Thank you.

Our capacity in B.C. was approximately 6.3 million TEUs for 2022. We used 4,612,130 of those twenty-foot-equivalent spots. As of the end of 2022, we have space for approximately another 1.5 million containers.

Do we need more container capacity in the west? No, we do not. What we need is to fix the parts of the system that are broken.

For example, we cannot get enough railcars west to load them up and send them east. Container dwell times in B.C. have gone up, while container volumes have dropped off significantly. Why is this? Also, why is no one addressing this issue of hundreds of thousands of containers sitting on the terminals for five days plus when they should be on a train headed east within three days?

According to the VFPA's own information, it is getting harder to send containers east via rail, because we are not getting our railcars. Why build a new container terminal that can take two million TEUs and will destroy thousands of west coast port jobs, when all you will be doing is dumping two million more problems onto an already broken rail and warehousing system east of the Rockies?

When construction of a new terminal is proposed and the current tenants are paying for it through increased rent, then that terminal should be built in line with the current terminals, not in a way that gives the new operator, whoever that may be, an upper hand straight out of the gate. If RBT2 is approved with the current level of automation that is proposed, which is still up in the air because, according to the VFPA, the third party will get to choose the level of automation, this will force the current conventional container terminals to automate as well, just to keep up with the new greenfield terminal.

The ILWU Canada commissioned a study in 2019 called the “Economic Impact Study of Digitization and Automation of Marine Port Terminal[s]”—the Prism report. This report talks about the negative impact of job loss in communities and the negative tax implications of both greenfield and brownfield sites.

The VFPA brags that it will create approximately 800 full-time jobs at 1,598 hours in a year, which equates to 39.5 weeks of work in a year, but if the RBT2 gets approved, it will force the current conventional or brownfield sites to automate, which can reduce the workforce by up to 50%, so the port's creation of approximately 800 jobs maybe will cause the loss of approximately 4,000 jobs, according to the Prism report. Does the Canadian government think this is a good idea for Canadians? Does the Canadian government think this is a good idea for the working class in this country?

In regard to environmental remediation, Environment and Climate Change Canada is not convinced that the mitigation offers from the Port of Vancouver are feasible. What does this mean? It means that the biofilm needed to feed shorebirds can and will be destroyed. We're in a situation in which shorebirds will not have the required food to be able to migrate when the time comes. This equates to putting an entire species at risk—such as the western sandpiper and others.

The national supply chain task force recognized the need to improve the labour relations paradigm in this country. In doing so, the government and its partners should recognize that in developing, building and operating large port infrastructure projects, that activity will impact the working conditions of thousands of workers under collective agreements such as ILWU Canada’s with BCMEA on the west coast.

In order to avoid labour disputes that may threaten the supply chain or infrastructure projects, government needs to consult with labour on planned projects and changes and to guarantee that such projects will not undermine the jobs, jurisdiction or collective agreements of unions. Where infrastructure projects have the potential to change where the work is done, how it is done and who is performing it, government must ensure that the project partners understand that infrastructure projects may not be used to undermine or remove collective agreement obligations.

In closing, I offer you this. Unions like ours, indigenous communities in our country and environmentalist groups need to have seats on port authority boards to bring an awareness to current and proposed infrastructure, so that before the development of new terminals in B.C.—like RBT2—we fix all other broken pieces first.

I urge our government to either not approve this project or postpone the decision until DP4 and the Prince Rupert expansion are in the same place in the impact assessment, so that all three projects can be put together and the best option for workers and the environment can be determined and acted upon.

Thank you for your time.

Transcript

Discussions (0)