Part 1 – Leadership, Direction, and the Governance Gap
The Transport Canada briefing binder for Changing Landscape of Truck Drivers in Canada was released this month. I spent my weekend reading it so you don’t have to.
Standing Committees meet to examine issues and make recommendations. Their recommendations are not laws or regulations; they shape direction and priorities that may eventually move through Cabinet and the long painful regulatory process.
The question that keeps resurfacing is simple:
Why does nothing ever change?
If government wanted to make change, it would. Change requires political will. Without it, files stall.
ELDs are a perfect example. They have been mandatory since 2021 and there is still no national ELD interpretation guide. Meanwhile, technology has already moved ahead. AI-enabled driver monitoring, biometric logins, predictive telematics — these tools are evolving faster than policy.
The core issue is not technology. It is leadership and direction.
Since 2019, Canada has had six Transport Ministers. Most did not remain in the role long enough to set or sustain long-term priorities. The Transport portfolio is not typically viewed as a high-profile or politically strategic ministry. It manages every mode — road, rail, air, marine — and much of the work involves responding to crises rather than setting proactive direction.
Ministers rely heavily on the Deputy Minister and public service for continuity. On the road transportation file specifically, regulatory authority flows through the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators (CCMTA), where all provinces and territories shape the Strategic Plan (currently 2024–2027). The collaborative structure makes sense. The logistics is where it falls apart.
Imagine a football team with one head coach, one assistant coach, and thirteen special teams coaches — all calling plays. This is the reality of the CCMTA, 13 provincial and territory representatives plus ten provincial trucking associations and roughly twenty national industry organizations. All of them have different and competing priorities and the CCMTA is expected to bring them all together in agreement under the direction given by Transport Canada. The result is not collaboration; it is diffusion.
Change happens when political will aligns with public pressure.
After Humboldt, there was will. MELT followed.
Now there is pressure around Driver Inc., licence mills, and unsafe carriers. Driver Inc. has its own section in this committee report. Driver Inc is not new — but it is politically relevant again.
Around 2017, carrier operating costs rose sharply while freight rates did not keep pace. One lever available to reduce cost was labour classification. Driver Inc. expanded. Today, with government fiscal pressure mounting, enforcement of Driver Inc solves two problems: tax recovery and targeted safety intervention.
Committee Composition and Industry Knowledge
The Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities includes ten Members of Parliament. Each biography lists “issues raised relating to the Transport Canada portfolio.”
There were 35 issues identified.
They include ports, rail investments, emissions, public transit, marine pollution, aviation delays, climate resilience, and rural connectivity.
None of the listed issues relate directly to road transportation safety.
There is no reference to:
The study is titled Changing Landscape of Truck Drivers in Canada. Yet among the ten committee members, none have direct professional experience in commercial road transportation.
That is not criticism. It is structural observation.
Direction Going Forward
In his opening remarks, Transport Minister Steven MacKinnon identified three priorities:
This summer, Transport Canada hosted a “trucking hackathon.” The outcomes were:
The goals are clear. The question is execution.
Cooperation cannot remain rhetorical. Every ministry, association, and industry body must move from “what should be done” to “what are we doing.”
Fragmented regulation, information silos, and reactive governance will not produce durable change.
If meaningful reform is coming, it will require sustained leadership, someone has to make hard decisions.
