XML 62 R34.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.8.0.1
Financial Instruments
12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2017
Text block1 [abstract]  
Financial Instruments

27. Financial Instruments

Credit risk

Credit risk is the risk of financial loss to the Company if a counterparty to a financial instrument fails to meet its contractual obligation. Financial instruments that subject the Company to credit risk consist primarily of cash and cash equivalents, cash in escrow, trade and other receivables, investments held for self-insured liabilities, holdbacks on long-term contracts, and indemnifications.

The Company’s maximum amount of credit risk exposure is limited to the carrying amount of these financial instruments, which at December 31, 2017, was $1,252.6 (2016 – $1,203.5).

The Company limits its exposure to credit risk by placing its cash and cash equivalents in high-quality credit institutions. Investments held for self-insured liabilities include corporate bonds, equity securities, and term deposits. The Company believes the risk associated with corporate bonds, equity securities, and term deposits is mitigated by the overall quality and mix of the Company’s investment portfolio.

The Company mitigates the risk associated with trade and other receivables and holdbacks on long-term contracts by providing services to diverse clients in various industries and sectors of the economy. The Company does not concentrate its credit risk in any particular client, industry, or economic or geographic sector. In addition, management reviews trade and other receivables past due on an ongoing basis to identify matters that could potentially delay the collection of funds at an early stage. The Company monitors trade receivables to an internal target of days of revenue in trade receivables, which, at December 31, 2017, was 55 days (2016 – 57 days).

 

Liquidity risk

Liquidity risk is the risk that the Company will not be able to meet obligations associated with its financial liabilities as they fall due. The Company meets its liquidity needs through a variety of sources, including cash generated from operations, long- and short-term borrowings from its $800.0 revolving credit facility and term loan, and the issuance of common shares. The unused capacity of the revolving credit facility at December 31, 2017, was $538.3 (2016 – $329.2). The Company believes that it has sufficient resources to meet obligations associated with its financial liabilities. Liquidity risk is managed according to the Company’s internal guideline of maintaining a net debt to EBITDA ratio of less than 2.5 as defined in note 28.

The timing of undiscounted cash outflows relating to financial liabilities is outlined in the table below:

 

     

Total

$

     Less than 1 Year
$
     1 to 3 Years
$
     After 3 Years
$
 

December 31, 2017

           

Trade and other payables

     704.6        704.6        -        -  

Long-term debt

     740.8        198.4        541.4        1.0  

Other financial liabilities

     10.9        1.8        7.5        1.6  
         

Total contractual obligations

     1,456.3        904.8        548.9        2.6  

December 31, 2016

           

Trade and other payables

     718.1        718.1        -        -  

Long-term debt

     1,023.0        92.4        929.5        1.1  

Other financial liabilities

     10.0        2.4        7.6        -  
         

Total contractual obligations

     1,751.1        812.9        937.1        1.1  

In addition to the financial liabilities listed in the table, the Company will pay interest on the revolving credit facility and the term loan outstanding in future periods. Further information on long-term debt is included in note 18.

Interest rate risk

Interest rate risk is the risk that the fair value of the future cash flows of a financial instrument will fluctuate because of changes in market interest rates. The Company is subject to interest rate cash flow risk to the extent that its revolving credit facility and term loan are based on floating interest rates. The Company is also subject to interest rate pricing risk to the extent that its investments held for self-insured liabilities include fixed-rate government and corporate bonds and term deposits.

If the interest rate on the Company’s revolving credit facility and term loan balances at December 31, 2017, was 0.5% higher, with all other variables held constant, net income would have decreased by $2.5. If it was 0.5% lower, an equal and opposite impact on net income would have occurred.

Foreign exchange risk

Foreign exchange risk is the risk that the fair value of the future cash flows of a financial instrument will fluctuate because of changes in foreign exchange rates. Foreign exchange gains or losses in net income arise on the translation of foreign currency–denominated assets and liabilities (such as trade and other receivables, trade and other payables, and long-term debt) held in the Company’s Canadian operations and foreign subsidiaries. The Company minimizes its exposure to foreign exchange fluctuations on these items by matching foreign currency assets with foreign currency liabilities.

If exchange rates were 1.0% lower at December 31, 2017, with all other variables held constant, net income would have increased by less than $0.2. If they were 1.0% higher, an equal and opposite impact on net income would have occurred.

 

Foreign exchange fluctuations may also arise on the translation of the Company’s US-based subsidiaries or other foreign subsidiaries, where the functional currency is different from the Canadian dollar, and are recorded in other comprehensive income (loss). The Company does not hedge for this foreign exchange risk.

Price risk

The Company’s investments held for self-insured liabilities are exposed to price risk arising from changes in the market values of the equity securities. This risk is mitigated because the portfolio of equity funds is monitored regularly and is appropriately diversified.

A 1.0% increase in equity prices at December 31, 2017, would have increased the Company’s comprehensive income by $0.4. A 1.0% decrease would have had an equal and opposite impact on comprehensive income.