Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Transport and Communications
Issue No. 21 - Evidence - September 19, 2017
OTTAWA, Tuesday, September 19, 2017
The Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications met this day at 9:30 a.m., in public and in camera, to continue its study on the regulatory and technical issues related to the deployment of connected and automated vehicles, and to consider a draft agenda (future business).
Senator Dennis Dawson (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Honourable senators, welcome back. I hope you had a great summer vacation. This morning, the committee is continuing its study on connected and automated vehicles.
[English]
I'm pleased to introduce our panel of witnesses: Mr. Patrick Leclerc, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Canadian Urban Transit Association; and Dominique Lemay, Chief Executive Officer of Transdev Canada.
[Translation]
Thank you both. I will first give the floor to Mr. Leclerc.
Patrick Leclerc, President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Urban Transit Association: Mr. Chair, honourable senators, first, I would like to thank the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications for this opportunity to address technical and regulatory issues related to the emergence of connected and automated vehicles. I am Patrick Leclerc, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Canadian Urban Transit Association, commonly known as CUTA. Your study is of vital importance, with the Canadian government launching an investment plan in urban transport infrastructure on a scale never seen before. Indeed, the government has announced direct investments of nearly $30 billion in the public transportation sector over the next decade.
[English]
These investments will completely transform our communities for generations to come. The end goal, as we like to say, is not to build public transit; it's to build sustainable communities. To that end, public transit is the cornerstone around which active transportation and shared mobility form a vast network of efficient and sustainable mobility options.
The Canadian Urban Transit Association has been exploring the impact of autonomous vehicles for several years already. If deployed right, AVs will greatly contribute to improving mobility across the country. However, they can also have negative effects if we approach them as the silver bullet that will fix all urban mobility challenges.
[Translation]
But let's start with the positive side. We believe that the advent of autonomous vehicles is a great opportunity to improve and complement the public transit service offerings, most notably where mass transit is not optimal — in low- density or low-demand areas. In those cases, small autonomous vehicles would transport residents, on demand or on a fixed schedule, to a fast and efficient public transit hub. Such an approach will make the system more efficient and optimize the use of resources.
[English]
Here is what is missing from the AV debate so far. Remember I said that the end goal is not to build transit; it's to build sustainable communities. The same goes here. The goal is not to deploy AVs; it is to use AVs in a way that will improve our transportation networks and lead to sustainable community building.
If we focus the development and deployment of AVs mainly for private use or to serve the purpose of moving one or two people at a time, just like the taxi industry does, then we will definitely miss the sustainability objective.
Turning our personal vehicles into autonomous vehicles will not address one of the major issues we are facing in cities, namely, scarce urban space. An autonomous car with one person on board doesn't take less urban space than a traditional vehicle with a driver. The issue of traffic congestion, road capacity and bottlenecks will remain the same.
While some say that autonomous cars will reduce traffic congestion by increasing the efficiency of traffic flow, several studies indicate that AVs will actually increase overall day-long traffic; for instance, if they return home to spare parking or if they go and pick up other passengers. This would create a new type of traffic called zero occupancy vehicles. In such cases, vehicle kilometres travelled and two-way traffic will actually increase.
Which brings us to the sustainability element. Currently most discussions and analyses around environmental sustainability are focused on GHG emissions and climate change. However, to assess the overall environmental impact of electric autonomous vehicles, we need to perform a complete environmental life cycle assessment.
Autonomous cars basically are computers on wheels. They don't have much in common with traditional cars as we know them. Think of the life expectancy of your smartphone and imagine what it means for an autonomous vehicle.
In a report published by Goldman Sachs earlier this year entitled "Rethinking Mobility,'' the authors mention that a private autonomous car would cost about $50,000. However, the life expectancy of the vehicle — still according to the report — would only be three years, with zero residual value after the three years.
When we know the amount of non-renewable minerals required in the production of a computer, it's hard to imagine how private autonomous cars could increase the environmental sustainability of the auto sector.
[Translation]
In conclusion, the federal government must show leadership and capitalize on its many programs to support demonstration projects of autonomous public transit vehicles. Finally, the government should work with the provinces to make sure that regulations governing the use of autonomous vehicles are harmonized across the country and take into account the realities of public transit systems.
The Chair: Mr. Lemay, the floor is yours.
Dominique Lemay, Chief Executive Officer, Transdev Canada: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Honourable senators, thank you for having invited us here today as part of your study on the deployment of automated vehicles. I am Dominique Lemay, CEO of Transdev Canada. I am pleased to have the opportunity to meet with you this morning to talk to you about automated vehicles, particularly as they relate to your work on public transit.
I would like to begin by giving an overview of Transdev in Canada. Transdev, a multinational corporation established in France in 1954, is a world leader in the field of passenger mobility. It has a presence in 19 countries, in 4 geographic zones. It has 83,000 employees and generates roughly CAN$10 billion in business. We operate any number of people-moving systems, including bike-sharing, regional trains, light rail transit (LRT) systems, subways, buses, ferries, and application development for travel planning.
Transdev designs, implements and operates different means of transportation that combine various modes of transport and link them with services that make travellers' daily lives easier. Through its direct operations and the operations of its 83,000 employees, Transdev is responsible for 43,000 vehicles. Therefore, the deployment of automated vehicles has a major impact on an organization like ours by helping us ensure that passenger mobility can be used to leverage quality of life and land development.
As the public transportation industry is constantly being called upon to innovate in how it offers mobility services, Transdev has invested considerably in ensuring that it is always on the cutting edge of opportunities to innovate. We are convinced that the mobility of the future will be personalized, autonomous, connected and electric, and we are taking advantage of the digital revolution to develop and offer our users a travel experience that is simpler, smoother and less expensive.
Transdev has many subsidiaries around the world and has been operating in Canada for a number of years. It has made a number of acquisitions in recent years, mostly in the eastern part of the country. In Quebec, the Transdev team has nearly 1,000 employees operating 550 vehicles, and providing more than 700,000 hours of service in more than 100 municipalities. In York, Ontario, Transdev Canada operates more than 130 vehicles — soon to be 160 — with a team of over 300 employees. It is clear that we have had significant involvement in innovation in the York region. In Alberta, Transdev Canada provides expertise through its management team, which is working on extending the light rail transit system, the Valley Line, an addition to its already impressive rail network in Edmonton.
Transdev brings together the expertise of its international team whose mission is to develop passenger mobility through autonomous public transit vehicles. Canada is no exception. We had an opportunity last May to introduce the vehicle in a real-life situation in the greater Montreal area. This type of shuttle is not intended to replace the current public transit system, but rather to provide new opportunities to serve communities. Setting up autonomous shuttles would mean that busier areas of a community could be better served. The shuttles could be used in less accessible areas with so-called regular transportation, or could be an interesting alternative to creating a set route for quieter areas that still need services, such as suburbs.
We gave a four-day demonstration at the Olympic Park and did a three-day trial run at the Global Public Transport Summit in Montreal, hosted by the Union internationale des transports publics, and we will be in New York next November. The different demonstrations that we have given have accurately modeled the potential that mobility technologies have for Transdev projects in Canada.
I want to specify that Transdev Canada is not a manufacturer, but rather a mobility operator. The transport and communications committee, of which you are members, is studying the regulatory and technical issues related to the deployment of connected and automated vehicles. In fact, these types of buses are being used in public transit systems in Switzerland and France, and will soon be used in the United States. For the time being, this is a controlled environment. We are not talking about street travel with traffic and pedestrians, but rather travel in controlled environments. In the United States, trials will soon be done in an urban environment, but that environment will be restricted and controlled. We believe it is important to ensure that these vehicles can be deployed in Canada, and to do so, we will need support.
The key to understanding this technology will always be to see it in action. Thanks to a demonstration of an autonomous shuttle on Parliament Hill, you will be able to examine the readiness of this new technology and assess its potential uses and impacts in Canadian communities. The proposed route is a loop around Parliament Hill, going by East Block, Centre Block, West Block and the Centennial Flame. The autonomous shuttle will be operating in a true- to-life situation, with pedestrians and vehicles crossing its path along the route, but that will still be a controlled environment compared to the streets. Transdev Canada, a member of the Canadian Urban Transit Association, will present its autonomous vehicle tomorrow morning, September 20. The demonstration will begin at 9:30 a.m. with a private test session of about one hour for the Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications.
There is no doubt that Canada is truly a promising market for Transdev. The Canadian division is known for its dynamism. The development opportunities and prospects are like the size of the country: massive.
Honourable senators, members of the committee, thank you for your attention. I would be pleased to answer your questions.
The Chair: Thank you.
Senator Boisvenu: Thank you very much for your presentation, which I found very informative and encouraging. A few of my questions have to do with the adaptability of those new technologies to our infrastructure, which is outdated in some respects. There is a reason the government is investing billions of dollars in that industry.
My second concern has to do with our climate. For nearly six months of the year, our roads are almost invisible, unless they are maintained using salt and gravel. So how will these technologies deal with those elements without reducing safety?
Mr. Leclerc: As far as infrastructure goes, we know that the federal government is making unprecedented investments — $30 billion — in public transit infrastructure. Public transit investments in future infrastructure are of the utmost importance. The government often asks us how we can plan without knowing what the urban mobility sector will look like in 2030. That is a challenge. That is why we have been working on autonomous vehicles since 2012.
When it comes to infrastructure, the first trials will be done in controlled environments. Afterwards, we can imagine a rapid bus system — such as the Transit Way, here in Ottawa — in a completely controlled environment. In that case, we can imagine that the development will be done, as there are already investments in the area. So we have to think in terms of that perspective.
You are absolutely right about the climate. There has been a lot of conversation about the deployment of electric buses. Two years ago, everyone was wondering whether it was possible for them to travel in a cold climate. The City of Edmonton will buy 40 electric buses this year, and we can say that Edmonton's climate is not very mild in winter. The technology is evolving extremely quickly, and I assume that will be the case for autonomous vehicles.
Mr. Lemay: When it comes to infrastructure, the current design of autonomous vehicles makes it possible to integrate all the equipment into the vehicles. So no additional infrastructure is required.
There are six levels of automation. They range from zero to five, with zero being the traditional vehicle or bus, and five being a fully autonomous vehicle under all conditions. Technological development between 2009 and today has reached level four. At that level, we have autonomy, but not under all conditions — only under specific conditions. Only some companies, such as Google, have reached level four. Nearly all automobile manufacturers are trying to reach that objective. That's also the case for buses.
The vehicle that will be used for the demonstration tomorrow is at level three. So a driver will be on board to provide assistance in case of an emergency. The next generation of autonomous buses that will arrive on the market will not have a driver. The buses will be linked to a control centre. In terms of infrastructure, the vehicle you will be able to test or try out tomorrow arrived here on Sunday evening or yesterday morning. It travelled the route, recorded the route data, and is operational. There is no equipment to install. When it comes to specific infrastructure, once we want to reach level five of automation — full autonomy under all conditions — perhaps some infrastructure will have to be installed in cities to enable the vehicles to communicate with the equipment that could provide information on routes. We are not there yet.
When it comes to safety on an international level, about 1,000 deaths are caused by automobiles daily. This is the era of autonomous vehicles entering the market. When something happens around the world, it's normal, we hear about it.
Autonomous vehicles are equipped with multiple lasers, detection systems, cameras and a computer. They will also be able to communicate with a control centre, with other vehicles, with other equipment. Safety is very much ensured. The vehicle you will try tomorrow has a laser on the roof, which makes it possible to see as far as 200 metres away. A camera is located on the front that helps assess what is happening in the vehicle's proximity. There is a laser in the front and in the rear, with 16 layers, that makes it possible to see obstacles or see whether anything is moving. In addition, 30 centimeters from the ground is a laser that scans the area in the vehicle's 40-metre radius to detect any obstacles or any moving objects around the vehicle.
So, in terms of safety, as soon as a problem is detected, the vehicles slow down or even stop, and that is why they must currently be used in a controlled environment, since they would always be slowed down or stopped on busy roads.
The system provides unprecedented and unparalleled safety with vehicles. It is difficult to predict a human's behaviour. A machine has communication parameters. That will be much easier and safer. It is clear that autonomous vehicles will help save lives. We will have to go through a transition, through a period of adaptation. To use autonomous vehicles to their full potential on the roads, other vehicles will also have to be equipped, they will have to be connected to be able to share information and help autonomous vehicles operate properly.
Senator Boisvenu: In your presentation, you talked about the accessibility of those new technologies. People in urban centres will benefit from economies of scale through public transit. Canada is a very large country, and we don't want to deplete the regions. People want to stay in the regions. How could remote regions have access to those technologies, given that public transit services are virtually non-existent there? The acquisition cost is $50,000 per vehicle, while a gasoline vehicle can cost less than $10,000. Will people in the regions be penalized in terms of accessibility to those new technologies?
Mr. Lemay: I don't think so. The cost is $50,000 for new products. If we compare them with other technology elements arriving on the market, such as flat-screen televisions —
Senator Boisvenu: We are talking about accessibility in 20, 30 years, but in the short term, won't those people be penalized? Won't urban centres be benefitting from all this?
Mr. Lemay: There are two things to consider. First, for individual vehicles such as solo cars, the product will be clearly expensive from the outset, thereby more inconvenient to buy. At the same time, it's the time we have to prepare for mass transit. Mass transit is a societal advance. The equipment may also be a bit more expensive at the outset, but the companies that prepare those vehicles are targeting markets that are new at the moment.
If we are not ready for independent mobility using public transit, there will be solo vehicles. However, solo vehicles will create new markets and this will contribute to an increase in the number of cars. That's the reality. If you look at the new video from Google announcing cars, you will see that the target populations are those with mobility impairments and children. We put our children into the vehicle to get to their soccer game, and so on. Among the targeted populations are also the elderly, especially those who no longer have the ability to drive, but who can still get around. They will want to acquire an autonomous vehicle to be able to move around. My father had that experience. At 85, he had to stop driving. He is now 91 years old and might still be able to get around with an autonomous vehicle. Those targeted markets will create an increase in the number of cars.
In terms of transportation and mobility, we have to be prepared. The cost may be absorbed by the company, and the price of the vehicles will drop rapidly. Now is the time to get organized, even for remote communities. We have to ask ourselves if we can get a kind of autonomous shuttle that drives around our areas and that can be called on demand to pick up people and move them around. This would prevent a third car from being parked at the entrance of residences in the suburbs, for example. Do we need a third vehicle at the door that will drive on the highway and contribute to traffic congestion? It is clear that the solo car will be more expensive initially, like any new technology. However, as far as mass transit is concerned, I think we will have effective solutions quickly.
Senator Boisvenu: Thank you.
The Chair: I have a very long list of senators who want to ask questions. Please be brief and respond more succinctly.
[English]
Senator Bovey: Thank you very much. This is a topic of great interest to me. I liked your phrase that we are building sustainable communities and improving transportation networks.
My question is simple. I am just back from France, and I understand that Transdev is involved in a number of pilot projects in France and the first commercial driverless service.
Having been in a van with some of our colleagues driving down the highways in France — which were very full, very short distances from vehicle to vehicle, motorcyclists driving down the white line, and you can imagine that the hair was standing on the back of our necks, everyone in the car — how does the commercial driverless service fit into that equation? I gather the speed limit is 130 kilometres unless the roads are wet, and then it is 110 kilometres — a situation that is quite different from here in Canada. I found myself in that van thinking: How on earth would a convoy of driverless trucks work?
Mr. Lemay: We are not into that autonomous vehicle. First, we will have the use of autonomous buses and shuttles in small, controlled environments. Then it will be in cities at lower speeds. Technology will probably bring us, a year from now, to high speeds on highways, but we are not there and we are not working on that. We can do research and bring more information, but we are not looking at convoys of buses with people on high-speed highways.
Senator Bovey: What are the pilot projects you are doing, then, involving the commercial driverless services?
Mr. Lemay: They are all in denser urban areas and more controlled areas. We will have one starting in the United States — the announcement will be made in a few weeks — that will be in a private, fenced neighbourhood, the way it is in the United States. The vehicles will bring people from their homes to the heavy public transportation systems, but not to their final destination. They will be used more as feeders to big networks but in an urban environment, or it could also be a small neighbourhood .
Senator Bovey: I was confused by that phraseology. Thank you.
Senator Griffin: I have a couple of quick questions. First, you mentioned the importance of working with the provinces to make the proper regulations. Have you, or the organization, done any consultation with the provinces?
Mr. Leclerc: CUTA has about seven provinces that are members of the organization. We do have these discussions, one of which is watching what is happening in the U.S. and in Canada. We work closely with Transport Canada on what the regulations will look like. The challenge here is that when you deploy public transit or shuttles, it is local in nature, and in some cases using routes that may be provincially regulated or linked directly to the city. Then you have the regulatory environment in Canada.
If we want to attract investors and deploy that technology, we have to ensure that we have something that is harmonized right across the board, and we are not necessarily seeing that dialogue happening. Right now, Ontario is the only province that has allowed an autonomous vehicle to drive there. What about the other provinces? How can we have pilot projects taking place in different types of environments? If we want to test it in Edmonton, we need to ensure the regulations are in place to allow for that to happen.
Senator Griffin: You've mentioned a couple of things that the federal government could do to show leadership. If you were to pick the single most important thing we could do to further the progress of autonomous vehicles, either a regulatory or financial instrument, what would that be?
Mr. Leclerc: To me, it would be to look at pilot projects in various environments. Right now we are testing private cars, autonomous vehicles. The federal government should look at the programs it has put in place and use them to support the development, and we need to stage it. For example, we could start with shuttles, such as Mr. Lemay is talking about. There are various models, some that include artificial intelligence. You also have shuttles that are produced in 3-D printing, and that is interesting. They bring different elements and we need to test them. We need to think in the long term as well.
Daimler has developed a bus called the Future Bus. They have deployed it in Amsterdam, for instance, on a bus rapid transit corridor. It is a link to the airport, I think. The bus rapid transit systems use segregated lanes, so it is a controlled environment. It is a 12-metre bus running there and moving a lot of passengers at one time.
We need to look at the various technologies and where they can be applied. The federal government can initiate that deployment of projects, capture the learning and see how it can be deployed across Canada. The other thing will be to support innovation, research and development.
Senator Eggleton: Mr. Leclerc, some of our witnesses have touted the advantages for autonomous vehicles, such as like less congestion on the roads, less parking and greater safety. But you have come here today and said that you think it may well make matters worse. You have said that if you just put the autonomous vehicles on the road with the current vehicles, and you have single passengers, it will not be any different than what it is today; you will still face the same problems. In fact, you are suggesting that it could even be worse if the vehicle is not being parked, say, downtown, and the vehicle returns to home base, so it further adds to the congestion by more vehicle movement.
In addition, you compare it to a smartphone in terms of the technology. You say that Goldman Sachs, in their report, suggests that $50,000 would be the initial cost of such a vehicle but that because of the advantages in technology it will probably become obsolete and wouldn't have the trade-in value that a lot of vehicles do today. What do we do about this in terms of the culture that exists for driving? It doesn't sound like the types of improvements people are talking about will be realized.
Mr. Leclerc: Thank you for your question. I'm really glad that the committee is looking at all the options because you are doing important work advising the government and it's critical. You are looking at that side now. There is a myth and that is why we need to avoid the silver-bullet approach that everything will be fixed with the autonomous vehicle. We need to deploy the technology or the solution that fits the problem. This is critical.
You mentioned congestion, parking and safety. Regarding safety, it's totally right. Autonomous vehicles or even private cars are safer than having the driver behind a wheel because there is no distraction. The computer will not be texting as it's driving.
On parking and congestion, yes, you gain a parking space on the streets, but it depends how you use it. You are not necessarily solving the congestion problem.
When we see reports saying that congestion will be fixed or improved, you can imagine an environment where all the vehicles are completely and fully automated, level 5, and there are no drivers in the equation. Then you optimize the traffic flow and the distance between the vehicles because they talk to each other and share information. They know when they can brake and follow one another closely.
In the rail sector for instance, SkyTrain and TransLink have been fully automated since 1986. Efficiency is gained when you have automated train control. That's the same thing here, but all cars must be fully automated. In that process, you will increase traffic congestion.
With two-way traffic congestion, with zero occupancy vehicles, that's a problem. Right now there is a problem with single-occupancy vehicles we are trying to fix by bringing more people into cars so there is more of the shared mobility model. If we go to zero occupancy vehicles, we are losing efficiency. If someone can afford a $50,000 car that will return home and come back, you can imagine a traffic problem going from Laval to Montreal, both ways. Right now in the morning it is just one direction and then coming back in the other direction.
It is the landscape of sustainability. We are only looking at GHG emissions. When you look at the GHG emissions required to extract the minerals to produce the electronic systems we are using in our daily life, if we produce more autonomous cars, we are not being more sustainable in any way. We need to avoid that and look at all the options, including traditional transit, to fix some of the problems on our highways. I don't think autonomous vehicles will solve that. Rapid transit solutions and getting cars off the road will solve that. We need to have a combination of solutions.
Senator Eggleton: Mr. Lemay, you seem to emphasize that the vehicles you have in your network — you particularly mentioned Switzerland and France — are all on private roads, not public roads. Why is that? Is it a regulation that you're not allowed to take them on the public roads? Do you not have the confidence in the technology to this point to be able to take them on a public road?
Mr. Lemay: There are two reasons for that. It's not a question of confidence. Regulations all over the world will have a hard time following the technology. First, big companies and producers started to produce level zero autonomous vehicles in 2009, eight years ago. Within eight years, they have reached level 4. Level 5 will come fast also.
Usually when we sit with experts, they suggest a number of years and we can cut it by two. That's when it will happen because it is going so fast. Legislation has a hard time following. It's the same everywhere. We would need specific pieces of legislation to be able to do that.
Second, the vehicle we are using is level 3. It needs an operator, and when it sees people, it slows down. When it sees cars, it slows down. In regular traffic, it will always be very slow. For that reason, and the state of the technology of these vehicles, we must be in a controlled environment.
The next level of vehicles are coming now, so we will be able to do more in traffic tests. Still we must be careful because one event is viewed as a big thing.
Senator Eggleton: Like the Tesla event.
Mr. Lemay: Yes.
The same thing happened with elevators in buildings. Elevators have been automatic since 1900. They needed years to be accepted at the time because people did not want to go in an automatic elevator. Now, when we go in an elevator with an operator, we wonder if there is a problem with it.
Senator Eggleton: We are talking about different levels of automation here. Level 5 is the highest, full automation, where you don't need a driver at all to move the vehicle. How far away is that? Do you think we're coming close?
Mr. Lemay: Some experts may say decades. I'll answer with an example of something we lived with.
Two years ago, we were with a group of specialists, trying to evaluate the value of those technologies. I'm not a specialist; I'm more an operator. We had technical people with us and concluded that in five years we will be able to operate AVs commercially. That's two years ago. We do it now.
Look at those five levels: level 1 reached in a year, level 2 in two years, level 3 in three years, level 4 in four years. That makes 10 years, and they have reached level 4 in seven years. Somewhere around five years from now we will reach level 5 and drive safely and slow. Some experts will tell you in decades, but if we look at the past and make a trend, it's somewhere in that range. We need regulations that will also be open to this quick evolution.
Mr. Leclerc: Dominique was brave enough to say five years on the record. I will not do that. Experts have different opinions on that.
I'm not an expert on the technology. What I'm interested in most is to ensure that the technology will evolve by itself. We need to have the right regulations in place. The last thing we want to do is not to have the right regulations. If the technology is ready in 5, 10, 15 or 30 years, it will have implications. If we wait for the technology to be ready to develop the right regulations now, and it's ready in five years, then we are stuck. If we develop the regulations right now and it's ready in 30 years, we are stuck as well because we will need to review it.
The Chair: We can reserve now for October 2022 so you can come and appear and we will take you up on it.
Mr. Lemay: I did not make you a promise here.
The Chair: We are politicians; promises happen.
Senator Mercer: I will be here in five years. Perhaps Senator Dawson and I can make a commitment that we will make sure you are called as a witness to tell us why it was successful or why it was not.
One of the issues I have with all this technology is that it is urban-based. It has not addressed the situation of rural Canada. There is a problem with rural Canadians being isolated from services because of their inability to get to the centres where services are available. As the population ages, many of those people are becoming more isolated because they lose their ability to drive and get to those communities that offer the services.
As senators who have been on this committee for a number of years will know, as far as I know, there is only one rural transit system in this country that works, and that's the Kings Annapolis transit system in Nova Scotia. That has an advantage because only one main highway goes through every community along the route.
Will this be able to address the isolation problem for rural Canadians? They're there; they need services and need to go see their doctor in a more urban centre. They may need to access other services that they can't or have difficulty doing now. As our population ages, the demand for this is becoming greater. Or we force Canadians who live in rural parts of the country to move into a congested urban environment that they are not comfortable with or that is not as friendly to their situation. How will this help?
Mr. Lemay: I'll say a few words on that. I think with what we see as personalized, autonomous, connected and electric vehicles, with the tools we have now, where we can share a lot of our infrastructure, lots of things, it changes the industry.
Autonomous vehicles alone won't change anything. Autonomous shuttles, well-connected to the network, will be able to bring shared vehicles into communities. You could call a shared shuttle when you need it and it would go into the city, grab people and bring them to their destinations. This is where we are headed with these vehicles, but it will need to be combined with the rest of the technology.
Senator Mercer: The big issue there will be the cost to the municipality. If it's public transit, then which municipalities will be able to afford to have that service available? The population is not high in those rural municipalities, so the tax base is not there. This is a real issue that needs to be addressed. If the service is to be available, we have to make sure that rural Canadians have access, particularly older Canadians, because this is the population that will need to be served. I'm saying that as a guy who's getting to be an older Canadian.
Mr. Leclerc: You touched on the point, senator, that to me is one of the most important challenges we are facing, not only here in Canada, but in North America and Europe as well, which is the challenge of an aging population. When you talk about isolation, that's what we need to think about. People are getting older; if they can't drive in rural Canada or elsewhere, they will become more isolated if we don't provide better connection to them, whatever it looks like, but it's a service that connects them to the community. We need to develop solutions that are people-centred and that fit the problems we are trying to solve.
You mentioned Kings Transit. Kings Transit is one of our members. Located in Miramichi with a population of 18,000, they run an amazing service for their communities, which is absolutely essential to the people using it. Right now the people using it have access to a 40-foot bus that drives by once every hour. If you have to go see your doctor at let's say 12:35 and the bus goes by at 12 and it takes 15 minutes to get there, then you need to take the one at 12. If something happens and you miss your appointment or if you have to take a taxi, if you have are on a fixed income, it impacts your revenue.
These vehicles can be deployed either on fixed routes — in urban areas you can have them on fixed routes — but they can also be deployed on demand. I think if we want to improve mobility for people, we need to look at the solutions. So with on demand, if the person needs to go there, they can summon a shuttle and have it arrive within let's say 15 minutes.
On the cost side, there are two elements to the main costs right now for transit agencies — labour and fuel. If you have an electric autonomous vehicle, you are taking that component away.
The operating system for some shuttles — I won't go too far into this — could be something like $10,000 to $15,000 per month to provide. When we look at the cost of operating a traditional transit system, it's much higher.
I think that needs to be the goal in what we are looking for, what we want to accomplish. Be people-centred, look at the solutions that fit the community and then invest in deployment. I think we can offer better service to Canadians in rural Canada.
Senator Mercer: My final comment is that you need to get out of your thought process the fact that the option is to take a taxi because in rural Canada there are no taxis. If you hire someone to take you, number one, you are going in an unlicenced vehicle, as taxis are, and unregulated and probably much more costly. We also need to analyze the costs to municipalities; small municipalities cannot afford it.
Thank you, chair.
[Translation]
Senator Saint-Germain: Thank you for being here and for your interesting presentations. I am interested in the adaptation of public policies and the resulting support programs at the federal, provincial and municipal levels.
A number of contradictions have become clear since the beginning of our study. The first is the automobile manufacturer who has an interest in selling as many solo vehicles as possible, especially to public carriers. It is a contradiction in the sense that the more electric cars individuals buy, the fewer customers the public carrier is likely to have.
In Canada, given the remote regions, the challenge is to ensure that transport in large centres, with large capacity vehicles, and regional transportation, with smaller capacity vehicles, can coexist. Consideration must also be given to the coexistence of public transportation and private commercial transportation.
Under those circumstances, the major challenge for public policy players and the resulting programs is to have coherent policies. We must ensure that there is no contradiction between the subsidy given to the person who purchases a solo vehicle and who benefits from an environmental protection rebate, and the fact that the person is competing with the public carrier.
Here is my question: Do you think public policy-makers at all three levels of government now have the conditions to work together to develop integrated policies that will link Canadian public carriers with private commercial carriers? Do you think you will have a timeline that will allow you to succeed before too many private vehicles have been purchased?
Mr. Leclerc: Thank you for the question. With respect to the harmonization and development of public policies, you have to become agnostic about the facts dictated at the political level, for example when one technology is chosen over another. That's something we see.
Think of tax credits for the purchase of an electric vehicle. If you give a tax credit for a $100,000 electric vehicle, there is a question of social fairness, in terms of whether it really has an impact on reducing greenhouse gases. If the goal of the public policy is to reduce greenhouse gases, the best solutions lie in mass transportation, what we call the price of mobility, to encourage a modal shift from the least sustainable transportation option to the most sustainable transportation option. The most sustainable transportation option is not public transit. It's walking, it's cycling, followed by mass transportation or community transportation.
In short, public policies should be aligned with the objective to be achieved and, right now, that's not necessarily what we are seeing. This is important for us. So public policies must be developed based on evidence and case studies abroad. Right now, there is a lot of talk about evidence. However, some of the policies being developed are still not evidence-based, which contributes very little to achieving the goal. I would not call it obstinacy, but there is an ideological drive to continue with the policies that are in place. If you want to do that, you have to look at the analyses, set the objectives to be achieved, look at the performance measures, monitor the progress, and tailor public policies to the objectives to be achieved.
Senator Saint-Germain: What you are saying is that, right now, there is no consultation or integration of the various public policy players to prepare for the arrival of autonomous vehicles at all levels.
Mr. Leclerc: Beyond that, I think there is very little discussion about how to adapt everything that will be automated, not just with respect to vehicles, but with respect to the service industry. On the radio this morning, they talked about the service industry, in restaurants or wherever. In the next 10, 20 or 30 years, workers in a whole segment of society will be at risk of losing their jobs. As a society, we must prepare for that transition. For example, with electric vehicles in public transportation, all mechanics will have to make the transition. They will no longer be mechanics, they will become electronic technicians. Are we ready to make that shift? How are we preparing ourselves as a society? Right now there is a lot of debate about technology. The technology will evolve because it is a market force. In terms of public policies, we have to think about the social impact of those technological changes.
Senator Saint-Germain: Including workforce planning.
Mr. Leclerc: Absolutely.
Mr. Lemay: When the information technology industry gets involved in another industry, the innovation cycle is disrupted. We have seen it with the hospitality industry, the taxi industry, and the retail industry. We see it with all the industries where the technology industry becomes involved and develops personalized and connected services. This is now happening in the transportation sector. So the industry is not going to wait to introduce the products. There will be growth targets initially. For instance, when computers appeared, we heard that paper would disappear. There was a growth in the paper industry and then a drop. So this is the same risk.
Let me sort of turn the question around. If we are not ready, I think there is an urgent need to set up preparation and consultation mechanisms to welcome the changes that may happen in the medium and long term.
Senator Cormier: Most of the questions I wanted to ask have been asked and most of the answers have been given. I will try to summarize. I think the tie-in between public policies, the federal government, provincial governments and municipal governments is a major issue. This is the case in the transportation sector and a number of other areas.
I come from a rural region. I am concerned about the impact of these changes, and especially the support the federal government can provide to help regions and municipalities prepare for them.
You talked a lot about preparation. You do not work in the federal government, but if you did, what would be the initial priorities? You talked about a pilot project, mainly to help with the preparation, but what would be the main mechanisms that should be quickly put in place so that the regions, particularly the rural ones, can be prepared for the arrival of autonomous vehicles?
Mr. Lemay: Your question is for an operator and it is quite difficult. I would tell you to promote demonstration projects, trials and errors, and to demystify the technology to help people become familiar with those types of vehicles. Those are the priorities. You have to start by trial and error because what you see and what is going to happen are certainly two different things. That's probably the only certainty. You have to set up testing programs and allow yourself to make mistakes. You will have to work with public corporations in big cities. We have heard this repeatedly in rural and remote areas. Demonstrations will have to start right away in order to adjust the legislation to best effect in the coming years. As to programs, I don't really deal with the nuts and bolts, so I will give the floor to my colleague.
Mr. Leclerc: As far as I am concerned, one of the important steps has already been taken when the committee undertook this study. We cannot just wait for the U.S. to do all the studies, specifically in Michigan, to create pilot projects, to test, and say that, when they develop their regulations, we will harmonize ours, because the objectives may be different. The government could, in parallel or as a result of the findings of your report, set up a major public policy forum where municipalities, provinces and the federal government could address economic and workforce issues and how to attract investors. Will investors come to Canada in a very unfavorable investment climate? I am talking about mass transit. There is a rule in the United States called "Buy America''. Vehicles must be assembled in the United States all the way to final assembly. So, if we want to attract investors and the entire economy that will come to Canada with the technology sector, I really think there is a need for a major forum where various issues can be studied. The advantage is that, even if this is five years down the road, you have to get down to work right away in terms of the technology. It is therefore possible for the technology to be ready in five years, but deployment on a large scale — even if it starts in five years — would take some time. This forum should therefore consider all possible options and the work to be undertaken.
Senator Cormier: Thank you very much.
[English]
Senator MacDonald: Mr. Lemay, you mentioned in your presentation that your company held a couple of demonstration projects in Montreal of late. Could you share with us what you learned from the demonstrations, and were there any surprises?
Mr. Lemay: The most important thing that we've learned was the reaction of the public. The test that we did for four days at the Olympic Stadium was very close to a metro station near the Montreal Biodome so that people could use it to get there. As for the openness of the public there, everybody asked whether it was safe, and we had to explain it is safe, that if human interference is too close, it will stop. People were putting themselves in front of the vehicle to test it. We realized it will probably be easier than we think to have these vehicles accepted in society because people wanted to test it. People wanted to be in it.
We also realized that with the actual state of the technology, if something changed on the circuit from day one to day two when it had been programmed, the vehicle slowed down and we had to adapt it. Level 3 autonomy is not level 5, and we still have work to do. This is why some specialists have said decades, but if we look back, we may say five years. But for the technology to be there, there is still some work to do.
We had dust that just stopped the vehicle. The vehicle detected a cloud of dust and stopped, so the sensors are very sensitive. The efficiency of the vehicle and all the software will have to be improved. Technically, there is work to do.
Socially, we believe that its acceptance will be much faster than what we had thought before when we tested them with the public. In both tests, there was a public trial, and we were very impressed with the reaction of people.
Senator MacDonald: Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you, Senator MacDonald. I'll put you down as a volunteer to be the one who stands before that bus tomorrow morning.
[Translation]
The Chair: My thanks to Mr. Leclerc and Mr. Lemay.
[English]
We are looking forward to the automated vehicle demonstration tomorrow morning. I would like to remind honourable senators that we will meet tomorrow at 9:30 at the main entrance at East Block.
We will suspend for a couple of minutes before we go in camera to discuss future business.
(The committee continued in camera.)