Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Transport and Communications
Issue 16 - Evidence, April 17, 2013
OTTAWA, Wednesday, April 17, 2013
The Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications met this day, at 7:02 p.m., to study Bill C-321, An Act to amend the Canada Post Corporation Act (library materials).
Senator Dennis Dawson (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Honorable senators, this evening we are beginning our study of Bill C-321, An Act to amend the Canada Post Corporation Act (library materials). The purpose of this bill is to provide for reduction in the rate of postage for library materials. Appearing before us is Mr. Merv Tweed, Member of Parliament for Brandon—Souris, who introduced the bill in the House of Commons and had it passed in the other chamber.
The floor is yours, sir.
Merv Tweed, Member of Parliament for Brandon—Souris: Honourable senators, thank you very much for the opportunity to present. As stated, my bill is a library book rate bill; it is materials. If I may, I will outline the steps that got us here and then if you have questions I am certainly happy to try and answer them. I will start by saying that this is my fourth attempt to move this bill through the house due to things outside of our control inside the chamber. It gave me the opportunity not only to present it many times to the people of Canada, but to reinforce that as we move forward.
Historically, Canada Post has allowed libraries to move books between libraries, and also to Canadians, at a reduced rate. This postal rate has been in effect since the late 1930s and it came to my attention in the 2004 election that many rural communities were under the pressure that this rate may change and impact them financially and how they would be able to service the communities they provide for.
Canada Post obviously has felt pressure to continue to generate revenue and I want to make very clear that I do not see this as an imposition on Canada Post on my behalf. It is a reinforcement of an agreement that has been in place for many years, much like a handshake agreement. Traditionally every year, as any business does, Canada Post looks at their statements and at ways to increase revenue. This is a way they felt they could increase revenue. Unfortunately by doing so it would present an impact not only on rural Canadians, but on people in areas of Canada unable to be serviced by the local library.
The bill I am introducing would merely solidify the reduced rate and protect libraries from any other rate increases without the debate of both houses. It is important that whenever you try and impose costs upon communities that have come to rely on that reduced rate that the government of the day, and hopefully the Senate, would have some input. I would suggest to you that it would not bode well for elected officials to impose a 100 per cent rate increase upon their communities, at least in my humble opinion.
The bill also proposes some adjustments to the definition of library materials. In the past it has been strictly books, magazines. I have asked to extend that so that it would include a lot of electronic definitions that are taking place. It would include CDs, CD-ROMs, audio cassettes, video cassettes and other audiovisual material. The reason I included that is I am convinced that by lightening the load over time, you lighten the post rate load and create savings to Canada Post over the long term. That would not happen immediately but as we move into the electronic age. I suspect this bill will be reviewed after a period of time to see that it meets those needs.
By changing the definition over time it would allow a reduction in costs and allow many people to increase their ability to access those types of materials.
I have had the opportunity and pleasure to tour many libraries across Canada. I see how they are moving into the electronic age and how books and other materials are being transferred electronically; I see this as a savings over time.
There are many people, as I am sure you know, who do not have access to libraries. Many of them rely on this service. For a person living in one of my communities, Medora, Manitoba for example, there is no community library but lots of people who have an interest in reading and improving their skills. By accessing this service, they can have a book mailed directly to their home at a reduced rate or to their library within their vicinity which they would go and pick up. I have been encouraging them to use the library because I find, like everything in the retail business, that when you walk in the door you always find something else you like or that would be of interest. It would increase traffic to the library and what they provide.
I am told that 1 million Canadians use the service directly and another 3 million use it indirectly either through the library service or direct home service, and I think that would continue to increase.
I wish to bring one example forward that got my attention in one of my campaigns that led me to this bill. A small library in rural Manitoba transferring books in and out and providing services to their communities under the reduced rate averages about $1,800 a year. It does not seem like a lot of money, but for a small community it is a lot of money. If we were to move to the retail rate suggested from time to time — and that is what put people in peril — that rate could increase anywhere from $15,000 to $18,000 a year and would devastate many rural or small libraries.
I appreciate the good work that Canada Post does in providing this service. I know one of their mandates is literacy in Canada and I believe this is another extension of that service.
I often say to people that coming from rural Canada it used to be if you had an elevator in your community you were a successful thriving community, and today a lot of people see that as their library. We have lost a lot of services, but the library continues to thrive and grow.
I have explained to my colleagues in the house that it is a good bill and it works. I am asking the Senate to look at what I am proposing and hopefully support it. I have received support from every province in Canada. I have received support from every part of Canada in the sense of rural and urban because the city benefits from it as well in the sense that they have the ability to forward those books to the communities in need. I often say to people that I think it is only fair that Canadians, no matter where they live, should not be deprived of the resources of a library simply because of distance. Many people are shut-ins or, through no fault of their own, have no access.
In closing, I will say that I was fortunate in preparing this bill. I had three interns from the intern program who helped me write it: Erin, Annalies and Rhea. I want to compliment them but also the program that provides the wonderful students and the wonderful people we have coming into our offices. I know that should I be successful, they will share in the pride and the glory of accomplishing something for rural Canadians.
I thank you for your diligence and look forward to your questions.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Tweed.
Before I give the floor to senators, I have to admit that this committee tabled a report three or four years ago on digital Canada, on the fact that we should be able to move towards a digital society in Canada. You are the first witness since I have been chair of this committee who has made his presentation from his iPad, and I want to congratulate you on that. As you know, in certain countries like Estonia, parliamentarians sit at their tables with their iPads, while here we have the tendency to say, ``If you are reading from your iPad, you must be doing something else.'' I want to congratulate you.
If you look up our report, it is called Plan for a Digital Canada. Senator Mercer wanted this committee to be the first digital committee where we would have less paper at the table and more iPads. Since you are making your presentation to a committee that is sensitive to the issue, I want to congratulate you on that.
Senator Plett: Thank you, Mr. Tweed. As you know, I am the sponsor of this bill in the Senate. This is only my second time around, your fourth but my second, and I think we will be successful this time. I have that feeling.
Being from rural Manitoba, I certainly see the need for something like this. Being from a small village, we do not have a library, so we could certainly benefit from this service.
For the benefit of the chair and the senators who were on this committee with me in the past, I know I would be remiss if I did not at least mention the words ``Buffalo Point,'' and there we also do not have a library. Thank you, chair, for giving me the opportunity, even though I am not a regular member of this committee.
I have one question, Mr. Tweed. In the bill you talk about five years after this act comes into force and every 10 years thereafter, the minister must have a review undertaken of the definition of ``library material'' and of the operation of paragraph 19(1)(g)(1). Ten years seems like a long time. Would every five years not have been better? Why five years the first time and ten after?
Mr. Tweed: It was an amendment brought forward at committee on the other side. I do think most legislation should be reviewed every three to five years. We agreed to this simply because the way things are changing so quickly. When I made the proposal, at the end of day it may save Canada Post money in the long term. People said, ``Let us make sure we can confirm that and be able to move forward.'' I suspect in 10 years from now, we will not be talking about CDs and discs and things like that but more about electronically transferred books, which the libraries will still house, but the transmission will be simpler.
It is also just a review to make sure it is doing what it said it would do.
Senator Plett: I certainly support the review. How did the bill read before it was amended? Was it simply every five years?
Mr. Tweed: There was no review. It was brought forward, and I had it in my original document. Through discussion, I was convinced not to have it in there, but I certainly accepted the amendment, and it came from the Liberal opposition.
[Translation]
Senator Verner: Senator Plett asked precisely the same question I wanted to ask you about the review every ten years. Given the fast pace of technological development, the speed at which advancements are made, hopefully we will not wait ten years before undertaking a review. But since it is stipulated in the bill, I hope there will be a way to speed up the process if we notice that a more timely review is needed.
[English]
Mr. Tweed: Again, for me, I believe any legislation should be reviewed and if we can make it better, then improve it.
Also, Mr. Chair, I did read your report, and I think that is the next step for many of us. I have been in countries where electronic voting is now the norm. I believe we are headed there; it is just a matter of time.
Senator Mercer: Thank you, Mr. Tweed, for being here. I appreciate your diligence in pursuing this. Having pursued a private member's bill myself, after six times, I finally got it through. I think you may be luckier than I was.
I support the legislation, but I do have one or two small questions.
According to the 2011 Canada Post annual report, there were 750,000 shipments under this program, which generated $831,000 in revenue. They estimated that there was an $8 million loss in revenue, which is not insignificant. In a Crown corporation, which is showing a decrease in its return to the shareholder, i.e. the Canadian public, how do you justify this? That is not a critical comment; I want to give you an opportunity to give us a positive response.
Mr. Tweed: The way I look at it, it is a service that has been provided over many years. When we first started challenging the rule in the sense of with Canada Post suggesting, usually at budget time, that a rate increase was necessary and what number that would be, I challenged them to tell me how much it is costing them, and I heard numbers anywhere from $11 million to $19 million. I said, ``You have to be more exact than that. You should know.''
From the numbers I have from 2009, which obviously are a little more dated than yours, it generated $772,000 for Canada Post. My thinking is that you can say it is lost revenue, but it is revenue they were not getting anyway; they were not counting on it or banking on it. I understand the need to be accountable and to be responsible with Canadian tax dollars, but when you have provided a service for 50 to 60-plus years, to change your mind overnight without any consultation with those communities, I felt this kind of legislation would be appropriate. Again, I have never said to Canada Post, ``You should not get an increase.'' I just said, ``You should not get a 100 per cent increase overnight.''
Their revenue will continue to grow. They received a 5 per cent increase this year. I do not object to that, but I do think there has to be an explanation. Again, I look at it as a service, particularly to the people I represent, who are rural Canadians without access.
It is interesting; a young student from one of the schools took library books out from Ottawa because he said he could not find them anywhere else. Normally, it would cost him 50 to 60 bucks to get them, but it cost him 3 or 4 bucks instead. I am not denying that is a good deal, but it also enables that person to access that type of information.
Senator Mercer: I do not disagree. The program has been in place since 1939 and the increase Canada Post received this year from 97 cents to $1 or $3 is not that major. We have to measure the community good as opposed to the burden it might be on Canada Post. Those fortunate enough to live in big cities who have libraries within easy traveling distance from us or access to the Internet is one thing, but for rural Canadians and rural students it is a vital service so I am supportive of the bill.
Senator MacDonald: Mr. Tweed, in regard to the service provided by Canada Post to libraries, I am a long-time library user. I still go to the library. I am from a small community where the library is a lifeline to self-improvement through higher knowledge. I am curious, if this service was not provided for these libraries by Canada Post, would they have any alternative? I use interlibrary loans and books are moving around. As someone who has run a small business for years, I look at the numbers, what is spent to move these books and the actual or purported cost of moving the materials around would be of concern to me. Is there a viable situation out there to Canada Post to transfer the materials from one library to another?
Mr. Tweed: I do not think there is. I have never seen anyone come forward with any type of proposal and, again, I do not think the libraries can afford much more.
Senator MacDonald: I know they run on a shoestring; they do.
Mr. Tweed: That was the impetus of my bill. I will be honest with you. I was not a library user to any great degree until I got involved in this. You start to realize the benefit not only to your communities, my communities, but to people having access to it in general. Again, you take a book that is provided in Braille, you take a book that has an audio component, these are things that people in rural Canada do not have access to, but would not have access to anywhere in Canada without the rate. They have told me that straight up.
I note again, this is not trying to limit Canada Post's ability to earn an income, but at the end of day it is income they have never had before and I know that. I am not trying to be flippant when I say that. I would suggest they would lose $1 million in revenue if they did not have the plan.
Senator MacDonald: I will be honest with you. I have more sympathy for the libraries than I have for Canada Post. That is the truth, and I suspect that these potential losses are somewhat skewed perhaps by an unrealistic approach to costing and if there is no alternative, if the only route available to the libraries is to use Canada Post, I certainly fully support the purpose of your bill. Perhaps Canada Post could look toward the top of their pyramid to find the money to pay for this.
Mr. Tweed: Private member's bills, as you know, cannot impose a cost on to the government and there was some concern that this was in an indirect way. We have legal opinions that would suggest it is not and therefore did not need a Royal Recommendation to proceed.
Senator MacDonald: Thank you. That is my only question.
The Chair: You will have the occasion. Canada Post will be here on Tuesday morning and you can ask the same question.
Senator Unger: Thank you for your presentation.
I have a short question, also. Your bill refers to magazines. What types of magazines are intended and are they not- for-profit or for profit?
Mr. Tweed: They are basically every magazine that is available to libraries in Canada. It could be across the spectrum, Maclean's, Time, Newsweek. Many people rely on that for their news source and it is included. Part of why we went to the electronic side of it is because a lot of the magazines are starting to present themselves electronically to the public, as are newspapers and things like that. It was included in the original package and we wanted to expand it because people are getting reading material in many different ways today.
Senator Unger: Magazines like Elle and Vogue?
Mr. Tweed: Anything you can find in libraries is part of the package and has always been. The expansion we have done is to the electronic side with the CD-ROMs, video cassettes, audiovisual materials. That is where the uptake has been seen the most and I suspect Canada Post will tell you that.
Senator Unger: That is the one point I do not particularly like. The rest of it is all great and I support it. Thank you for answering the question.
Senator Housakos: Thank you, Mr. Tweed. It is a very interesting bill you have here. I compliment you on your perseverance on it. One of questions I have is on the reduced rate. Who determines it and how is it determined?
Mr. Tweed: It has been determined since 1939 and has changed very little since that point out of the generosity of Canada Post. They have maintained that rate. I think they see it as a good community service. I think they see it as a positive within the rural communities, but I also understand they have a responsibility to generate revenue. What really got me interested was the fact that I did not want them to have the ability to raise the figure by 100 per cent overnight. I wanted them to have to justify to parliamentarians why this should be imposed on the communities. Where I live, and where a lot of Canadians live, we just do not have the access to the facilities to get the material we need.
Senator Housakos: Can you give an example of the reduced rate? Is it a third, quarter or half of the rate?
Mr. Tweed: I would say it was about 10 per cent.
Senator Housakos: Of what the actual cost would be?
Mr. Tweed: Yes.
Senator Housakos: What would have been the impact if it was double or triple, which would bring it to 30 or 40 per cent of the actual rate? What would be the impact to the coffers of Canada Post and to the users of the service?
Mr. Tweed: My humble opinion is that rural communities under 5,000 people would not use the service because they would not be able to afford it.
Senator Housakos: What is the trend over the last three, five or seven years of the number of people using the service? You mentioned there were 1 million direct users of the service. Are they current figures?
Mr. Tweed: Current?
Senator Housakos: What is the trend?
Mr. Tweed: Librarians tell me that the numbers continue to grow mostly on the electronic side. They are sending out more DVDs and audiovisual materials. Libraries used to transfer materials within their own zone. That has changed not by this bill, but by government. There was some sense it was overused for interlibrary exchange as opposed to going out to the public. That has been changed where they are not allowed to us it as much in that form. However, my rural libraries tell me their numbers continue to grow and I think librarians would say part of it is because of their ability to get a book out of any library in Canada to provide to their community.
Libraries cannot afford to buy these books in rural Canada. They rely on the loan system to get it to the communities.
Senator Merchant: Thank you very much for your bill. I also think it is a good bill, but I come from Saskatchewan. I live in Regina and not in a rural area.
We hear about rural post offices closing. Is it helpful to the communities if there is this extra service that it also keeps their post office going?
Mr. Tweed: I am not sure about that.
Senator Merchant: People worry about losing their post office entirely.
Mr. Tweed: My thoughts on post offices, again, representing a rural community, I often say to people who get rural delivery: Use the post office; use your community. They go into that community every day.
I know it is a very sensitive issue in parts of Canada, but I think that would increase the use of the post office. I have probably 800 rural deliveries and I see most of those people in the community where they could pick up their mail every day. That would benefit Canada Post as opposed to perhaps the Library Book Rate in that sense.
Senator Merchant: It also benefits the community, because people come in and maybe they buy other things while they are there and they talk to each other.
Mr. Tweed: That is why I said that it used to be the grain elevator. You would come in and sell your grain, and go uptown and buy your groceries. Now it is the library, to some degree, and I think that trend will continue. Again, it is more the opportunity for the people I represent to have access to the same types of reading materials as you would in Regina or someone in Ottawa or Montreal, because we can actually go into their library file and order a book. If there is no Canada Post in your community, they will mail it directly to you, which is a real positive for people who are isolated for various reasons.
Senator Merchant: Congratulations.
Mr. Tweed: Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you very much. I would like to remind the audience and members around the table that our next meeting will be on Tuesday morning, April 23. We will hear from Canada Post and from the Canadian Library Association. Depending on the questions and the comments, we will probably proceed to clause-by-clause consideration. We might be able to send this bill back to the Senate as quickly as next Tuesday.
Mr. Tweed: I appreciate that.
The Chair: The good news is that if that happens on Tuesday morning, we will not sit on Wednesday night. I know most of you like to come here on Wednesday night. I am not putting pressure on you to proceed to clause-by-clause on Tuesday morning, but if that happens we will not be sitting next Wednesday.
The following week we will be hearing from Senator Hugh Segal on Radio-Canada International and from Mr. Lacroix, the President of CBC. In the following weeks we will go to our next order of reference, which will be adopted by the Senate in the next few days.
Senator Greene: I am not sure if Senator Segal will come. The CBC person will come.
The Chair: That means we would have only one sitting.
Senator Greene: Yes.
The Chair: If you can inform the clerk, we would give a heads-up to the members so that we can reschedule for future meetings.
Does anyone have anything to add?
Mr. Tweed, carry on with your digital society requirements.
Mr. Tweed: Thank you very much.
(The committee adjourned.)