobile and smart technologies.
The parcel business operates in a highly competitive environment. The corporation is well aware that to build on recent successes it must attract customers in an increasingly complex economic environment. Unlike letter mail, the parcel business is highly competitive, and parcel volumes have been rising worldwide. Postal services in many countries have been aggressively using their extensive sorting and delivery infrastructure to expand in this sector. This only makes sense. The infrastructure that presently exists across the country can be used as an advantage to further its market share in this particular area.
Globalization means more parcels coming into Canada to be processed to the same high standards. The highly competitive parcel delivery market means that service providers must modify operations in order to win and retain customers with the quality and reliability of the service. In the business-to-customer parcel delivery market that means providing fast, reliable and convenient delivery, excellent tracking options and reasonable prices.
The growth in the parcel industry has also intensified local and global competition. For example, FedEx and UPS have increased their competitive positions with Canada. Consumer patterns have also shifted from premium to less urgent products that cost less. The increased competitive landscape has put increased pressure on Canada Post to manage costs, improve product offerings and provide a superior customer service.
With approximately 40% of parcel deliveries to Canada originating internationally, Canada Post has negotiated bilateral agreements, notably with the United States and China, to increase its share of this inbound traffic.
The corporation has also made extensive investments in new facilities, including a 700,000 square foot plant at Vancouver International Airport, increased real-time tracking through portable scanners for employees and added to its capacity for motorized delivery to handle growing package volumes. All of this has required internal reforms and changes in the way it does business.
Canada Post is aware of the changing face of the postal industry and has been preparing for the future with less mail and more parcels for the last number of years. The corporation has implemented measures to expand its parcel volume, both through its postal operations and its Purolator courier service. For example, changes to internal operations, which first began in 2010, have made for a more efficient flow of parcels through the network to the customer.
Canada Post has launched an aggressive plan to invest in replacing its aging processing infrastructure and delivery processes with more modern and cost-effective approaches driven by technology. This is something businessmen have had to do all along. As we all know, technology has changed dramatically in the last number of years. Businesses have had to stay attuned and abreast of what is happening, and so do businesses like Canada Post. The sorting equipment in place today is faster and more accurate. From a delivery perspective, it has made a massive shift toward motorization.
Canada Post has also offered on-demand parcel pickup for small businesses in 2011. In 2012, it provided enhanced web services for online retailers, including the seamless management of returns.
Canada Post will continue to leverage these investments, and it must. Doing so will further reduce the costs of processing the mail and will allow the company to better serve the growing parcel market and provide the services Canadians will need in the future.
In many urban areas, Canada Post has moved away from letter carriers delivering mail by foot, to carriers who leave their depot every morning with a fuel-efficient van containing the mail and parcels for delivery to their route. Putting mail and parcels in one truck for delivery provides a better customer experience, especially in the parcel business, at a much lower cost to the corporation.
These improvements will allow Canada Post to compete more effectively in a fast-paced and technology-driven global parcel market.
It is quite remarkable what Canada Post does handle, which is everything from health care products, gourmet food, to live bees. It must continue to adapt, to modernize, and to ensure it is able to service the demands of the Canadian public.
Jean-François Larose NDP Repentigny, QC
Mr. Speaker, we are talking about a CEO who earns a great deal of money to make an ordinary decision like this, about $10 million lost and about a sham of a public consultation process.
Canada Post belongs to the people. It provides a public service to seniors and to persons with reduced mobility.
I asked the question once before, but I will put it now to my honourable colleague. They say two-thirds of households while we say one-third. Are those who have been forced to use community mailboxes since the 1980s satisfied with the service they receive?
Oddly enough, in my riding, many of my constituents have told me that they are dissatisfied. Homeowners sometimes have no choice but to have a community mailbox. The fact of the matter is that they do not want one. They want home delivery. The public has not been consulted on this matter. A system that is outdated and unwanted is being forced on people.
Fundamentally, before making any kind of decision, Canada Post must serve the Canadian public, the corporation’s owner. This is part of its mandate.
Could my colleague answer this question?