Lloydminster is a city unlike any other in Canada — a true border town straddling the provincial line between Alberta and Saskatchewan. On the surface, it functions as one cohesive community. But dig a little deeper, and you’ll find it’s a city caught in the crosshairs of inter-jurisdictional red tape.
Take, for example, the recent changes around food regulation. For decades, something as simple as a meat processor on the Saskatchewan side couldn’t legally sell its product across the street in Alberta. Thankfully, in November, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency updated its regulations to allow for the free flow of food within Lloydminster city limits. One trade barrier down. Dozens more to go.
Trucking in No-Man’s Land
One of the most significant ongoing challenges in Lloydminster is commercial transportation. Unlike the United States, where motor carriers operate under a single federal system, Canada allows each province to set its own rules. The result? A logistical nightmare for trucking companies that operate in and around Lloydminster.
Alberta allows two types of operating statuses for carriers: provincial and federal. A provincial carrier can only operate within Alberta, but has fewer regulatory burdens — no Electronic Logging Devices (ELDs), longer allowable driving hours, and fewer rest period restrictions. Federally regulated carriers, on the other hand, face tighter rules, including mandatory ELDs and 70-hour driving limits over 7 days.
This discrepancy creates a clear competitive advantage for provincial carriers. To patch the hole, Alberta and Saskatchewan created a policy allowing Alberta provincial carriers to operate on either side of Lloydminster under strict conditions:
"Services received or provided" include fuel, meals, accommodations, vehicle repairs, or loading/unloading — essentially any business activity. The only exemption? If those services are provided wholly within Lloydminster city limits. In other words, you can drive through the Saskatchewan side of town — just don’t buy gas, unload freight, or grab a sandwich.
This isn’t a policy designed to facilitate trade. It’s a policy for the sake of having a policy.
Enforcement is Here (and It’s Getting Expensive)
For years, enforcement of these complicated rules was minimal. But things are changing. Alberta has ramped up commercial vehicle enforcement, and Saskatchewan has responded with its own measures through the Saskatchewan Marshals Service.
The penalties are no joke. Operating without the correct Safety Fitness Certificate (SFC) in Alberta costs $324 — and that’s just the start. Add on the fine for not having an ELD, possible insurance implications, and violations noted on your carrier profile, and suddenly that “quick job” across the border becomes a costly mistake.
One can easily imagine a newly minted enforcement officer, fresh out of training, parking on the wrong side of Highway 17 and racking up ticket after ticket by stopping Alberta-plated trucks on the Saskatchewan side — or vice versa.
A Real Solution: Cooperation, Not Constriction
The current policy doesn’t help carriers, consumers, or the community. What Lloydminster needs is more than a border exemption — it needs true inter-jurisdictional trade cooperation. Alberta and Saskatchewan should work together to create a registrar’s exemption that allows businesses to operate freely and legally on both sides of the border, especially within the unique context of Lloydminster.
Instead, Alberta Transportation continues to take a reactive approach, crafting policies in response to problems instead of proactively solving them. It’s time for Alberta to step up and lead — not leave businesses stranded in a jurisdictional limbo. In an industry where every hour costs money — especially in oil and gas — these policy gaps aren’t just annoying. They’re expensive, inefficient, and completely unnecessary.
Recent US litigation against JB Hunt raises questions about the threshold for effective carrier driver oversight. As part of the lawsuit against the carrier and driver it is alleged the carrier did not effectively monitor the driver or correct the driver’s behaviour and this lack of oversight contributed to the collision. This case underscores the complexities of internal monitoring regulations for commercial carriers, especially in the absence of clear regulatory guidance.
Regulatory Requirements for Carrier Hours of Service Monitoring
The Federal Hours of Service Regulations (SOR/2005-313) impose several key obligations on carriers:
However, these regulations do not define what constitutes adequate monitoring or what corrective actions are necessary for different violation thresholds, leaving significant room for interpretation.
The JB Hunt Case: A Breakdown of the Allegations
In this case, a JB Hunt driver was involved in a fatal collision in the US while allegedly using his phone on a dating app. This was confirmed with driver facing camera data and phone records. Prior to the collision, two incidents within 6 weeks raised concerns about the driver’s behavior:
The issue in the lawsuit is whether the carrier’s failure to address the previous incidents contributed to the driver’s negligence. This raises a larger question: should a single five-second violation trigger disciplinary action by a carrier?
Industry Standards vs. Regulatory Ambiguity
Carriers receive frequent alerts from electronic logging devices (ELDs) and AI-driven cameras for minor infractions 24 hours a day. Without explicit regulatory guidance, it remains unclear how many brief incremental time violations should warrant carrier intervention. Regulators like Transport Canada, the CCMTA, and Alberta Transportation Compliance and Oversight have yet to provide an ELD interpretation guide despite the regulation being in effect for four years.
Key considerations include:
Regulatory Harmonization and Compliance Uncertainty
The lack of clear internal monitoring standards complicates enforcement. The Regulations Amending the Contraventions Regulations (SOR/2023-137) propose a $2,000 penalty per driver for a carrier’s failure to monitor. Yet, without concrete guidance, how can regulators fairly assess compliance?
As Transport Canada and the CCMTA work toward inter-provincial regulation harmonization, cases like JB Hunt’s illustrate the pressing need for explicit internal monitoring directives. Incremental time violations are a fact of life in data rich environments like ELDs and driver facing cameras. Clear regulatory guidance is urgently needed and would benefit carriers by ensuring fair enforcement and reducing liability uncertainties.
Conclusion While the JB Hunt case highlights the potential consequences of inadequate monitoring, it also exposes gaps in regulatory clarity. Carriers need definitive guidance on what constitutes effective driver hour of service oversight to ensure compliance and roadway safety. Until such guidance is provided, industry stakeholders remain in a precarious position—balancing operational feasibility with legal risk in an evolving regulatory landscape.
The Alberta government is once again overreaching enforcement powers.
Recently, the U.S.-Canada border has been making headlines, with American officials blaming Canada’s lax border controls for contributing to the U.S. fentanyl crisis and the influx of migrants without status. In response, Canada pledged $1.3 billion to bolster border security, appointed a Fentanyl Czar along with an accompanying staff, and allocated $5.3 million for two Black Hawk helicopters equipped with advanced surveillance technology. One of these helicopters is already stationed in Alberta and has seen extensive use.
The UCP government, never one to miss an opportunity for more “Made in Alberta” enforcement, has now rolled out the $29-million Interdiction Patrol Team (IPT). For that hefty price tag, Alberta gets 51 uniformed officers armed with carbine rifles, four drug-patrol dogs, 10 support staff, four narcotics analyzers, and surveillance drones. Not to be outdone, my favorite minister, Devin Dreeshen, announced three new highway traffic inspection stations for commercial vehicles, costing taxpayers another $15 million.
These inspection stations, located at the U.S. border, will allow sheriffs to monitor commercial vehicles entering and exiting Canada. Many drug busts start with something as simple as a blown taillight or expired registration—just saying. Truckers, no doubt, would prefer to see that $15 million go toward rest areas and better highway line painting, but this is about generating fine revenue and enforcement statistics, not road or community safety.
The Alberta government has also amended the Critical Infrastructure Defence Regulation, adding a two-kilometer-deep border zone north of the U.S.-Canada border to the definition of essential infrastructure under the Critical Infrastructure Defence Act. This change gives peace officers the authority to arrest individuals for trespassing, interfering with, or damaging essential infrastructure. Sheriffs can now arrest individuals suspected of illegally crossing the border or trafficking drugs and weapons—without needing a warrant. A friendlier way of saying “border wall.”
Adding to this enforcement expansion, the government plans to train highway maintenance workers to identify and report suspicious activity of commercial vehicles. There are 2 significant problems with this plan; first this Government is requiring, as part of their employment, highway workers to become informants for the Sheriffs and IPT, snitches in ditches. Secondly unless the Alberta Government is planning to implement implicit bias and racism training this program will end up being the “driving while brown” hotline.
Racism is deeply embedded in all levels of enforcement across Canada, and commercial vehicle enforcement disproportionately targets South Asian drivers, given their high representation in the trucking industry. Institutional bias ensures that these prejudices persist through training and workplace culture.
Commercial drivers are already under near-constant surveillance—highway cameras, electronic logging devices (ELDs), driver-facing cameras, inspection stations, mobile enforcement units (RCMP, sheriffs, IPT, peace officers, bylaw officers, and city police), and now highway maintenance workers? Yes, drug trafficking and migrants without status are real issues, but cracking down on truck drivers is not the answer.
The real problem lies with trucking company owners and managers who enable this trafficking. If a driver goes off-route for three hours to pick up a load of drugs, someone in the company knows. If a driver did it without approval, the driver would be fired, time is money. GPS and ELDs track every movement, making it easy to pinpoint when and where illicit activity happens. Authorities already know which companies are problematic—those operating as “chameleon carriers,” exploiting work permits, or with prior smuggling violations. The issue isn’t a lack of knowledge but a lack of action by regulators and law enforcement.
This growing wave of enforcement highlights a more disturbing trend—government overreach. Warrantless arrests at the border, civilian informants, drone and helicopter surveillance—where does it end? Alberta already has the Immediate Roadside Sanction (IRS) program, which allows impaired driving charges without a breathalyzer or blood test. Without proper oversight, these powers will inevitably be abused. This is how civil liberties erode, how Charter rights are trampled, and how we edge closer to a 1984 Orwellian reality.
As the first signs of spring emerge, our thoughts turn to highway pavement. Joking, most people don’t think about spring and road bans but, when ruts and potholes destroy your vehicle, you think about it. While they may not be top of mind for everyone, road bans are crucial for preserving infrastructure and preventing costly damage to vehicles and highways.
Why Do Road Bans Exist?
Road bans have been around for as long as roads themselves. In the past, springtime ruts and mud made roads impassable. Today, municipalities formally regulate road bans to protect highways from damage during the thaw cycle. Alberta, thanks to strong infrastructure investments, during the Premier Lougheed era, has an excellent highway system that requires diligent maintenance.
Here’s what happens during the freeze-thaw cycle:
Carrier Responsibilities & Training
Commercial carriers are legally required to train their drivers on weights and dimensions, including seasonal road bans, Alberta Regulation 314/2002 Section 41(1)(h)(i). While MELT (Mandatory Entry-Level Training) includes some instruction on road bans, it is minimal.
For example, MELT Module 6 in Alberta, provides only two and a half hours of classroom legal weights training, with just one and a half pages covering road bans. Compounding the issue, fraudulent licensing schemes in Ontario mean some drivers never received any training at all. The result? A significant number of undertrained drivers coming to destroy a road near you.
Spring Road Training: What Drivers Must Know
A spring road refresher is essential before bans take effect. Drivers must be aware of:
Understanding Road Ban Signs
At intersections of restricted and unrestricted roads, signs display a truck symbol with a percentage below it. This percentage represents the allowable weight on an axle for that road.
Example:
Some exemptions exist for farm commodities and emergencies, but they require permits and approvals from the appropriate authority and highway engineering.
Increased Enforcement & Penalties
Calgary city police have a budget shortfall of 28 million dollars due to the cancellation of the photo speed enforcement on all provincial highways thanks to Minister Dreeshan. Other cities and towns and municipalities are feeling the pinch of lack of funding and reduced revenues. One way to make up these shortfalls is to increase enforcement revenue from other areas and road bans are money makers. Enforcement traps are usually near highways with new restrictions or restrictions that have recently changed. Don’t assume just because it was a 90% ban last year it will be the same this year.
Avoid Costly Fines
Overweight penalties increase exponentially during road ban season. Fines can double compared to the rest of the year, and carriers risk accumulating points on their carrier profiles.
Stay Compliant: Drivers Plan Ahead
By staying informed and proactive, you can avoid hefty fines, protect your vehicles, and help maintain Alberta’s roads for everyone.
Inter-provincial trade limitations have gone viral, touted as a solution to U.S. tariffs. In my last blog, "SESAME STREET TAUGHT US, COOPERATION MAKES IT HAPPEN,'" I explained that the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators (CCMTA) is ultimately responsible for any regulatory changes that effect the trucking industry and inter-provincial trade.
The CCMTA has a long-standing relationship with Transport Canada—dating back to 1947 when Transport Canada granted it authority. The CCMTA is an incorporated body whose membership includes representatives from Canada’s 14 provincial, federal, and territorial governments, each appointed by their respective jurisdictions.
Within the CCMTA, several committees focus on specific issues, including:
These committees establish working groups that seek solutions to pressing issues. The committee level is where the real work happens. The matter of inter-provincial trade barriers will likely fall under Compliance and Regulatory Affairs.
The CCMTA published its 2024–2027 strategic plan before the recent surge in tariff discussions. Given the growing focus on inter-jurisdictional trade, priorities may have shifted. One of the CCMTA’s strategic goals is to develop and maintain Reciprocal Pan-Canadian and International Agreements. The strategic plan includes examining:
Rather than focusing on international agreements, the CCMTA appears to be prioritizing Pan-Canadian agreements—meaning nationwide alignment.
Past Efforts: Heavy Truck Weight and Dimension Limits
In 2019, the Heavy Truck Weight and Dimension Limits for Interprovincial Operations in Canada document was released, based on the Federal-Provincial-Territorial Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on Interprovincial Weights and Dimensions. Between 1991 and 2019, nine amendments were made to accommodate evolving technologies and industry needs, such as:
This is typical of government regulation—reactive rather than proactive. Technological advancements (e.g., electronic logging devices, ELDs) force unprepared regulators to adjust, rather than anticipating and preparing for industry changes. An example is there is still no ELD interpretation guide from the Federal Government or Alberta Transportation and the regulation is 4 years old. The 2019 amendments (Amendment 10) set the vehicle weight and dimension regulations that the trucking industry operates under today.
Canadian Trucking Alliance (CTA) & Trade Barriers
In 2023, the Canadian Trucking Alliance (CTA) released a report titled Interprovincial Trade Barriers in Trucking. The report, based on a survey of CTA members, identified multiple trade barriers, including:
The CCMTA’s strategic plan and the 2025 Regulatory Reconciliation and Cooperation Table (RCT) Workplan align on many of these issues. However, some trade barriers may never be fully resolved, while others require significant federal and provincial collaboration.
Why Is It So Hard to Remove Inter-Provincial Trade Barriers for Trucking?
Simple answer: a lack of leadership and direction.
Transport Canada granted regulatory policy authority to the CCMTA, which consists of 14 representatives—each with different priorities. Achieving consensus takes years of meetings, drafts, and rewrites. Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs) move slowly.
If the federal Transport Minister provided clear directives, stating that inter-provincial trade is Priority #1, the CCMTA and provinces would have to fast-track agreements. Transport Canada may need to act as referee and tie-breaker to push progress forward. More committees, working groups, and studies aren’t the answer—we need decisive action.
Not every jurisdiction will get exactly what it wants, but it’s time to focus on the big picture.
The Root of the Problem: Provincial Control
The weights and dimension 2019 MoU states:
"Under the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding, each of the provinces and territories will permit vehicles which comply with the appropriate weights and dimensions described in the following section to travel on a designated system of highways in their jurisdiction. It should be recognized that each jurisdiction continues to retain authority to allow more liberal weights and dimensions, or different types of vehicle configurations, for trucking operations within their jurisdiction. In addition, for trucking operations which take place between adjacent jurisdictions with compatible weight and dimension regulations which are more liberal than those specified in this document, the local regulations will prevail."
This explains why complete harmonization of regulations has never been achieved—each province and territory maintain authority over its own regulations.
A Call for Action: A Regulatory Reckoning
The transportation industry needs a regulation overhaul, just as it did during deregulation in 1987. If the federal government is serious about removing inter-jurisdictional trade barriers, it should:
The industry doesn’t need more bureaucracy—it needs bold leadership and immediate action to remove the barriers that have stifled trucking progress for decades.
My favorite MAGA hat-wearing minister has issued a call to action to the federal transport minister, urging investment in interprovincial mega-infrastructure projects to keep Canada productive amid an impending tariff war with the United States. Given that his ministry is Transportation and Economic Corridors, it’s worth examining what’s actually being actioned. Historically, the MAGA minister’s focus has been squarely on the economy, often neglecting how transportation itself contributes to economic strength.
Another Bureaucratic Layer Instead of Action
The MAGA minister proposes creating an Economic Corridor Agency to identify and maintain economic corridors across provincial boundaries, with consultations involving Indigenous groups and industry. However, Transport Canada already has mechanisms in place: the Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA), the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators (CCMTA), and the Canadian Transportation Agency (CTA). These organizations have spent decades attempting to align regulations and reduce interprovincial trade barriers. The issue isn’t a lack of agencies—it’s the unwillingness of jurisdictions to uniformly adopt existing regulations.
Rather than creating another layer of bureaucracy, the government should focus on implementing industry-backed solutions. The CCMTA has a strategic plan for 2024-2027 and the CFTA’s Internal Trade Action Plan (ITAP) for 2024-2027 already outlines necessary steps—there’s no need to reinvent the wheel.
The Case of the Disappearing Rest Areas
The MAGA minister calls for increased federal funding for trade-enabling infrastructure such as roads, rail, ports, inland ports, and airports. Notably, the CTA lists lack of rest areas as an inter-provincial trade barrier in trucking. There is an urgent need for more rest areas for commercial drivers, particularly those accommodating long combination vehicles (LCVs).
Yet, in 2022, the UCP government promised 18 new rest areas. Construction was supposed to begin in 2023, and it’s now 2025—yet no new rest areas exist. If the minister is serious about trade-enabling infrastructure, he should take inspiration from Lougheed’s government: build roads, twin highways, and fulfill existing commitments instead of making new ones.
Regulatory Barriers: Overlooked and Unresolved
The MAGA minister also pledges to streamline regulations around trade-related infrastructure and interprovincial commerce, particularly within economic corridors. But Alberta trucking companies still face significant burdens, such as PST compliance when operating in British Columbia and Saskatchewan. This issue should have been addressed under the New West Partnership MoU—why wasn’t it?
Additionally, Alberta’s Ministry of Transportation and Economic Corridors has selectively granted an Electronic Logging Device (ELD) exemption permit to the oilfield industry while neglecting farmers and ranchers. The U.S. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMSCA) recognized this additional burden on farmers and ranchers and wrote an agriculture exemption into its ELD regulation. This MAGA minister only cares about farmers and ranchers during rodeo season. Manitoba offers an ELD exemption by permit to federal carriers with parts of the fleet that remain within the province. Why hasn’t Alberta followed suit? If the minister is serious about regulatory efficiency, these discrepancies need to be addressed.
All Talk No Action The MAGA minister claims Alberta is proactively tackling trade issues by collaborating with Prairie provinces and the North, reducing interprovincial trade barriers, and fostering partnerships with Indigenous groups. However, in the trucking sector, this simply isn’t happening. Clearly this minister should have read the reading materials that came with the job to understand the issues facing trucking. Instead, all his focus has been on economic corridors and this neglect has stifled trucking in Alberta.
Seriously? Canada’s current federal Minister of Transportation has made an announcement that will surely solve everything. The regulations that are often criticized as barriers to trade between Canadian provinces could all crumble within a month, according to federal cabinet minister Anita Anand. Following an announcement at the Port of Halifax on Wednesday, a reporter asked Anand if "interprovincial trade barriers [could] be dealt with, wiped away in 30 days?" "The short answer to your question is yes," responded Anand, the minister of transport and internal trade. Anand suggested her optimism was based on an emergency meeting last week between Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and the premiers. "We are making incredible, fast-paced progress with all of the provinces and territories," she said.
Really? Yes? That's optimistic—considering the government's track record on this very issue.
For decades, provinces have been hindered by barriers that impede interprovincial trade, costing businesses, industries, and, frankly, everyone in the country. The lack of regulatory alignment has been so bad that in 2017, a push was made to start some sort of interprovincial regulatory cooperation. Fast forward eight years and—surprise!—not much has changed. Many provinces, including Alberta, have resorted to adopting memorandums of understanding (MOUs) to handle region-specific issues. An example would be the New West Partnership Trade Agreement (NWPTA), between Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and British Columbia to address regional concerns.
Why is it acceptable for the government to do nothing for eight years without delivering any meaningful action? Accountability is non-existent, and there’s no sense of urgency. But why should we expect any different? Just look to the Electronic Logging Device (ELD) regulations—implemented by the federal government in 2020—and still, no interpretation guide from either the federal or Alberta government. The carrier profile enforcement information data transfer system has been broken since 2019, again, nobody cares.
The idea of harmonizing road transportation regulations is old. In the 1970s, we had the Roads and Transportation Association of Canada (RTAC), which was supposed to make life easier for truckers by aligning weight and dimension regulations. These efforts culminated in the publication of the "Pavement Management Guide" in 1977. In 1988 we tried again with the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on Heavy Vehicle Weights and Dimensions, RTAC the re-mix. This aimed to harmonize truck weight and dimension regulations across Canada. The implementation process faced challenges because of differing regional preferences which are still in place today.
The fact is that Minister Anand’s objectives sound admirable but, there’s a catch. The reality is the federal government doesn’t have the power to fix this. The feds handed control over to the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators (CCMTA), a body that is supposed to facilitate federal regulations for provincial and territorial governments. But here’s the kicker: the federal government only provides a measly $4.44 million to the provinces and territories for road safety and transport-related initiatives. It’s no wonder things haven’t moved an inch.
So, how can Minister Anand’s bold vision become a reality? Is harmonization even possible? The answer is yes—but don’t get too excited. It’s not going to be easy, and some of the regional differences are never going to disappear. Canada’s geography and diverse terrain mean that some differences are simply unavoidable. What’s needed is clear direction from the federal government, telling the CCMTA that aligning regulations is a top priority. The CCMTA needs to step up and get everyone in a room to hash it out. After all, they managed to implement MELT within a year after the Humboldt tragedy—so surely, they can handle something as basic as truck weight and dimension regulations.
But while the feds and the CCMTA fiddle around with their big ideas, Alberta must address some glaring issues themselves. Here are a few suggestions that could make a big difference:
Let’s not forget the issue of consultation with Indigenous communities. Consultation with Indigenous communities must happen when changes to regulations that impact the weights and dimensions allowed on highways that run through traditional territories. The days of Canada just bulldozing the roads through is over, communities must be involved. This is going to be more important as mining and exploration increases in the north. Those projects involve equipment and people that need to get north on limited road infrastructure, not on a 62,500 kg RTAC highway. If these projects do not include Indigenous consultation, you can bet legal action will follow. This can only delay and increase the costs of projects—something Canada can't afford as industries look to expand.
Government uses the word collaboration freely but rarely practices what they preach. In order for Minister Arnad’s wishes to become reality there must be collaboration. Collaboration by the 14 representatives to the CCMTA without ego, avarice, tribalism or elitism. Regulatory alignment is just one of a few issues facing the road transportation industry. Recently the federal government has limited the manufacture of manual transmission models to 10% of their total heavy-duty truck sales. The decision is driven by the need to comply with stricter greenhouse gas (GHG) emission standards. Certain industries require equipment with manual transmissions, and this will drive up the cost for those carriers to configure equipment. These challenges on top of the Carbon Tax increase in April and the upcoming US tariffs are going to make a difficult industry impossible. If the feds and the CCMTA can’t accomplish alignment this time around the industry will remain in its current unstable condition. The only solution is collaboration, we are all Canadian, on our home on native land. Cooperation makes it happen.
In a December 8, 2024, news release, Diane McLeod, Alberta’s Information and Privacy Commissioner, issued a reminder about the importance of transparency in government operations: “Citizens should be able to feel confident that governments will design systems and processes for day-to-day operations that promote transparency of government records.” Caroline Maynard, Information Commissioner of Canada, echoed these sentiments, emphasizing that transparency is fundamental to democratic trust and civic engagement: “By embedding transparency into the very fabric of our public institutions, we not only build trust between Canadians and their governments but also empower citizens to actively participate in the decision-making processes that shape our society. This resolution is a significant step toward ensuring that our public bodies operate with the openness and accountability that Canadians rightfully expect.”
These principles are more than abstract ideals. They should be central to the actions of public institutions, including Alberta Transportation Compliance and Oversight. However, the department’s handling of the Federal Electronic Logging Device (ELD) mandate raises serious questions about its commitment to transparency.
The ELD Mandate Information Hoarding
Alberta Transportation Compliance and Oversight adopted the Federal ELD mandate on June 12, 2021, with enforcement beginning January 1, 2023. This provided an 18.5-month window between adoption and enforcement—ample time to prepare the industry. Yet, during this period, the department failed to provide critical guidance to commercial carriers, specifically safety officers who are required to monitor and verify driver records.
There has been no interpretation guide for the ELD mandate, no policy for required ELD driver monitoring, no educational materials for industry stakeholders, and no transparency regarding violations observed during reviews yet, Alberta Transportation Compliance and Oversight can sure write administrative penalties for these infractions. It is immoral and dishonest to hoard information and then subsequently write tickets because the information was not known. This vacuum of information is particularly egregious given the significant operational changes ELDs already impose on federally regulated commercial carriers.
Instead of fostering compliance through education, Alberta Transportation Compliance and Oversight has focused on enforcement, writing administrative penalties for infractions rooted in ignorance. This approach mirrors the “cash cow” criticisms once levied at the province’s problematic photo radar system, which was ultimately dismantled for being unfair. The question is: How is this any different? When Alberta Transportation Compliance and Oversight adopts a new regulation, it has an obligation to educate stakeholders, not penalize them for a lack of knowledge.
Transparency: A Pillar of Public Trust
The issue at hand underscores why transparency must be a cornerstone of public administration. Government information belongs to the public, and withholding it undermines the relationship between institutions and citizens. Diane McLeod and Caroline Maynard’s calls for embedding transparency in daily operations are especially relevant here.
To that end, Canada’s Information Commissioners and Ombuds have recommended eight key principles for transparency in public institutions:
These principles are essential for fostering a culture of accountability and openness in all levels of government.
The Path Forward for Alberta Transportation Compliance and Oversight
To rebuild trust, Alberta Transportation Compliance and Oversight must shift its focus from enforcement to education. Developing and distributing an ELD interpretation guide, creating clear policies, and providing comprehensive educational resources are urgent priorities. Transparency should no longer be treated as a peripheral concern but as a fundamental aspect of governance.
Furthermore, the department must address systemic issues such as the broken Carrier Profile system and the horrendous TPA program. These tools should serve to enhance safety and compliance, not create additional barriers for measuring accurate commercial carrier safety performance.
Conclusion
Information hoarding by Alberta Transportation Compliance and Oversight runs counter to the democratic principles of openness and accountability. As Information Commissioners McLeod and Maynard highlight, transparency is the foundation of public trust and meaningful civic participation. It is time for Alberta’s transportation authorities to embrace these values fully, ensuring that their systems and policies reflect a genuine commitment to serving the public interest. Governance rooted in openness and education is not only fairer but also more effective.
In recent months, news stories and discussions on Reddit threads, Facebook groups, and industry publications have illuminated a growing crisis within the Canadian transportation industry. The issue is not just about on-road safety or the rate crisis anymore—it's about the financial instability plaguing commercial carriers across Canada and the United States. Every day, companies are declaring bankruptcy, leaving behind millions of dollars in unpaid wages, truck leases, and taxes. Yet, transportation regulations and safety codes often ignore these issues, focusing solely on a carrier’s road performance.
Take, for instance, a house-moving company in southern Alberta that has recently caught the attention of the Alberta Government's Red Tape Reduction department due to allegations of financial mismanagement and incomplete work. Or the case of Pride Group, a major Ontario-based trucking company that recently went bankrupt, leaving behind enormous debts. These are not isolated incidents—they’re part of a growing trend in the transportation industry, and it's time we addressed the broader implications.
The Gap in Transportation Oversight
During my time in public sector investigations, I’ve seen firsthand the fallout from these financial crises. Over the years, I’ve handled countless complaints from employees who were left without wages. Despite these concerns, transportation regulations in Canada, such as the National Safety Code (NSC), don’t include provisions for monitoring a carrier's financial health.
Alberta Transportation & Economic Corridors, Traffic Safety Services Division, Monitoring & Compliance Branch, Investigations & Enforcement Section monitors on-road performance with the non-functional carrier profile system but, there is no obligation to consider over-all carrier health that is not safety related. This leaves a massive gap in regulatory attention. For instance, the house-moving company mentioned earlier currently holds a "Satisfactory" Safety Fitness Certificate (SFC). A citizen conducting due diligence before selecting a carrier may view a Satisfactory rating as including overall performance and compliance to the regulations. However, the reality is that financial instability in transportation companies can lead to deteriorating safety standards. Carriers in financial trouble don’t pay the bills, the drivers, or for expensive truck maintenance. Tires are expensive and if a carrier is at the point of not paying wages or completing work already paid for you know those tires are bald and the ABS light is on.
The Consequences of Ignoring Financial Health
When we overlook the financial well-being of carriers, we're putting more than just paychecks at risk—we're endangering lives. Commercial carriers facing bankruptcy aren’t just skipping wages or taxes; they're skimping on truck repairs, neglecting safety checks, and pushing drivers to operate under less-than-ideal conditions. These are ticking time bombs on our roads, and yet, there is no requirement in Alberta’s Transportation Ministry Business Plan for 2023–2026 to address this issue.
The Alberta Transportation Ministry Business Plan for 2023 – 2026 stated, The ministry ensures a robust legislative and regulatory framework is in place to protect Albertans. Legislation and regulations are reviewed and refreshed to align requirements with emerging transportation related best practices, issues and technologies. The ministry’s focus is on ensuring "a robust legislative and regulatory framework" that protects Albertans, but the framework is incomplete. The National Safety Code and provincial regulations focus solely on road safety and compliance. They ignore critical factors like financial health, which can directly impact safety. Without a complete picture of a company’s stability, it's impossible to truly gauge its ability to operate safely in the long run.
Conclusion: The Need for a New Approach Transportation is a vital part of the economy, and the financial instability of carriers is an issue that can no longer be ignored. To protect both the public and industry workers, regulatory bodies must start evaluating the overall health of carriers. The stakes are too high to focus only on road performance. It’s time for the leadership group of Alberta Transportation & Economic Corridors, Traffic Safety Services Division, to take an interest in the industry they monitor. Read the news, follow some public Facebook groups, get Redditt. It cannot always be about the Economic Corridors part of Transportation and Economic Corridors, transportation needs some attention also.
Commercial trucking insurance is high-stakes gambling. Insurance premiums are the wager—a bet on the fleet, drivers, and safety practices. The insurance company is the "house," accepting that bet in hopes the fleet won’t incur significant claims. But what goes on behind the scenes? How do insurance companies calculate the odds, and what happens if they miscalculate? Here’s a closer look at commercial trucking insurance.
The Gamble: Premiums, Odds, and Actuaries
When setting premium rates, insurance companies rely on actuaries, the industry’s "odds makers." These experts use historical data and risk models to calculate the likelihood of claims. They analyze factors like accident frequency, claim costs, and inflation trends. Setting the minimum premium, or “bet.” Insurance brokers act as intermediaries, like a bookie, between trucking companies and insurers. They earn commissions to facilitate these relationships.
Actuarial calculations are only as reliable as the data they use. If the data is wrong the resulting odds and premiums may misrepresent actual risks. Insurers may overcharge safe trucking companies or undercharge riskier ones. These inaccuracies, if widespread, drive up premiums across the industry. Insurance companies offset losses by charging all policyholders higher rates, ensuring that everyone bears the brunt of miscalculated risks.
Actuaries vs. Underwriters: Understanding Their Roles
While actuaries work with numbers, underwriters assess a company’s specific risk factors. For instance, underwriters examine a trucking company’s Carrier Profile and safety rating. A "Satisfactory" rating typically indicates strong risk management and may lead to lower premiums, whereas a "Conditional" rating suggests potential issues, leading to stricter rates or additional charges. Now is a good time to re-read my blog, Don’t look behind the curtain! unveiling the Alberta Transportation safety scam. Unlike actuaries, underwriters consider a broader range of factors, including safety practices, maintenance programs, and driver qualifications.
Insurance Models in Canada: Public, Private, and Self-Insured
In Canada, insurance systems vary by province, with three main models: public (government-managed), private, and self-insured.
Captive insurance can be structured as either "pure" captives for individual companies or "group" captives that pool resources across multiple companies, sharing risks and lowering costs. Captives can offer cost control, customized coverage, and better claims management—attractive benefits for companies looking to optimize their insurance options. Now think of a group of “chameleon carriers” getting together to self-insure, no risk there.
Limiting Liability: Knowing Your Policy and Exclusions
Understanding your policy and identifying gaps in your safety and maintenance program is of the upmost importance. These gaps could be used against you when approving or denying claims. Insurance companies may scrutinize records during an incident review especially if the carrier has a black swan event. Insurance companies are looking for evidence to limit liability, looking for reasons to minimize claim payouts. Key areas for attention include:
Complete and accurate documentation can be the difference between an insurance payout or a hefty company expense. For example, if a wheel flies off the carrier needs to be able to show regular inspections and re-torques.
In commercial trucking insurance, exclusions refer to specific situations, events, or types of damages that the insurance policy will not cover. These exclusions are important to understand, as they indicate which risks and scenarios the carrier will be financially responsible for if they occur. If you smash up your vehicle while driving impaired the insurance company doesn’t pay for a new car.
Common exclusions often include:
Final Thoughts: Navigating the Insurance Gamble
The relationship between trucking companies and insurers is an intricate blend of risk, probability, and strategic management. With proactive documentation, a comprehensive safety program, and a thorough understanding of policy limits, companies can make the most of their insurance—and minimize surprises when they need it most. Lack of reliable regulatory oversight from federal and provincial governments has resulted in inaccurate carrier information, allowing trucking companies on the road that do not meet safety standards. Two things will happen, insurance companies will put pressure on regulators to do their jobs, or insurance companies will have to do enhanced compliance reviews before insuring a carrier. Insurance companies cannot use inaccurate carrier profile information and bogus TPA (third party auditors) audits anymore to determine risk.
