TRAN Committee Meeting

     I call this meeting to order.

    Welcome to meeting number 14 of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities.

    Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Thursday, September 18, the committee is resuming its study on the changing landscape of truck drivers in Canada.

    Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format.

    Colleagues, I'm jumping right to it because we only have until 10:15.

    I'd like to welcome our witnesses. Appearing before us, we have the Honourable Patty Hajdu, Minister of Jobs and Families, and, of course, the Honourable Steven MacKinnon, Minister of Transport.

    We also have officials accompanying the ministers today. From the Department of Employment and Social Development, we have Sandra Hassan, deputy minister of labour and associate deputy minister of employment and social development, and Brenda Baxter, assistant deputy minister. We also have, from the Department of Transport, Arun Thangaraj, deputy minister, and Melanie Vanstone, director general, multi-modal and road safety programs.

    Welcome to you all. I would like to thank you all for being with us early this morning.

    We'll begin with your remarks.

    For that, Ms. Hajdu, I'll turn the floor over to you. You have five minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    I am very pleased to be here with you to speak to the committee about truck drivers and the measures we are taking to protect them.

     I'm here today to talk about the next steps to take to protect truck drivers and tackle worker misclassification.

    I'm joined by Sandra Hassan, the deputy minister of labour, Assistant Deputy Minister Brenda Baxter—I believe there are other officials in the room as well—and my colleague, Minister MacKinnon, who will say a few words as well.

    Every day, as you all know and as you've been hearing, truck drivers keep our country moving. They deliver the food, fuel and goods Canadians depend on. Some work for companies, while some are independent contractors. The trucking industry and all of these workers are vital to our transportation and our economy.

     Some drivers choose this path of independent driving because they value the flexibility it offers. They invest in their equipment, they take on clients and they build their reputation, just like every other small business owner. However, not every independent driver is legitimately a business, as I'm sure you've been hearing. As you've heard from expert testimony, there is a misclassification issue that's been a growing problem in the trucking industry.

    I want to be very clear: Misclassification is exploitation. It strips workers of their rights and creates an uneven playing field for the many honest companies that follow the rules. That's why we have been taking increasingly strong action to root out this behaviour.

    In 2023, the federal government invested $26.3 million to fight misclassification in the federally regulated road transportation sector. A national employee misclassification team was created, made up of labour standards inspectors dedicated to enforcement in trucking. Since April 2023, the team has focused on high-risk employers suspected of misclassification, drawing from our list of employers with a history of non-compliance, employers provided through our tip line and names provided by stakeholders. So far, the team has initiated over 650 inspections. Of those, 129 found were found to be cases of misclassification.

    Today, the government announced that budget 2025 will invest $77 million over four years and $19.2 million annually on an ongoing basis for the Canada Revenue Agency to implement a strong compliance program that addresses non-compliance issues related to personal services businesses. The budget will also lift the moratorium on reporting fees for services, also known as T4As. This moratorium was put in place in 2011, ostensibly to cut red tape, but it's allowed the growing practice of misclassification. The budget would also propose allowing the Canada Revenue Agency to share information, including audit results, with the ESDC for the purpose of administering and enforcing the Canada Labour Code as it relates to the classification of workers.

    These measures will make sure that drivers and the companies that hire them comply with tax and labour code regulations. When misclassification is suspected, we will investigate and enforce the law.

     Roughly 80% of the employers found to be non-compliant have since agreed to properly classify their drivers. Employees who misclassify have been facing escalating enforcement measures and administrative monetary penalties. In June 2024, further amendments to the Canada Labour Code strengthened the ban on misclassification. These changes made it increasingly clear that it is illegal to misclassify workers, and all workers are presumed to be employees unless an employee can prove otherwise. In other words, the burden of proof now lies with the employer.

    We're also taking enforcement right to the highways. The team is partnering with provinces to meet drivers at weigh stations to explain their rights and identify employers breaking the law. Recent joint operations with the Canada Revenue Agency, worker compensation boards and provincial transportation agencies, including those of Quebec, Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia, are strengthening enforcement and outreach all across the country, and more operations are on the way.

    To strengthen compliance even further, the labour program will launch a major inspection blitz in the greater Toronto and Hamilton areas this fall to address misclassification. I've asked my officials to fast-track enforcement measures and swiftly issue penalties when violations are found, and I've directed the department to increase the administrative monetary penalties regime to send an even stronger message.

     This includes reviewing the public naming of employers who break the law, because transparency drives accountability. That work is commencing immediately.

    In addition, since April 2024, the government has issued over 750 payment orders to employers totalling over $4.1 million in unpaid wages and other amounts owed to employees. That's money that belongs in the wallets of working people. Too often it is vulnerable workers who are hit the hardest. Many of them are newcomers to Canada who have trusted that the system will protect them.

    I'd also like to talk about another serious issue, the abuse of temporary foreign workers in the trucking sector. The temporary foreign worker program is meant to fill critical employment gaps temporarily as a last resort and only when qualified Canadians and permanent residents are not available. Employers must demonstrate their efforts to recruit within Canada. Misclassification of workers and the use of Driver Inc. arrangements are prohibited under the temporary foreign worker program, and that means that labour market impact assessments cannot be granted to foreign workers who are applying as independent contractors. Under the program, workers must be employees of the trucking company with the same wages and benefits as other drivers. The government continues to oversee and enforce temporary foreign worker protection and ensure compliance in key sectors, like trucking.

     I believe, as I think everyone in this room does, that workers in Canada deserve to have their rights protected. I want to be very clear. When non-compliance is found, we will take action, including any abuses linked to the Driver Inc. model.

    Thank you.

    Thank you, Minister.

    The floor is now yours, Minister MacKinnon. You have five minutes.

    Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

    It is a great pleasure to be here, accompanied by my new colleagues from Transport Canada and my former colleagues from the Labour Program and Employment and Social Development Canada, or ESDC.

    I would like to thank the committee for inviting me here today.

    First, I would like to say how privileged I feel to have recently been appointed Minister of Transport. It is a great honour, and I am very excited about working with you on this committee and, more broadly, working together to build our country and strengthen our economy.

    I would also like to take a moment to highlight the remarkable contributions of the Canadian trucking industry. Across Canada, more than 1.2 million commercial vehicles transport hundreds of billions of dollars in goods each year. Every time we see well-stocked shelves, whether it’s food, clothing or household items, we have a truck driver to thank, and that role will only grow as we aim to double our non-US exports. By the end of the decade, we will need our truckers even more to transport our wood, steel, aluminum and natural resources to new markets.

    As Minister of Transport, I recognize that this industry is changing rapidly and that these changes bring new challenges. One of the issues posing a challenge is the “Driver Inc.” model or scheme, which raises important questions about labour practices and taxation. This is an important issue that our government takes very seriously, and has done so for a long time.

    We all share the same goal: a safe, fair and competitive trucking industry. In this regard, our government has just announced some excellent news that will come from the 2025 budget. Incidentally, I believe this was one of the Bloc Québécois’ requests for the budget. The budget provides $77 million over four years, with permanent funding of $19.2 million per year, to enable the Canada Revenue Agency to strengthen compliance in the industry. These investments will help identify non-compliant companies, support drivers affected by misclassification and ensure that every company contributes fairly to the programs that Canadians depend on.

    The budget also creates legislative amendments to improve information sharing between the Canada Revenue Agency and ESDC, thereby strengthening enforcement of the Canada Labour Code. In other words, this is a concrete initiative to protect workers, ensure a level playing field and strengthen confidence across the sector.

    At Transport Canada, we are working closely with ESDC to support these efforts and promote responsible business practices across the country. On one specific point, there can be no compromise. Regardless of the business model, safety must always come first; it is the absolute priority. Safety is a shared responsibility between the federal, provincial and territorial governments, and with the industry itself, of course. The National Safety Code for Motor Carriers is one of the essential pillars of this collaboration, containing 16 standards governing the safe operation of commercial vehicles and carriers.

    Take electronic logging, for example. It has simplified record keeping, strengthened compliance with the Commercial Vehicle Driver Hours of Service Regulations and helped prevent fatigue. These are major advances for road safety, but we know there is still much work to be done.

    More recently, the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators, or CCMTA, was mandated to analyze carrier safety certificates to more effectively identify those with problematic histories. The results of this work, combined with our joint efforts, will guide future improvements to the national framework and help facilitate domestic trade.

     I would also like to highlight an important initiative organized by Transport Canada last July. The “trucking hackathon” brought together representatives from all levels of government and industry to identify concrete solutions to eliminate trade barriers that affect the free movement of goods between provinces.

     This hackathon sparked rich exchanges and innovative ideas to improve both domestic trade and road safety. There's still a lot of work to be done, but I am confident that, together, we are moving in the right direction.

     Before concluding, I want to emphasize one key idea. Collaboration is our greatest strength. The trucking industry is essential not only to our economy but also to our communities. It connects people, goods and opportunities across this very large country. By working hand in hand—government and industry—we can ensure that Canada's transportation system remains safe, efficient and sustainable for generations to come. This is the message that I had when I met with the trucking industry. We'll work together to strengthen the sector, to protect good Canadian jobs and to build our economy.

    Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

    Thank you, Minister.

     Colleagues, we're all very eager to ask questions of the ministers and the department officials. As you know, I'll do my best to ensure time equity, split amongst all of you.

    With that, I have once again with me two placards, proudly shared with me by my children from their craft box.

    One means that there are 15 seconds left. The other one means your time is up. I will do my best to ensure that you're all given equal time.

    To start us off today, we have Mr. Albas.

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

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Thank you, ministers and officials, for your service to our great country.

    Mr. MacKinnon, Canadians are dying on the roads, and it seems that you're spending more time keeping your government safe than keeping Canadians safe on the roads. What do you say to that criticism?

    I haven't heard that criticism.

    You just did.

     What I can tell you is that I am a full-time Minister of Transportation. I spend an inordinate amount of time worrying about rail safety, road safety and air safety, worrying about the multitude of issues, infrastructure issues and other issues, and this issue, on which I was proud to collaborate with my colleague Ms. Hajdu, with the labour program, where I have a special acquaintance, and I was able to help orchestrate some of the improvements last spring that you saw in this issue.

    There's a lot going on, Mr. Albas, and we look forward to more.

    Actions speak louder than words. The old saying is that if you don't have time, you give money.

    What investments in road safety will be in the budget? If you can't give concrete examples today, will you at least commit to putting a firewall around any cuts that you need to make to any safety program under your portfolio?

    I can assure you there'll be no compromise on safety, ever. I can point you to the $77 million that will be in the budget, or won't be in the budget if it does not pass, unfortunately. It will make this vast improvement, we think, to the trucking regime in the country.

    There's that House leader role again.

    Minister, National Safety Code 16, the requirements for a class 1 driver's licence for extraprovincial driving, right now is a recommendation. We have a patchwork system in this country with varying standards. Why is it not a law for extraprovincial? That's an area under your direct responsibility, sir.

    We have a collaborative system in this country, in terms of transportation. Some parts of it are exclusively provincial. In fact, you could argue that the heavy half of the regulation of trucking is found at the provincial level. Certainly, enforcement is found at the provincial level, and where we collaborate is nationally. It's not necessarily, in many cases, a federal system but a national system, through the CCMTA or others, where we collaborate and establish standards. In all events, this needs to be a collaborative—

    Minister, the safety fitness certificate is set by you, as the Minister of Transport, through the Motor Vehicle Transport Act. I hope you take this suggestion seriously.

    I'm going to pass on my time to Mr. Groleau, please.

    Thank you.

    Mr. Chair, distinguished guests, Minister MacKinnon, Canadians and Beaucerons are very concerned about the “Driver Inc.” phenomenon. As you know, accidents occur every week. Every day, untrained drivers are on our roads, endangering the lives of our fellow citizens.

     What concrete measures have you taken since becoming Minister of Transport to ensure safety on our roads?

    We just tabled one this morning. You saw the announcement made by my colleague François-Philippe Champagne, together with Ms. Hajdu and myself, with the aim of combatting this phenomenon. We are tackling the “Driver Inc.” scheme head-on, and we have been looking into it for quite some time.

    Thank you for your response. Mr. MacKinnon, but I am addressing the Minister of Transport, not the Minister of Finance.

    Do you believe that the federal government has a responsibility for road safety, yes or no?

    Absolutely. Through standards, collaboration with the provinces and our federal legislation, we must ensure road safety, just as we do for other modes of transportation.

    So, if you believe you are responsible for safety on our roads, you have surely seen, like everyone else here, the episode of the CBC’s Marketplace program entitled Truckload of Trouble. People were getting driving licences in 48 hours. Did you see that program? Why didn’t you intervene in this matter?

    This is an issue that must be addressed by the Société de l’assurance automobile du Québec, or SAAQ. Certifying drivers is a provincial responsibility. We are obviously focusing on standards, especially with regard to interprovincial trade. However, when it comes to policing or certifying truck drivers, that is the responsibility of the province—

    I apologize for interrupting, I don’t mean to be rude, but I don’t have much time. At the federal level, why is the Liberal government encouraging these practices instead of condemning them?

    Let me explain what I mean. It has been confirmed that Canada Post, a federal agency, has abandoned traditional secure transportation in favour of awarding contracts to companies using the “Driver Inc.” model.

    Why are you condoning this, Mr. MacKinnon?

    Canada Post is obviously an independent agency. Its employees, with whom we are currently negotiating, are unionized. If such a practice existed, we would obviously look into it. I would be very surprised—

    This has been confirmed by this study.

    Will you be taking action on this matter, Mr. MacKinnon?

    We intervened this morning to put an end to the scheme that was put in place by Mr. Harper in 2011.

    You are talking about the measures taken by the Minister of Finance. Here, we are talking about safety. I am talking about saving lives, Mr. MacKinnon.

    What you are talking about does not save lives.

    We, too, talk about saving lives, every day. I assure you, Mr. Groleau.

    Thank you very much.

    Thank you very much, Mr. Groleau.

     Next, we have Ms. Nguyen for six minutes, please.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you very much to the ministers for joining us this morning. It's great to see our colleagues here for this really important discussion. We've been digging into this issue for the last few weeks, and we are really interested in hearing your perspectives.

    Minister Hajdu, throughout the study, we've heard from witnesses the recommendation for better information sharing between the provinces. We know that earlier this year an information-sharing agreement between CRA and ESDC was signed.

    Can you tell us a little bit about how this is helping to close the gaps in enforcement and road safety for the federally regulated sector?

    By sharing information federally and working in partnership with weigh stations across the country, we can actually crack down faster on suspected bad actors. About 80% of employers who we suspected were misclassifying agreed to properly treat drivers as employees and voluntarily comply with the code.

    However, there are still actors out there who continue to use this practice in fraudulent ways. That's why this relationship with information sharing between the labour department and CRA—but also the work we're doing in partnership with the provinces and territories—is so critically important.

    We also spend quite a bit of time, when we're partnering with the provinces, informing individual drivers of their rights. It's an important component of the work to let drivers know their rights. It helps them to understand any kind of improper practices that may be happening, up to and including misclassification.

    I believe today's announcement about how we're going to strengthen that information sharing will lead to even better outcomes in terms of being able to track, find and address these misclassification incidents.

    We heard from some witnesses that some drivers enjoy the flexibility and the freedom of being independent drivers. Many truck drivers, operating under the Driver Inc. model, are effectively gig workers. They don't have access to the basic protections and are vulnerable to exploitation.

    Can you talk about how the federal government is ensuring that labour standards are evolving to reflect the realities of gig-based employment, particularly in sectors like trucking?

     The reality is that when people are being misused or abused in this way—and some could call this abuse—oftentimes they are unaware of their rights and they're unaware of the fact that this is happening to them.

    There may be a number of different reasons for that, but the end result is the same. We have workers who are not receiving the same protections, not being advised of the same rights, and, in some cases, not being paid wages that they thought they would be paid through complicated schemes of compensation. Ultimately, this ends up in a very fragile situation for the worker, but also for other truck driving companies that are very diligent in keeping records, diligent in submitting important taxation information, following all of the regulations that are important in this industry, as my colleague has just spoken about. That's why this misclassification issue really deeply affects us all, ultimately starting with the abuse of the worker but ending with an abuse of an industry that is, as my colleague just said, critical to all of our communities.

    I think the misclassification issue and the increasing work that we're doing to not only root out bad actors but prevent any kind of repeat behaviour.... It's a great number, 80%, who say that they won't do it anymore or that they didn't know they were doing it in some cases. That's a good number but it still means that we have 20% of the actors out there who are continuing to use this practice to abuse workers to enrich themselves, but also to avoid their obligations.

    Ultimately, I think today's announcement, through better data sharing with CRA, will allow us to even dig deeper into those practices.

    Thank you, Minister Hajdu.

    Minister MacKinnon, Spadina—Harbourfront, the riding I represent, is Canada's most densely populated riding where pedestrians, cyclists and commercial vehicles share tight urban corridors every day.

    How is Transport Canada working with municipalities and provinces to ensure that our national safety standards and infrastructure planning reflect the realities of urban contexts, so that goods movement can remain efficient and keep communities safe?

    That's a great question.

    The fact is that Transport Canada works closely with provinces, with territories, and with municipalities to ensure that our national transportation policies and safety standards reflect the realities of these urban environments, just like yours.

    I know most Canadians transit through your riding at some point in their lives. Safety in those dense, urban environments...bicycles, public transit, including the tram, and obviously cars and trucks, must move more fluidly through our urban environments. We're working to keep those environments safe with a national road safety strategy.

    Using data, we try to reduce collisions and protect vulnerable road users, and I think we're making good progress on that.

    Minister MacKinnon, we see the very important role that newcomers and immigrants play in sustaining the transportation and trucking industry. Many of these individuals are entering the sector as drivers, operators and small business owners, and they're often doing this under challenging conditions.

    Can you speak to how their contributions are helping to grow the industry and build a more resilient transportation system to serve all Canadians and the economy?

    I think it's quite obvious, colleague, that immigrants have played a major role in building this country and they obviously play a major role in the transportation sector.

    I am a little concerned about the stereotyping that goes on. When I see, floating around social media, quite obvious cues and stereotypes about the people who populate the transportation sector, and particularly the trucking industry, that concerns me.

    Most people are honest, qualified, competent, conscientious operators and employees, and efforts to paint this in some kind of stereotypical way are wrong-headed and dangerous.

    Thank you very much, Minister MacKinnon.

    Mr. Barsalou-Duval, you have the floor for six minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    I would also like to thank the two ministers for being here today.

    We can only rejoice that the government is beginning to take the issue of low-wage drivers seriously.

    Ms. Hajdu, you held a press conference this morning to announce improved data sharing. Changes will also be made to T4A slips, a measure that will be requested by Minister Champagne.

    All of this is happening at a surprising time. Your government has been in power for 10 years, and associations have been saying for years that there are problems in the industry.

    On October 6, the Bloc Québécois held a press conference with industry stakeholders to present 10 demands. We have been hammering you on this issue for months and we are not letting up. Suddenly, you wake up and present measures.

    Can you tell us whether today’s announcements are strictly due to the work that has been done and the pressure you have received? Otherwise, none of this would have happened.

     Thank you very much for the question. I'm sure that's how some would like to characterize it.

    As I said in my speech, we started this work in April 2023, when we invested $26.3 million to fight misclassification in the federally regulated road transportation sector. As I said at that point, a national employee misclassification team was created. This was made up of labour standards and—

    I’m sorry to interrupt you, but you’ve already said that. I understand what you’re saying.

    I would like to address another issue. I know that you already started work in 2023. In that case, we could also talk about the 2022 economic statement.

    On May 25, 2023, a press release was published. It stated the following:

    Further on, it says:

    If I understand correctly, your government did not have the political will to act. Is that correct?

     What that release, which I have not seen, would perhaps be stating is that we don't want to stigmatize honest drivers in this sector. There are a ton of small businesses we rely on every day that are a single person and their truck. We need to keep those folks. We don't want those folks to feel like they're part of the target we're looking at. What we're looking at are people who are conducting illegal activity.

    As I said, since April 2023—

    I understand why you say that and I agree with you. We must not—

    Let me finish the sentence. Then I'll certainly let you go.

    As I said, since April 2023, there have been over 650 inspections and 129 cases of misclassification. That's a result of working in partnership with provinces and territories. A lot of this work is done on the road in the weigh stations, with provinces and territories looking at records in—

    Thank you.

    I understand that inspections have been carried out, that money has been invested and that we cannot complain about that. However, on the ground, we have not seen any change.

    You are talking about 2023, but we are now in 2025. You talk about a few hundred inspections, when there are tens of thousands of trucking companies and fraud is said to be widespread throughout the industry.

    Ultimately, the measures and resources that have been put in place so far are a drop in the ocean. That is my understanding.

    But there is worse. According to data from your department, ESDC, 17 companies have been sanctioned.

    Minister, do you think it is sufficient that 17 companies have been sanctioned and fined?

    Allow me to answer that question, Mr. Barsalou‑Duval.

    Ms. Hajdu has outlined a long series of measures taken by our government, and this continues. This morning, an important initiative was announced. In April, we ensured that data sharing with the CRA could take place.

    There is often talk of deregulating and dismantling the transportation system. I am sure you are not advocating that inspectors, road controllers and police officers harass truckers at every turn. We do spot checks, we have targets.

    Data sharing will improve the success rate. However, you will agree that—

    I understand.

    What I am saying is that the government’s approach is the problem. We can see that the educational approach is not working. At some point, we have to crack down and take this seriously. That is what we are seeing.

    This scourge has spread throughout the industry. You don’t have the resources and you’re not dealing with enough companies. At some point, you’ll have to take this seriously.

    Of those who receive fines, 75% do not pay them. Furthermore, 100% of the fines paid are in the trucking industry.

    You are not being taken seriously, that is the reality.

    What are you going to do to be taken seriously?

    As we just told you, the government has been working on this problem for a very long time. I myself met with the Canadian Trucking Alliance. We've been working with the community, the industry and individual drivers for a very long time.

    When it comes to fines, there's more work to be done, obviously. We will look at fines, administrative penalties and so on. That will help us strengthen the measures, and we will ensure that people comply with the law and standards.

    There's no doubt—

    They don't pay the fines. That's the problem.

    Thank you very much, Minister.

    Today, we're laying the groundwork to clean this up.

    Mr. Harper got it wrong in 2011. I think you would agree that we're rectifying that.

    Thank you, Minister.

    Thank you, Mr. Barsalou‑Duval.

     Next we have Mr. Lawrence.

     You have the floor for five minutes, sir.

    Thank you very much.

    Thank you for being here, Ministers. My questions will be primarily to Minister Hajdu.

    First of all, I understand that former minister Freeland was quite popular amongst colleagues. We have invited her and she has yet to show up. Maybe you could mention the fact that we would love to see her at the transportation committee.

    Next up, in all seriousness, I'm glad to see that there is some acknowledgement of the problem that has been created over the last 10 years, and that there has finally been an acknowledgement that over the last 10 years the Liberal government has mismanaged the immigration system and the TFW system, and has mismanaged the CRA to the extent that both the misclassification and the TFW program have led to numerous fatalities on our highways. I'm glad to see that there is some acknowledgement of that.

    What my concern is that over 10 years, we have seen this problem get worse. In fact, the Insurance Bureau came here and told us that there have been 80% increases. People in my riding have died because of your government's failure to manage the TFW program and the classification of drivers.

     I'm glad to see there is an acknowledgement, but I want to dig down and see if we can get some results here. What is the date that the Driver Inc. problem will cease to be an issue in Canada? Give me that date.

     As I said in my speech, this began with a deregulation that allowed for this practice to flourish. That actually happened under the Harper Conservatives in 2011. Over the years, the process began to multiply. We've actually, as of today, announced that we are reversing a moratorium on T4As.

     This is something that the Trucking Alliance is pleased with. Obviously, there are a lot of efforts to streamline doing business in this country, but sometimes we have to take a step back and realize that some regulations really matter, and this one evidently did.

    I would also say that the licensing and the training of truck drivers is firmly in the lens of provincial jurisdiction. That's why this partnership with provinces and territories is so important: because we can't actually get to the infractions from a driving—

    Here's the reality, Minister—

    —capacity licensing way without the provinces and territories.

    Here's the reality. According to the Insurance Bureau, we have seen an 80% increase in accidents in Ontario and 88% in Alberta. We have seen over 80% in the Atlantic region. This is a national problem. We would love to have some national leadership.

     I'm going to ask you again: On what date will the Driver Inc. issue cease to exist in Canada?

    Well, I think we're actually getting somewhere. We have not only sent a strong signal through the industry but also cracked down on individual companies—small, medium and large—that have used this practice—

    Minister, we're trying to schedule a meeting to have the victims here. Unfortunately, your party is filibustering that. They are unwilling to listen to the victims.

    For the victims, it's cold comfort for them to hear that we're making some progress—

    Do you mean the drivers who have been misused? Is that the victims you mean?

    Sure, absolutely, as well as those who have died on our highways because of your government's inability to properly classify drivers and to handle the TFW program in a sensible manner. They would find it very cold comfort to hear that we might be making progress someday. On what date will the Driver Inc. program cease to be an issue?

    Well, we hope that it will cease to be an issue immediately. That's the work that we're doing to invest in the tools that we need to catch these bad actors. Today's announcement goes a long way to sending a message throughout the industry that we are taking even further measures by sharing information—by sharing information back and forth with ESDC and the CRA—and by working with provinces and territories in a deep collaboration.

    I would say that we all share this deep grief that you're talking about. We have all known people who have lost their lives. I live in northern Ontario. Highway 11/17 goes through my riding and is in many places only two lanes. We have invested $70 million towards doubling the lanes in my riding, and I expect that we will work in partnership with the provinces and territories to continue that work to make our roads safe.

    It's an issue of infrastructure, it's an issue of investment and it's an issue of cracking down on bad drivers. We need the provinces for that, by the way, because if someone is licensed to drive in this country and they don't actually have the skills to drive, they're putting my son's life in danger, who is also, by the way, a licensed AZ driver who is on the roads hauling equipment back and forth from job sites.

    You know, when you talk about victims, I really want you to know that we all share the grief, and we all share the responsibility to push our provinces and territories to do better on behalf of all of us, in partnership with the work we're doing today.

     We also—

    Mr. Chair, I want to say that I find it actually really distressing that we're going to weaponize grief in this room.

    I want 10 seconds here. She went over. That's not fair, Peter. I let her go, so you have to let me go for 15 seconds here.

    I share your grief, but we also have a duty and responsibility to these victims—

    With all respect to you all, I'll make sure you get the additional time. I want to make sure I don't disrespect Mr. Greaves. He has five minutes that I have to respect as well.

    Mr. Lawrence, I will give you additional time if you want to go next time.

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

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Good morning, ministers. Thank you for joining us today.

    I'd like to elaborate on this theme of road safety that we were just touching on. As we heard in your remarks this morning, and as we've also heard from previous witnesses before this committee, this challenging model of Driver Inc. began in 2011 under a previous Conservative government. We've heard concerns this morning about road safety and funding from Transport Canada for road safety, which we also know was slashed under that government in 2015.

    With that in mind, Minister MacKinnon, can you elaborate on what Transport Canada is doing to ensure safety on our roads and on the government's ongoing commitment to ensuring safety for both drivers and passengers on Canada's highways?

    That's a great question.

    Our responsibility for road safety, as my colleague Ms. Hajdu just said, is a shared one, but let me reiterate that we do rely on provincial road safety measures and policies and we rely on largely provincial infrastructure investments in safety.

    Mr. Lauzon, who is participating in the meeting by video conference, is aware of Highway 50. More money must be invested in road mobility in Outaouais. The safety of our roads is at stake. That's a perfect example.

    Mr. Greaves, most Canadians understand that when you get a driver's licence, you're getting it from a provincial entity, whether that be in British Columbia, Quebec or elsewhere. We rely on provincial law enforcement to monitor highway safety and compliance with the rules of the road. We rely on the infrastructure of weigh stations and other road inspections that are undertaken at the provincial level.

    The federal government largely has a coordinating and policy role in elevating best practices with regard to technologies and new methods, making sure we look around the world at the best practices possible and that we, to the extent possible in a federation, nationalize those things and make sure Prince Edward Island can benefit from good things that are done in New Brunswick and Quebec can benefit from good things that are done in Nova Scotia.

    The federal government has a solemn responsibility around this. I do find it a little mystifying, as I'm sure you do, when we come here and get asked about something that is obviously and squarely under the aegis of a provincial solicitor general or a provincial certification authority. If you come here and then you, as my colleague just said, weaponize people's grief in an attempt to attribute blame at the political level or the federal level, I think that is not a helpful contribution to this debate.

    You can rest assured that all of us—my colleague Ms. Hajdu and I and every one of us—have approached this problem with a real collaborative spirit and a spirit of getting done whatever federal contribution can be made to solving this issue.

    Thank you for that clarification, Minister.

    Staying in the vein of federal-provincial regulation of this matter, Minister Hajdu, can you speak to how it is that ESDC distinguishes between federal and provincial jurisdiction around the Driver Inc. model and how the government coordinates and communicates with its provincial counterparts on this issue?

    Yes, I can.

    As my colleague has just said, there are things that are really not in our lane and that we don't have the jurisdiction to oversee. For example, the training and licensing of professional drivers and class G drivers is squarely among the rights and responsibilities of the provinces.

    Anecdotally, these collisions that happen on our roads are often not solely the responsibility of the truck driver; there are sometimes general drivers who are involved in these incidents. All of that is tragic. As I mentioned earlier, I live in northern Ontario, in Thunder Bay, and these kinds of incidents happen all the time.

    We work very closely, mainly on the administrative side, on how people's books are kept, the kinds of information about how the drivers are classified—

     Thank you.

    —and what kind of financial information is available for us to really understand the misclassification issue.

    The rest of that work on licensing is—

    Thank you, Minister.

    Thank you, Mr. Greaves.

    I'm sorry. We have 13 minutes left of questioning and 13 minutes left of our time with you, so I have to make sure that I'm respecting everyone.

    Mr. Barsalou‑Duval, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Today, it seems that the government is waking up after 10 years of deep sleep. For the past 10 years, it's been badgered about the Driver Inc. matter. Suddenly, after 10 years of doing nothing, the government seems to have been divinely inspired to take action.

    Mr. MacKinnon, only one of the 10 requests we had was implemented. That's a far cry from a passing mark, a one out of 10.

    Can you tell me what made this divine inspiration fall down from heaven?

    You're really using a lot of religious metaphors this morning, Mr. Barsalou‑Duval.

    First of all, as I just said, you must have been surprised to see the government's press release when you read La Presse this morning.

    Absolutely, and even more so because two weeks ago, you were still saying that this was a provincial matter.

    No, we never said that.

    We have video, Mr. MacKinnon.

    The press release that Mr. Groleau and other Conservative colleagues just read is proof that we've been taking this issue very seriously for a very long time. Today, we announced the next set of measures the government has proactively undertaken. The last measure was introduced in April.

    You have a government that takes this issue very seriously, and the work will continue.

    I have a specific question for you.

    When you talk about the fact that only one of your 10 requests has been considered, are you thinking about your budget requests or your requests about—

    I'm talking about the 10 requests for “Driver Inc.” One of the 10 requests has been addressed. There are nine left. Are the other nine going to be addressed?

    You'll send me your nine other requests.

    I'm happy to do that.

    I wanted to say that the announcement about the T4A slips is interesting. Sharing information is a positive thing.

    I think a few of those requests are under provincial jurisdiction. Are you going to arrange for letters from the ministers in the provinces where they're asking us handle this?

    I'll have to get back to you on that, but we've checked, so I don't believe that's the case.

    In your presentation, you said that you are a full-time Minister of Transport, and the Department of Transport has 6,000 employees.

    However, in concrete terms, none of the measures announced today fall under Transport Canada, and you've come here empty-handed. Do you intend to take meaningful action on transportation?

    When it comes to solving transportation-related problems, Transport Canada is a catalyst, collaborator and partner for all federal agencies and institutions.

    I'll give you some examples of what can be done with respect to the Motor Vehicle Transport Act, the security certificate—

    Thank you, Mr. Barsalou‑Duval.

    I can assure you that that is the role of Transport Canada, Mr. Barsalou‑Duval. I think you know it too.

    Next, I will turn the floor over—

    No, I have a nice list here. It's unfortunate that I'm out of time.

    Thank you very much, Minister.

    Thank you, Mr. Barsalou‑Duval.

    Next, I'll turn the floor over to Mr. Lewis.

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

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Thank you to both of the ministers for appearing this morning.

    I'll turn first to you, Minister MacKinnon. In your testimony.... Notwithstanding the fact that I agree with you that our grocery shelves are full of goods because of our truckers, I'm also going to equally say that probably it's because Canadians can't afford food, but that's just a point of interest.

    Minister, on October 7, 2025, this committee heard compelling testimony from witnesses who described the Driver Inc. model as “the crisis that is destroying [the trucking] industry, causing carnage on our highways and robbing our social network of billions of dollars each year.”

    Minister, honestly, give yes-or-no answers, please.

    In your capacity as Minister of Transport, have you met with the Ontario Minister of Transportation about this crisis?

    Mr. Sarkaria and I have communicated back and forth, and our offices have. We will continue to, obviously, collaborate with Ontario. We have, as you can imagine, a number of major issues with Ontario that we want to solve together, and we'll do that.

    I've visited your riding. I've visited the greenhouses in your riding. I've visited the temporary foreign workers who work in the greenhouses in your riding, and I've visited the owners of those greenhouses who say that they could not possibly survive without those temporary foreign workers.

    I just want to ask you, though, Mr. Lewis—

    Thank you, Minister.

    I had a very brief question.

    I want to ask you, Mr. Lewis, do you approve of the stereotyping of temporary foreign workers that your colleagues just—

    Minister, have you had any—

    It's an honest question for you.

    Have you had any discussions—

    It's my floor.

    Thank you, Minister, it's my floor.

    In your part of the world, you produce food. You're a breadbasket for Canada, Mr. Lewis.

    Colleagues, could I just ask everybody to speak one at a time for the benefit of our interpreters who are having a very hard time trying to figure out what to translate.

     Thank you.

    I'll add 15 seconds to your time, Mr. Lewis.

    Thank you very much.

    Minister, have you had any discussions with Felix Fung, the assistant deputy minister of transportation, on the CCMTA regarding this crisis?

    Well, I just want to finish off on my earlier comments—

    I asked you a question—yes or no.

    Sometimes you have to take a stand—

    Chris Lewis: Please, Minister—yes or no.

    Hon. Steven MacKinnon: Sometimes you have to take a stand, Mr. Lewis.

    I'm taking a stand right now—yes or no.

    Do you approve of—

    So the answer is no.

    Have you met with any other boards of directors from CCMTA about this crisis?

    Do you approve of your colleague's stereotyping of temporary foreign workers who are vital to the employment base in your riding and to feeding Canadians?

    So the answer is no. Okay. Thank you for that, Minister.

    Let's talk about my riding of Essex. Quite frankly, I know about the breadbasket of Essex. You don't need to remind me. Thank goodness for those greenhouses. They certainly put a lot of food on Canadians' tables and on Americans' tables as well. Because of the price of food, thank goodness they do that.

    My riding of Essex is next to the busiest international border crossing in North America. Earlier this year, a truck driver lost their load on County Road 42 and Banwell Road in my riding of Essex. Because you visited it, you must know exactly where it is. There were tons and tons and tons of safety violations.

    Minister, what does standard 16 mean?

    I assume you've spoken to Mr. Sarkaria about those safety violations—

    What does standard 16 mean?

    —so that he can talk to his colleagues in law enforcement.

    What does standard 16 mean? Do you know?

    Well, the first thing is that if you're interested in solving the problem, Mr. Lewis, I suggest that Mr. Sarkaria may be—

    Chris Lewis: So standard 16—

    Hon. Steven MacKinnon: Perhaps I could introduce you.

    So you don't know. Thank you, sir.

    Mr. Sarkaria and I will talk to you about law enforcement on those highways that I've been down. I've visited those greenhouses. I've talked to those workers. I've seen those packaging plants. We're very proud of that industry in Canada.

    As you should be.

    That is an incredible industry with incredible entrepreneurs—

    Thank you, Minister.

    Let me just read standard 16 for you: “Entry Level Training (Class 1)”. It's what drivers must be trained in, such as vehicle inspection and driving practices. At least you're aware now.

    My next question is for Minister Hajdu—

    Mr. Lewis, you would agree that driver certification is a provincial responsibility, surely.

    Well, I would suggest that because it's interprovincial...which is why my next question is for Minister Hajdu.

    Would you like us to federalize that issue? Has Mr. Sarkaria signed off on that?

    By the way, I've heard you speak about Highway 11/17. I know that area very well. I spend a lot of time up in that area.

    Minister, we had some testimony a couple of weeks back from Johanne Couture, executive director of the Women's Trucking Federation of Canada,. She testified before committee that she didn't feel safe and she didn't want to use route 11/17.

    In light of this testimony and similar concerns raised by other women who appeared before this committee, do you have a response that you would like to share with Ms. Couture and the women who expressed fear for their safety on these routes?

    Well, I would echo that fear. I'm driving down that road this weekend for an event in my very large riding. I will tell you that I'm very glad there's no snow on the road. There are times when, as a member of Parliament, I actually cancel visits to small communities in my riding, because the only route in is 11/17. Portions of that road are extremely treacherous.

    Now, the good news is that Ontario and Canada have invested in widening the road and increasing lanes. In those parts, the safety obviously has increased, but that work has to continue. I would suggest that the federal government can be a strong partner in those infrastructure priorities that provinces are setting, not just for safety, obviously, which I think should be our primary concern, but also for the economy of our country. You will know, having travelled those roads, that actually there are ports to them. If that shuts down, it shuts down the trade for the entire country.

    Thank you, Minister.

    Thank you very much.

    Hon. Patty Hajdu: In fact, I was—

    The Chair: Thank you, Minister Hajdu. I just want to make sure I give the final slot to Mr. Kelloway.

     Mr. Kelloway, the floor is yours. You have five minutes.

     Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Thanks to the ministers and to everyone here today.

    This study has been pretty illuminating on many different fronts. As you stated, it's a very serious study that fundamentally focuses on safety.

    You talked about the weaponization of certain things. I think we need to get back to the basics of this meeting and its focus, which is the safety and security of Canadians and what the government is doing. Clearly, the government has been focused on this.

    Let's talk about some facts for a second. If we really want to talk about facts, it was the Harper government that cut transport, security and safety, aviation, safe transportation of goods and the Motor Vehicle Safety Act. If only we could go back and change that...but we can't, so here we are discussing what we're going to do to rectify this situation.

    Minister Hajdu, regarding the announcement made last night and into today—for people at home, in particular—can you break down, in layman's terms, what this means in terms of our efforts and funding? What is it going to do in terms of playing a role in those two things—keeping people safe and secure?

    Today we're talking about misclassification, which, at the end of the day, is about fraud. That's why it's illegal. It's about defrauding workers who, in some cases, are promised a rate of pay and a return on all their hard work that never comes to pass. We've recovered wages for people who have been defrauded of those wages. Often, they are the most vulnerable people in the workforce.

    I can tell you that, having known a number of people in the trucking industry, these are very hard jobs. Hopefully, everyone in this room knows someone who's either worked in the industry or is working in the industry. These are really long hours, really gruelling experiences and a long time away from home. That's partly why we have such a hard time recruiting people into these jobs, quite frankly. There's huge personal sacrifice in doing this kind of work—trucking goods across the country, sleeping in your truck and eating on the road. There are tons of studies on health and outcomes for drivers that, from my previous job, I can tell you are serious.

    You asked me to break it down in two ways.

    One, we are strengthening the ability to talk to each other, whether it's provinces or federal departments, so we can root out the bad actors and protect companies that are doing the right thing by their workers and following safety standards. How many hours do you need to sleep? Are your logs kept? It's these kinds of things, so we can then ensure workers are getting the right sleep and only working the number of hours they're entitled to work. Each province has somewhat different rules around that, but we need to be able to talk to each other to make sure that is what's happening.

    Two, we're going to increase those monetary penalties so that bad actors really feel the sting. That work is starting immediately. It's a process. Obviously, these are regulations. They go through a series of consultations. The ultimate goal is to make sure we send an even stronger message to the cheaters out there that we're going to find them and protect the good actors. We're going to protect the industry and those very vulnerable workers who deserve to work in safe environments. A legitimate trucking company that's being run properly, in accordance with the law, guards the safety of the worker, which ultimately guards the safety of everybody else on the road.

    Thank you.

    Minister MacKinnon, I talked about this in the last session we had. Clearly, we have challenges. We have problems. We're talking about them here. With Prime Minister Carney's focus on major projects, we're going to have more development and traffic on the roads.

    In the time we have, what do you think are core tenets in terms of federal responsibilities for transport under that safety and security aspect, as compared to, say, the provinces?

    That's a great question.

    The first priority is, and will always remain, safety in all modes—air safety, rail safety, highway safety and marine safety. This is the first and most solemn responsibility of any regulator and any minister of transport. Every fatality or injury suffered in the transportation world is a tragedy. It's a tragedy that we share and that we all bear as a society, and we all try to do better. That's why we have agencies that look after these things.

    I find weaponizing these things and capitalizing on people's grief to try to attribute blame and score political points particularly unhelpful, when a lot of good people wake up every day, put on their boots, go to work and try to make the roads safer for Canadians.

     Thank you very much, Mr. Kelloway.

    Thank you, Minister.

    On behalf of all of the members of this committee, I want to thank our ministers for appearing before us early this morning, as well as the department officials who joined them. I wish you all a wonderful day.

    Colleagues, we're going to suspend for a couple minutes to allow the clerk to prepare for our next round of witnesses.

    I'll end off, before I suspend, by saying, “Go, Jays, go!"

     I call this meeting back to order.

    Colleagues, I'd like to now welcome our next set of witnesses for today.

    From the Department of Employment and Social Development, we have Sandra Hassan, deputy minister of labour and associate deputy minister of employment and social development; Gary Robertson, senior assistant deputy minister; Brenda Baxter, assistant deputy minister; and Michael MacPhee, assistant deputy minister, temporary foreign workers program.

    From the Department of Transport, we have Melanie Vanstone, director general, multi-modal and road safety programs.

    Thank you, once again, for appearing before us today. We begin our line of questioning for this second round with Ms. Cody.

    Ms. Cody, the floor is yours. You have six minutes, please.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    As we've all heard, trucking is the wheels of our nation that keep us moving.

    I come from the riding of Cambridge. We have very many reputable carriers as well as many concerns that I'd like to address today.

    My questions are going to be for Melanie Vanstone. Thank you for coming here today.

    We're hearing about inexperienced drivers, who are often new to Canada. They're being sent on long-haul interprovincial routes in winter driving conditions without adequate training or the equipment required to operate safely, such as tire chains, winter tires and emergency gear. Many lack the practical knowledge to handle snow, ice and extreme cold, and are unfamiliar with how to use winter equipment effectively.

    These concerns point to gaps in training standards and oversight, particularly in fast-tracked licensing programs. What risk does this pose to public safety and to experienced carriers sharing the road? Do you support an extra-provincial framework for commercial driver training, particularly to address fast-tracked licensing programs in unregulated training centres linked to the Driver Inc. model?

    First of all, as we've heard today, driver licensing and training is an area that falls under provincial jurisdiction. We don't have any authorities at the federal level to mandate programs related to driver training.

    I'm happy to say—and just to inform the committee—that I am the board member for the federal government at the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators. I work very closely with my federal-provincial colleagues there to update and maintain the national safety code, which includes NSC standard 16, which is the mandatory entry-level training for drivers, which is the latest addition to the safety code, a very important addition.

    We work there to continue to share information, share best practices and promote continuous improvement in all aspects of trucking safety.

    Could I ask you about the reputable carriers who are facing unfair competition from Driver Inc.-style operations that avoid the taxes, skip the inspections and undercut safety standards? These practices distort the market and undermine legitimate businesses.

    What is the economic impact of these unregulated operations on responsible carriers, particularly those operating on interprovincial trade routes? Would you support stronger federal enforcement, like regulatory reform, in your department, to crack down on the shadow economy created by Driver Inc.-style models and restore the fairness in our industry?

    With respect to fraud in the transportation industry, obviously as a safety regulator, we take any non-compliance with rules and regulations very seriously.

    From a safety perspective, we are concerned about companies, so-called chameleon carriers, who may be trying to move from province to province to avoid sanctioning. We are discussing and working toward trying to close any loopholes that would allow that, through working with provinces and territories.

    Enforcement of federal regulations—as well as, of course, provincial regulations—for local trucking is carried out by provinces and territories.

    I thank you for that, but, as we've noticed, there are, especially on Highway 11/17.... They are actually two roads that go to Highway 1, which runs the truck drivers from coast to coast. I think we need to work a lot more closely with our provincial partners, especially when it comes to the insurance factors.

    Legitimate carriers are facing rising insurance costs, partly due to high-risk drivers insured through facility insurance, often linked to Driver Inc.-style operations.

    How are responsible operators being impacted by the system, especially when accidents occur on federally significant routes like Highway 11/17? What federal measures could help ensure that insurance schemes don't unfairly penalize responsible carriers due to the actions of unqualified or unvetted drivers?

    I would just note that insurance is also an area that falls under provincial and territorial jurisdiction, as well as the maintenance of highway infrastructure.

    Thank you, but insurance is impacting negatively on the trucking companies that are federal-related.

    Highway 11/17 is part of the Trans-Canada Highway system and serves as vital interprovincial trade corridors. Many are calling this route a death trap.

    Do you believe the federal government has adequately fulfilled its responsibility to ensure these national trade routes meet basic safety and infrastructure standards, such as passing lanes, regulated rest stops and safe off-road parking? What specific federal actions would you recommend to improve safety and reliability on these interprovincial corridors?

    Obviously, safety is a tremendous priority, and something that is very important to us at Transport Canada. We do not have direct authority, or responsibility, with respect to the maintenance of highways and highway infrastructure.

    I do understand, though, that this is something our minister has discussed and will continue to discuss with his counterparts, the ministers of transportation at the provincial level.

    Trucks don't just stay in one province. They go across our country. If it's a security and safety priority, the federal government should be involved and work with our provincial partners.

    We have heard of trucks sold in Ontario receiving Manitoba plates and safety certificates without ever being inspected in that province. What does this say about the integrity of our interprovincial licensing and inspection system?

    Do you support a federal framework to close licensing loopholes and ensure commercial vehicle certifications are traceable and legitimate, especially in cases tied to Driver Inc.-style operations?

    Trucking safety is an area of shared jurisdiction. We would work to discuss with the provinces and territories any changes to the model to determine if there are any recommendations to bring forward.

    Thank you very much.

    Next, we'll go to Mr. Greaves for six minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    Good morning to our witnesses. Thank you for being with us today.

    What we have heard from numerous witnesses on this subject is that Driver Inc. at its root is a labour and fraud issue. It refers to the employment status of these individual drivers, and the misrepresentation that some of them engage in, primarily, for the purposes of tax evasion.

    I'm wondering if you could speak to where your departments are in pursuing perhaps additional measures to complement the existing labour protections and regulations that govern the trucking sector that have been introduced under the Canada Labour Code.

    The issue of Driver Inc., as raised by Mr. Barsalou-Duval, is not a recent one. It has been going on for quite some time. Back in 2021, the first measure that was brought into force was changing the Canada Labour Code so that the misclassification of a worker as an independent contractor was deemed illegal if the intent was to remove the employer's rights and protections under the Canada Labour Code. As we are well aware, the issues continued, so in 2023, a $26-million source of funds was allocated to a dedicated team to work on misclassification in the trucking industry.

    In the 2024 budget bill, further amendments were brought to the Canada Labour Code. There were three fundamental amendments.

     First, misclassification was declared illegal, regardless of the intent. Whether it is to remove the employee's rights or not, it's simply illegal.

     Second, all workers are deemed to be employees unless proven otherwise.

     Third, it's now the employer or the one giving the work who has the burden of proving the qualification of the person as either an independent contractor or an employee. The burden used to be on the employees, and a lot of them either had difficulty or didn't have the knowledge to be able to prove their status. They didn't have all of the information on the various criteria. It can be somewhat complex. Now, it's on the employer. They have that responsibility of showing that a person is either an independent contractor or an employee.

    Those are the legislative amendments that were made. As you heard the minister say this morning, we started the enforcement measures.

     There was a reference to a 2023 press release. When we announced our first stance, we were directed to be more in the education world and raising awareness. That is clearly not sufficient. The information has been out there for at least two years and the bad behaviour we've seen continues. Consequently, there will be an increase in how quickly we impose penalties in the enforcement continuum.

     Those are some of the measures that have been taken through the years to address those issues of misclassification.

    Brenda, do you have anything to add?

    In addition to the monetary penalties we issue, we publish those employers that have been issued a monetary penalty, both to make it public and to add some reputational harm. It helps to encourage compliance with those employers going forward.

    To pick up on something you just said, Ms. Hassan, education around this matter may not be sufficient, but it seems to be an important part of ensuring that workers and employers are aware of the changes that have been made recently. Can you speak to any measures your department is taking to share the changes that have been made recently with drivers and trucking companies?

    Over the past two years since the dedicated team was set up, it has done awareness sessions and inspections. The team has been working with provincial counterparts at weigh stations. We're close to 1,000 interventions, with at least 400 awareness sessions being held across the country.

     Thank you very much.

    Mr. Barsalou‑Duval, you have the floor for six minutes.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    First, I would like some clarification from you and the clerk regarding the motion we discussed last week. If I'm not mistaken, at the outset, when we adopted the motion to study this, it said at least six meetings. Since there seems to be a unanimous desire to have an additional meeting to hear from victims and some witnesses that everyone seems to want to hear from, I wonder if you think the conditions have been met to exercise the latitude you've been given to add meetings.

    Thank you, Mr. Barsalou‑Duval.

    The clerk has just advised me that we need clarification from the committee. Yes, the motion mentions a minimum of six meetings, but the committee must clarify what that means.

    Okay. Maybe I'll come back to that in a second.

    I'd now like to ask the officials here a question.

    Subsection 25(1) of the Motor Vehicle Transport Act states:

    

    Subsection 25(2), which covers the content of the report, states the following:

    

    

    this information is provided separately … and

    

    The Motor Vehicle Transport Act is still in force, as far as I know. However, the department's website says that the last report dates back to 2020.

    When can we expect to see the next report?

     Yes, under the act we are obligated to report annually to Parliament on commercial vehicle safety. The latest report was actually tabled, I believe, in early 2025, but it is the data of 2020. The reason for the lag is that the data we collect for the annual report is provided by provinces and territories. It takes some time to collate. There are a lot of statistics in the report with respect to safety inspections and other data. We do look forward to bringing forward the next report, which will cover 2021. Hopefully, in the very near future we'll be tabling that report.

    You'll understand that I'm very frustrated to see that it takes us five years to get statistical data. There are problems that appear in society and that require us to act more quickly than five years. In any case, I strongly urge you, as officials, to put pressure on your ministers, your teams and your counterparts so that this is resolved more quickly, because it makes no sense to still have 2020 data in 2025. They're already outdated.

    I'd like to ask you a question about the $26.3-million envelope that was announced in the 2022 economic statement and that the minister talked about earlier.

    How much of that money has been spent to date?

    This $26-million envelope is spread over five years and is distributed almost equally among the fiscal years. As fiscal years 2023-24 and 2024-25 have passed, approximately $10 million is expected to remain for the last two fiscal years. For the current year, approximately $5 million will be spent.

    Did that $26 million allow for the hiring of only 23 people?

    In total, the team has 23 inspectors and 13 people to assist them. That was the number of inspectors that had been planned for.

    According to documents submitted by the Canadian Trucking Alliance, the non-compliance rate in the industry is 40%, and 25% of non-compliant companies simply disappear as soon as they see Employment and Social Development Canada coming. Can you confirm this?

    If those aren't the real numbers, could you send the committee the latest numbers?

    We can send you the reports from our surveys, which contain the exact figures. I can't tell you where the 40% figure comes from, but I can tell you that since our team has been in place, there have been 650 surveys. We will provide you with details on this data.

    Thank you very much, Ms. Hassan and Mr. Barsalou-Duval.

     Next we have Mr. Lawrence.

    The floor is yours for five minutes, sir.

    Thank you very much.

    Ms. Hassan, most of my questions will be directed toward you.

    To give you an idea of what I'd like to accomplish in my round, the minister said that there were quite a few people in your investigation who were just not aware of where the line was. They incorporated, when maybe they should have been an employee. I just want to talk through that step by step, so that if you're a truck driver or an owner of a truck driving business, you know where the lines are.

    Let's start at the beginning.

    If in fact you don't own the truck and you just walk in, get your licence and start driving a truck, you would be an employee. Is that correct?

    Determining whether you are an employee or a contractor is complex. It's on a case-by-case basis. We have criteria that we look at. We're looking at the entire business to start with. It would be a trucking company that transports goods for others.

    In looking at the individual driver, it is what the total relationship is—the control, the ownership of tools, the chance of profit, the risk of loss, who hired the worker, who paid the worker or established the rate of wages—

    I appreciate it, Ms. Baxter. I don't want to be rude. I know of the Supreme Court case that comes from. I agree with that. I'm trying to boil it down.

    If I'm a truck driver right now, say I own my own truck, but I'm completely scheduled by a trucking company. In your estimation, would that represent someone who could incorporate or not?

    It's just in general. I'm not trying to get you on anything.... That's not the purpose of this. I'm trying to give those truck drivers and those trucking companies some bright-line rules.

    Again, it would be determined...the business that they're doing. If they own their truck, they can still be an employee. They can work directly with an employer and the employer controls their hours, provides their wages, determines who they're picking up and delivering for.

    If you are an individual, own your truck and decide who you're going to work with, what goods you're moving and when you're going to work, that is more on the contractor side.

    That's very helpful.

    Again, it has to be looked at on a case-by-case basis.

    I realize that you don't want to get yourself too much in a corner because there may be situations you can't contemplate.

    I'm just trying to get it out there, so that if you're a truck driver or the owner of a truck company, you don't accidentally run afoul of the misclassification. I think you've been helpful there.

    Before I move on, is there anything else on that issue that you might want to give to truckers or truck driving companies?

    The minister said—and I'm inclined to believe her—that there were a number of people who, when you did the investigation, just didn't know. Is there anything else that you can give them in terms of bright-line rules?

    When our officers are out at these weigh stations educating some of the drivers, they are talking about the benefits of being an employee and the protections that they receive under the Canada Labour Code as an employee, not just from a labour standards perspective, but also from a health and safety perspective. These are protections that you receive as an employee.

    We do take the time, when we meet with the drivers, to educate them on those benefits.

    For the crackdown that was announced, I believe that $23 million in funding was announced.

    Over what period is that $23 million? Has that already been spent? Where are we with that $23 million?

     The fall economic statement of 2023 announced $26.5 million over a five-year period from 2023-24 to 2027-28.

    Really allocated, if you do quick math, it's close to $5 million per year. Since we have two fiscal years that have gone by, $10 million has been spent. We're well into 2025-26, so the team is up, they're working, and we know that we've been spending those sums as it's mostly full-time employees, FTEs. We know, because we have the teams in place, that the money is being spent.

    Sorry, I'm going to jump in there.

    My challenge is, if you do the math, that's 10 million bucks and we have 129 misclassifications. That's like $100,000 per misclassification. That's a lot of money for relatively limited results. I'm not sure if taxpayers are getting full value for money there.

    I'll leave it there.

    Thank you very much, Mr. Lawrence.

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

    Thank you, Mr. Chair, and hello to the witnesses.

    We know that many drivers, in particular newcomers, incorporate without understanding the legal and tax consequences.

    We've talked to some degree about that in this testimony, I'm wondering if you can break down what ESDC is doing, tangible action items, in relation to that lack of awareness and lack of understanding of the tax implications and the legal implications.

    Could you break down actionable items or outcomes that you are focused on?

    Thank you.

    Going back to the work that is being done, the awareness and the sharing of information, that relates to informing the drivers we are meeting, a lot of them at the weigh stations but in other fora also, about their rights, about the qualification under the Canada Labour Code and other acts as employees.... It actually protects them. Many did not know. It gives them rights to medical leave. It gives them protections in case of nonpayment of wages, for example.

    We also explain that if they are an employee there are contributions to Canadian social systems, such as employment insurance and our retirement regime, the Canada Pension Plan.

    That's part of the information that is shared when we have those meetings and information sessions. Our colleagues from CRA and our colleagues from the provinces are also in attendance.

    I have the ADM responsible for the temporary foreign worker program also here with me. There's a strong link that's being made with the temporary foreign worker program. Under that program, employees who are brought to Canada are brought under an agreement that they will be hired by the employer as an employee. When those workers come, the agreement that allows them to come to Canada is that they are to be employees, they are to be treated under the Canada Labour Code, but also under our other legislation as employees.

    We're looking into that also.

    I'm curious—and this is for you or for anyone else—about the feedback of what's been done to date. I understand that a lot of scaffolding needs to happen here; you focus on putting a solution in place, but there's always more to do.

    I'm wondering about the feedback from stakeholders—whether that would be companies, individuals or newcomers—in terms of the measures and in terms of industry. What is the feedback that you're getting in terms of this particular measure and how it's manifesting? It's important to hear what you're hearing. We've heard from industry and we'll continue to hear from industry and different stakeholders. What are you hearing from stakeholders? I'm interested to see what the threads are here.

     I will start with the investigations we are doing at the weigh stations, spending a lot of time educating drivers. We do hear a lot of appreciation of the time that we're spending there with the drivers to help educate them. Many of them didn't know what the difference was between being an employee and being a contractor, and what the benefits were from an employee perspective. Having other partners participating there, like the provincial transportation authorities, the CRA, the workers' compensation boards and the insurance boards, they're getting a lot of information, and that is very much appreciated.

    Certainly, we engage frequently with the Canadian Trucking Alliance. I believe they're here in the room as well. We've been working with them on this issue since 2018. I think they appreciate the escalation of the work that we are doing, starting with the education and now with the enforcement, looking to enhance that enforcement work.

    Thank you very much.

    Mr. Barsalou-Duval, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

    Thank you, Chair.

    I'd like to move the following motion, which will be handed out to all committee members:

    The purpose of this motion is to give the committee a better understanding of what is being done, what has been done, what hasn't been done, and what more can be done to address this serious problem. There have been announcements today, but I'm far from convinced that they will be enough to solve the problem. By obtaining this information, the committee will be able to do a better job.

    Thank you, Mr. Barsalou-Duval.

    I will suspend the meeting for a few minutes while the motion is being handed out.

     I don't think we're going to be able to get back to our witnesses.

    I want to thank you, on behalf of all committee members, for appearing today and for sharing your testimony. You're free to leave.

    This meeting is suspended to the call of the chair.

     I call this meeting back to order.

     Colleagues, I believe you have all received the duly translated, in both official languages, version of the motion proposed by Mr. Barsalou-Duval. I believe there is one small adjustment.

    Mr. Barsalou-Duval, do you want to speak to the slight adjustment you made to your motion?

    Yes.

    If the committee members are in agreement, we could go back to 2018, instead of going back indefinitely.

    I have Mr. Albas, followed by Mr. Kelloway, followed by Ms. Nguyen.

    Thank you, Mr. Barsalou-Duval.

    Mr. Albas, the floor is yours.

    I just wanted to make sure that there are no issues with revenue being factored in to the department. I just want to make it very clear that this is obviously the Canada Revenue Agency we're speaking of here. I think that's the case.

    Can you confirm that, Mr. Barsalou-Duval?

    Yes, absolutely. If the committee feels it is necessary to include the Canada Revenue Agency in the motion, I'm perfectly willing to oblige.

    Thank you, Mr. Barsalou-Duval.

    Do you want to continue, Mr. Albas?

    As long as we all know what we're talking about and the intent is clear, I am fine.

    Mr. Kelloway, please go ahead.

     Thanks, Mr. Chair. It is much appreciated.

    Thanks for the notice of motion. A couple of things come to mind with respect to this. One is what Mr. Albas said, so that's clear. In terms of this particular motion, it doesn't state it in here so I'm assuming it's not: Does this extend the study or the discussions we're having around the length of the study even further than we're going? I guess that is question number one.

    Number two is a question about the intersection of the federal government and the provincial government in terms of the production of documents and emails. Does that get complicated when it's another level of government and there are corresponding discussions with respect to programming or information around offences under particular acts and things of that nature? I'm not exactly sure, and that's why I'm asking the question. How easy is that to produce? Does it become more of a cascading series of more meetings on this? Before I say, “on this” and someone says safety is a priority, I want to make sure to say it's important and that security is absolutely a priority. Everybody wants safe roads, and we've all illustrated that.

    I'm just wondering if we can have a discussion on that, because I genuinely want to know. This is a legitimate question, in particular for my colleague from the Bloc, about jurisdictions, discussions around that and information. I'll put that out there, and I might have more questions as we go.

    Thank you.

    I'm taking note of that, Mr. Barsalou-Duval.

    I'll turn the floor over to Ms. Nguyen.

    Thank you.

    I wanted to follow up and get a bit more context as well, to add to my colleague's request for additional context on this motion.

    From my understanding, some of the stuff you might want to gather through this production could breach the Privacy Act and might provide information on those who have been fined, and some of this data would actually not be releasable because of the enforcement and corresponding data. What can be put in view is a bit challenging.

    I'm also curious whether you'd want this data to remain confidential within the committee or if you would want this to be more broadly out in the open and available to journalists, which would potentially provide personal information of offenders. I wanted to strike that note of concern around that and get more clarification on the motion.

    Up next is Mr. Greaves, but I'll let Mr. Barsalou-Duval answer these questions first before giving the floor to Mr. Greaves.

    Is it a question to add on to those questions that maybe he can respond to?

    He can respond first, Mr. Chair.

    Okay, I'll let you respond.

    On the subject of jurisdictions, to my knowledge, this isn't the first time that such a request has been made involving correspondence in other jurisdictions. I imagine there are already established practices that could be used.

    With regard to meetings, there's no mention of additional meetings in the motion. I think this is a separate debate that we began at our last meeting and that we can resume later. However, it was my understanding that everyone agreed to additional meetings.

    With regard to privacy, the motion doesn't require the documents to be unredacted. If there are excessive redactions, that may come up later. I think the current provisions already protect the privacy of the individuals involved.

    With regard to confidentiality, I think it is important that everyone has access to the information that the committee will have at its disposal. In my opinion, it is clear that the general public, including journalists, must have access to it. Since our committee is seeking the greatest possible transparency, I think our approach must be transparent.

    Thank you, Mr. Barsalou‑Duval.

    Mr. Greaves, please go ahead.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    With respect to this motion, the committee has heard now from the relevant ministers, from senior departmental officials and from a whole range of leading stakeholders from across the country and many of the provinces most affected by the Driver Inc. model. I am not entirely certain what it is the committee would hope to gain from the provision of these documents given the testimony we have heard, the access we have had and what I would suggest is a very forthcoming response from the senior bureaucrats responsible for these files and matters.

    With all respect to my colleague who has brought the motion forward, it does seem that this exercise would require a significant amount of work in order to produce materials that would substantiate the testimonies we've already heard. I'm not sure the committee would be particularly well served by that or by the additional time it would take, given the other matters we hope to turn our attention to as well in the coming weeks.

    Is this necessary? What does it achieve that the committee has not already heard or received from the witnesses who have come before us?

     Do you want me to turn it over to Mr. Barsalou-Duval for a response to that, and then go to Mr. Kelloway?

     Yes.

    I'm going to turn it over to Mr. Barsalou-Duval first to get his response.

    First, I'd respond by saying that when I moved the motion, I mentioned its purpose, which was to find out what more could be done on this issue as a committee, as Parliament, and as members of Parliament. I'm sure we will learn a lot about the government's approach, both what it has done in the past and what it intends to do in the future. Recommendations and possible solutions could have been provided to us.

    The Bloc Québécois had specifically asked the Minister of Transportation to launch an investigation into the “Driver Inc.” phenomenon and the exploitation of workers in the transportation sector. Unfortunately, he declined to do so.

    I think the testimony we heard was interesting, but it doesn't cover all aspects of the issue. There is still much to shed light on, and I think that with this information, we will be able to shed more light on the matter.

    Thank you.

    Mr. Kelloway, please go ahead.

    I want to thank the Bloc member for that response. I'm with my colleague MP Greaves here, though. The reality is that we're at a point where I think it's absolutely essential to get the recommendations and report out now.

     My concern—and I don't dispute the convictions of the Bloc motion—is as it was at the last meeting, when I said that I think we have a chance here of continuously—on a very important study, yes—moving the goalposts, and then two meetings—that's not in this motion and I appreciate that—become three meetings. What happens if we don't get production of documents in 30 days? Another delay?

     I believe, and others can have a difference of opinion, and that's what makes this committee so great.... In my opinion—others can have a different opinion and I respect that—that would do a disservice in getting out the recommendations that we heard on the consistent themes in terms of things like how the logbook can be tampered with. Fatigue was another one. Also, of course, when we get to a certain point, there's listening to the victims, which is going to be important.

     What we've heard consistently—and you see this in a lot of important studies like this essential study—is that when you get to a certain point, the information is important to have and the knowledge is important to have from all stakeholders in this study, but you see re-emerging things—

    My apologies. It is 10:15. I'm going to have to adjourn.

    The meeting is adjourned.