Statement made on 03 March 2011 by Senator Céline Hervieux-Payette
Hon. Céline Hervieux-Payette:
Honourable senators, I would like to add a few comments to the excellent speech by Senator Harb, who is responsible for this file, to explain to you why we felt that the short title did not reflect the rest of the bill. Not only is there nothing in the wording of bill itself, according to Senator Harb, but there are 39 other sectors covered by this legislation and this is the sector that is the most compliant when it comes to weights and measures.
I will begin by addressing the honourable senators. In the Standing Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce, of which I am a member and where we studied this bill, we did not hear any rational explanation for this title. No one explained why the title did not include any of the other sectors where statistics clearly show there are more errors. Some sectors have a compliance rate of less than 90 per cent.
One of the things that concerns me the most — and keep in mind that we are talking predominantly about small businesses throughout Canada and therefore about hundreds of thousands of locations — is when the inspector and installer of the equipment is the same person. I assure you I do not understand the wisdom behind that.
Another thing that concerns me greatly has to do with monitoring. If you live in Abitibi or the Lower St. Lawrence, where will the inspector come from to check the scales? Will he arrive from Montreal by plane? Assuming the legislation will respect the rights of Canadians, especially when we are talking about a government that favours simplifying regulation, does this not amount to having the private sector enforce the rules? There is a clear conflict of interest for people with the skills to install scales or any weights and measures instruments, which are more electronic than anything else these days. I doubt an electronics expert can travel from town to town and bill the small business owner. This inspection is supposed to be done regularly. We are dealing with a system that has been a bit lax about the number of inspections. We are talking about gas stations, entrepreneurs, business owners; we are talking about 16,000 businesses across the country. Think of all the convenience stores, all the fruit and vegetable vendors throughout Quebec and across Canada.
Honourable senators, in my opinion, Bill C-14 was not studied closely enough in the other place and, what is more, they have the nerve to give us a title that has nothing to do with the bill itself and everything to do with petty politics.
I want someone to give us good reasons for supporting such a bill. I have not seen or heard any, and I do not see how such a law, especially with such a title, would protect the interests of Canadians. On the contrary, the other 39 sectors affected by this bill are not mentioned, which means that Canadians will likely not be adequately informed, even less so if the famous line about being very concerned about fairness at the pumps is used.
I think that it is just as important to know whether there is a litre of milk in a bag or a litre of orange juice in a carton as it is to know whether there is a litre of gas in my gas tank. The last time I checked, orange juice cost more than a litre of gas.
The substance of the bill is important, but so is the title, which does not accurately describe the bill.
Honourable senators, I am asking you to support the amendment moved by my colleague. We need to be honest with Canadian taxpayers, particularly if they have to pay in order to comply with this new legislation.
I am therefore waiting for an explanation and, when we vote, I hope that my honourable colleagues will take into account the arguments I just presented.
Please click here to read the full text of this debate