Construction company, province duke it out before trade panel

Contractor says it was forced to follow tougher rules than local rivals; province denies that, says its concerns were about safety

Article content An Ontario construction company that was kicked off several big projects in New Brunswick took its fight with the province to a new level this week, airing its grievances before an internal trade panel. Julmac Contracting Limited had been awarded contracts for refurbishment work on Miramichi’s Centennial and Anderson bridges, and on the Mactaquac Dam crossing. The Centennial Bridge contract, according to court filings, was for $16.2 million.

The Anderson Bridge contract was for $15.6 million, and the Mactaquac work was for $17.7 million. But last year, the province issued Julmac with “removal” notices for the three projects, effectively forcing the company to stop work and leave. This week, the fight has been playing out in front of a three-person federal trade panel.

The company says the province discriminated against it by forcing it to follow tougher rules than it sets for local companies, and “nitpicking” it “to the extreme” because it’s an out-of-province operator. The province’s actions violated the Canadian Free Trade Agreement, Julmac alleged. The province denies this, and says any extra scrutiny placed on Julmac was because of safety concerns over the work being done.

On Friday, the two sides made their final pitches to the three-person panel, which reserved its decision. No financial compensation will be awarded, but the sides argued about who should pay legal costs. At one point, government lawyer Mark Heighton told the panel that Julmac’s claim of discrimination or unfair treatment didn’t stand up to any scrutiny, particularly in light of testimony from several witnesses called earlier in the week.

“What you have before you are hard-working DTI (Department of Transportation and Infrastructure) employees, external consultants, people who are just trying to do their best, trying to do their job to build infrastructure in this province,” Heighton said. “None of those individuals are discriminating against out-of-province contractors. All of them have told you that explicitly in their witness statements.

They are required to make difficult decisions based off of difficult criteria, and they are doing their best to ensure that that decision-making is uniform, because their overall objective is to ensure that things are done safely.” Wrapping up, Heighton said: “I would suggest that after a review of that extensive evidence, there is no other conclusion that you could reach other than the province did not breach the agreement.” Shalom Cumbo-Steinmetz provided most of the closing arguments for Julmac, and he categorically rejected the province’s claim that the company wasn’t discriminated against.

“The evidence before you is that on many of these contracts, Julmac was the only contractor that even bid on the work,” Cumbo-Steinmetz said. “Julmac is clearly the contractor with the greatest capacity and experience to do this work. “At one point, it was doing the majority of the work in the province.

It is clearly an integral player in the market, and what’s before you is a complete removal of that player from the market.” He later added: “Julmac is asking for directions that will have a material effect on New Brunswick’s conduct going forward in supporting its promise under the CFTA to eliminate and reduce barriers to trade.”