Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Transport and Communications
Issue 16 - Evidence, June 17, 2015
OTTAWA, Wednesday, June 17, 2015
The Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications, to which were referred Bill C-52, An Act to amend the Canada Transportation Act and the Railway Safety Act; and Bill C-627, An Act to amend the Railway Safety Act (safety of persons and property), met this day at 6:45 p.m. to give clause-by-clause consideration to the bills.
Senator Dennis Dawson (Chair) in the chair.
[English]
The Chair: Today we are scheduled to proceed to clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-52, An Act to amend the Canada Transportation Act and the Railway Safety Act.
As you know, we have witnesses here from Transport Canada: Alain Langlois, General Counsel and Associate Head; Brigitte Diogo, Director General, Rail Safety; Benoît Turcotte, Director, Regulatory Affairs; Lenore Duff, Director General, Surface Transportation Policy; and Natalie Dolan, Manager/Senior Policy Advisor.
If it's agreed, we'll proceed to clause-by-clause consideration, using a certain grouping of clauses.
Senator Eggleton: May I comment before you go to clause-by-clause consideration?
The Chair: Sure, no problem.
Senator Eggleton: Mr. Chair, I appreciated the concerns addressed by the minister at our meeting yesterday morning. At the same time, there needs to be a continual focus on providing the resources needed to make sure that there is rail safety. This bill is a move in the right direction. It sets up the liability for the companies that transport goods. In particular, we're looking at the crude oil situation, but of course we need to see it move into other areas as well. The minister and officials indicated that they were seized with that and were attempting to move that along. I understand that ethanol will be the next one dealt with in that context.
You can set these liability standards, ask for these amounts of insurance and set up this fund. But it's most important to prevent these things from happening in the first place. When the Auditor General says there isn't enough inspection being done, inspectors are not properly trained and there's inadequacy in how the safety audits are carried out, it's worrisome. The move to increase the number of inspectors is minor, from 21 to 22. Nevertheless, we can hope that it will ensure a greater amount of safety, but they should well be considering more than that. That's where this will stand or fall in the implementation of safety.
With those comments, I will support the bill.
The Chair: Thank you, Senator Eggleton. As you know, at third reading you can address some of those issues again in the Senate.
Senator Plett, do you have a comment?
Senator Plett: I have a comment only because Senator Eggleton felt the need to put something on the record, because clearly, as he says, he's supporting the bill. We're going to go to clause-by-clause consideration and it will pass. Then tomorrow, he will address those same concerns again in the chamber and he will again support the bill and it will pass.
He wanted to get his shot in at the government, so I will at least say that the minister was quite clear in that we are adding inspectors and clearly adding larger insurance levels. We all know that premiums are based on safety records, and when you have to all of a sudden carry $1 billion in insurance or over $0.5 billion, we know that with that will come clearly an effort to be safer because nobody wants to have those claims. Nobody wants to have a Lac-Mégantic again. That is what initiated a lot of this.
The bill allows the minister and inspectors more leeway in proactively correcting issues and that will speak to safety. I at least want to say that I believe the government has been very proactive in putting safety at the top of its agenda and this is just another step in doing that.
Having said that, I will support the bill.
The Chair: That being said, I guess the same applies. I'm sure we'll be hearing you at third reading either tomorrow or next week or at the beginning of July.
Shall the title stand postponed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clause 1, which contains the short title, stand postponed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clause 2 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clause 3 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clause 4 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clauses 5 to 7 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clauses 8 to 10 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clauses 11 to 13 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clauses 14 to 16 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clauses 17 to 39 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clause 40 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall the schedule carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Are there any new clauses?
Hon. Senators: No.
The Chair: Shall clause 1 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall the short title carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall the bill carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Does the committee wish to consider appending observations other than the speeches you will be making tomorrow or next week?
Senator Eggleton: I was tempted to, but I will take the minister's word on the areas that she will follow up on.
The Chair: Does everyone agree that I shall report the bill to the Senate, and I will ask permission for them to proceed the same day?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Unless you really want to come back in July.
Senator Eggleton: I'm okay with proceeding the same day.
The Chair: Honourable senators, we will now proceed to clause by clause. The witnesses are not allowed to comment on the following bill because it's a private member's bill and they have no opinion on it.
If you agree, I will free the witnesses to go downstairs to a reception for the Canadian Brewer's Association.
Senator Eggleton: Can I ask a question? They should be able to answer this, because the sponsor of the bill said that this bill was addressing a gap. I'm not going to ask you to comment on whether there is a gap, but she said that there was some sort of an effort — meeting or whatever — to make sure it dovetailed with everything else and that there aren't unintended consequences or anything in Bill C-627 that would conflict with the other legislation the government has or that was just adopted or whatever. Can you confirm that?
Alain Langlois, General Counsel and Associate Head, Transport Canada: I'm not aware of a meeting, but we have reviewed the legislation and provided comments to the department. I understand there was communication to ensure that the bill was consistent and did not create unintended consequences with one another. I don't believe the bill does.
That's as far as I'm going to go.
Senator Eggleton: Okay. I just wanted to put that on the record.
[Translation]
The Chair: I wish you a good evening, and I thank you very much for being here. Had we had problems, you would have been there to help us.
[English]
Honourable senators, we will now proceed to clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-627, an Act to amend the Railway Safety Act (safety of persons and property).
Is it agreed that we proceed to clause-by-clause consideration?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
Senator Eggleton: I'm going to support this, as well, although I'm not totally convinced that it's necessary. There is a case that can be made for redundancy in it. I think the member had a particular interest in ensuring that this kind of a bill was put in place so she could tell her constituents that she had moved on this effort.
I think we could support it.
The Chair: I would imagine, Senator Plett, that you would like to add a few words.
Senator Plett: Again, I appreciate Senator Eggleton's comments. I'm going to make a note that if we want Senator Eggleton's support after we come back — whenever we come back — that we will make sure that we will try to bring bills in at the end of the session, because it's a pleasure to work with him a few days before we rise.
The Chair: Is it agreed that we proceed to clause by clause?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall the title stand postponed?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clause 1 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clause 2 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clause 3 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall clause 4 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Are there any new clauses?
Hon. Senators: No.
The Chair: Shall clause 1 carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall the title carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Shall the bill carry?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Does the committee wish to consider appending observations?
Hon. Senators: No.
The Chair: Shall I report the bill to the Senate as quickly as possible?
Hon. Senators: Yes.
The Chair: Thank you, honourable senators.
We will now proceed in camera to discuss CBC reports.
(The committee continued in camera.)