Evidence of meeting #24 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was pumps.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:25 a.m.
Vice-President, Program Development Directorate, Measurement Canada, Department of Industry
Yes, that's right. We don't have that data because we consider those devices to be in compliance. We don't know in which direction they would be.
9:25 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
So conceivably, if you had a pump that was exactly 0.45% in a retailer's favour, over time that could result in a fairly significant amount of money to a retailer.
9:25 a.m.
Vice-President, Program Development Directorate, Measurement Canada, Department of Industry
That's right. That is not included in the $20 million, and it's not data that we have.
9:25 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
I was interested in exploring the concept he was talking about. I know you said there was an international standard of 0.5%, but is it reasonable to expect that with technology and calibration procedures being more modern and maybe more accurate today, we could actually narrow that? Is it reasonable to expect that with two years between inspections, we could get more accurate?
9:30 a.m.
Vice-President, Program Development Directorate, Measurement Canada, Department of Industry
It is unlikely. There's a reason why the tolerance is at that level internationally. There are a lot of factors that have to be taken into consideration, and the uncertainty of the calculations of the determination is a factor, internationally. Our tolerance is the same in the U.S., in Europe, in Japan and Australia. There's a reason for that.
It makes sense for the industry to target a lower tolerance, and we would be very concerned if they were not to do that. When they adjust and test a device, they have to make sure it's within the tolerance and will remain within the tolerance for a period of one or two years. So they have to target as close as possible to zero. That's normal.
If we were to reduce the tolerance to 0.25%, again we would be off-sync internationally, but it would also introduce all sorts of challenges with regard to the testing procedure. You have to make sure your capability to test is in line with the tolerance.
There are some very good scientific and technical reasons for why it's there, and again, it makes sense for the industry to target a much lower band.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
Right.
The other number where there seems to be a little bit of discrepancy was... I think Ms. Savage brought up the Ottawa Citizen talking about 74% of the pumps being in favour of the retailer, whereas I think your numbers show 65%. Is that accurate, and why the difference?
9:30 a.m.
A voice
She said 65%.
9:30 a.m.
Vice-President, Program Development Directorate, Measurement Canada, Department of Industry
You have to keep in mind, we don't control the information that is used by the media.
There was an access to information request made several years ago, and they used that data to produce those numbers. We don't comment whether they're right or not. When we issue data, we base it on our data, which is unbiased. All sorts of information is mixed within that database. Depending on the types of inspections they include, you can get variations. It's about the same thing.
For us, it's a ratio of about one-to-two. For every gas pump that is out of tolerance and penalizing retailers, there are going to be two that are out of tolerance and penalizing consumers.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
9:30 a.m.
Vice-President, Program Development Directorate, Measurement Canada, Department of Industry
Yes, that's about 65% or 66%. That's our data.
9:30 a.m.
Conservative
Mike Lake Conservative Edmonton—Mill Woods—Beaumont, AB
Let the record show, Mr. Chair, that he said that the government does not control the media, just to put that out there--not this government, anyway.
I think that's enough time for me.
9:30 a.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
It's another one of the Conservative Party failures in this session of Parliament--not controlling the media. They've tried as best they can.
I want to continue on that 60% to 65%. How many pumps, approximately, would that be across Canada?
9:30 a.m.
President, Measurement Canada, Department of Industry
There are approximately 130,000 pumps in Canada. I want to make sure you understand that's not necessarily the box. On some of those boxes, you have up to eight hoses. Each one of those could have a separate measuring chamber, which means they would be verified separately.
9:30 a.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
That's actually important information, thank you, because that's something that hadn't been clarified before.
The Ottawa Citizen had 74%; you're saying 60% to 65%. The thing that concerns me a little bit is that some of the data here has been challenged. You're saying it's a ratio of even one-to-two in terms of the error on the side of the retailer. That would seem to be a pattern. Has that been looked at over a series of years, or is that just the tally for one year?
If it were 52% or 53%, that's one thing, but if the Ottawa Citizen is saying 74% through their analysis and you're saying with yours it's 60% to 65%, or one-to-two, that's not acceptable to me. It shows that perhaps the devices that are being installed or used err in favour of the retailer more than of the consumer. To me, that seems to be a pattern.
9:30 a.m.
President, Measurement Canada, Department of Industry
First of all, the data in terms of the 66% in favour versus one third is based on many years. It's not based on one year's worth of data. The information that was published in the article was also based on a number of years, but I don't know how he massaged the information. He didn't consult with us, so I can't tell you why that bias is there in terms of what his numbers show and what ours are showing. We believe he may have included some other data that we don't in terms of our unbiased random inspections.
9:35 a.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
Even in terms of yours, though, the numbers show that you take a brand-new pump, you put it in a station; it's built and perhaps even designed to err in the favour of the retailer. If it's a 60% to 65% chance, that's significant. We're not talking about it erring on the side of the consumer at 45% or 50%, or whatever. If you're saying that's over a number of years, doesn't it seem that there could be even a problem in terms of the manufacturing and distribution of the mechanics behind this? If you're doing it over a number of years and the pattern sustains itself, that might be a problem as well.
9:35 a.m.
President, Measurement Canada, Department of Industry
I don't believe any manufacturer would deliberately set out to design a gasoline pump or any kind of measuring device that would skew what it delivers. Certainly these companies live and die by their reputation and by their technology. If word got around that they were manufacturing devices that were not the best technology available in the marketplace, there are always competitors.
As to why there's a bias, I really can't speculate on that. There may be many factors, such as wear and tear—they are mechanical. I really am not in a position to say that we have done a detailed study as to why these devices may wear in favour of the retailer more often than the consumer.
9:35 a.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
I don't know how much competition there really is in this industry for that. There's very little competition in the industry for supply. We have so much vertical integration. We see now, even with Shell closing out its Montreal refinery, we're going to have greater integration. When the numbers are that high, it gives me concern for the consumers.
You mentioned as well that in the last period you had other licensed people actually measuring for Measurement Canada as part of this study. We went through these numbers in the study that was done that was exposed by the Ottawa Citizen. Was that also done with Measurement Canada staff and independent people who were contracted? Is that part of the statistical and data analysis that was done?
9:35 a.m.
Vice-President, Program Development Directorate, Measurement Canada, Department of Industry
Again, they took all our database, so we don't know what part they used to publish their numbers. But if we look at the period of time—I believe it was from 1989 to 1998—other than for initial inspections, there were very few organizations recognized by Measurement Canada to perform on-site inspections of gas pumps over those years. Most of those inspections were done by Measurement Canada inspectors.
Again, there are different types of inspections that have been done over the years, so I don't know what they used.
9:35 a.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
I guess what they're suggesting is they don't know what was used as well, by Measurement Canada. That was the testimony put forth in front of us. So what we're trying to do is sort out whether this is a real problem or a manufactured problem.
I have concerns with the allowance of new, independent, private inspections that basically are almost self-regulated by the industry, because they're going to come from people in industries that already manufacture pumps and deal with that. It's not a very competitive industry for retail inspection, in my opinion. If we move away from that, then I'm worried about the data that then gets assembled later on.
Of these things, though, I do want to move a little bit towards all these inaccuracies that were noted. Again, can you kind of explain why no real charges were laid? There don't seem to be any penalties. If this is a significant problem that came to bear, and there's $20 million annually lost to consumers, why have there been no convictions, currently, in this system?
9:40 a.m.
President, Measurement Canada, Department of Industry
First of all, we have what we call a progressive enforcement policy. If we find that a device is out by slightly over the one tolerance, then we require them to get the device fixed within 14 days. If we find it's over two tolerances, we seize the device, which means the device owner cannot use that particular device until such time as the device is repaired, and then we will follow up to make sure that does happen.
On convictions, prosecutions right now are the only way we have to charge anyone, and we have found that prosecutions are very expensive. Sometimes the penalty doesn't fit the crime, as I mentioned previously. If you are convicted under the Weights and Measures Act, you get a criminal record, which is very severe in terms of where you may or may not be able to go or get a job. We have had some convictions. We had one, not too long ago, in New Brunswick, but again, our fines are very low as well. The judge has the ability to decide, within the range, what kinds of penalties he will levy. At the present time it's maximum $1,000 for a summary conviction, plus you can go to jail in some cases. The judge chose to levy the fine at $300 per charge.
So one of the things that we're trying to do is increase the fines but also introduce the administrative monetary penalty system, which is civil penalties, which, again... I want to make sure people will understand that we are not going to be out there issuing administrative monetary penalties. First of all, and very important, we do not keep any revenue related to these, so it wouldn't be a situation where we would be going out trying to generate revenue. But more importantly, we're looking for accuracy and equity, and we believe we can get that through...
First of all, we'll have to do a lot of both trader and consumer education if this new law is passed, in the sense that we have to make sure that they understand their obligations. They have to understand that they're going to have to get their devices inspected, in the case of gas pumps, every two years. And we have built into the proposed act a due diligence clause. So again, if a device owner has tried to get a device inspected and hasn't been able to find somebody for whatever reason, or has had it inspected and we find it out of tolerance, we're going to investigate the reasons why, but that doesn't necessarily mean we're going to issue a penalty to that retailer at that point in time. We may find that it's due to the device itself; it could be due to the authorized service provider; there are many reasons. It would depend on the circumstances of the individual inspection, what was found, what we determined to be wrong. That's the kind of action we would take.
9:40 a.m.
NDP
Brian Masse NDP Windsor West, ON
I'm not going to make a statement, because you can't comment on it anyway. But the minister went on CTV and pointed at the cameras and said “We're coming after you” to the retailers.
I didn't realize you could actually seize the device, though; that's new information. How many devices did you seize in this period? That's helpful, because that shows that there could be another level of influence. When you seize a device, do you actually physically take it, or do you lock it aside? I've been at some pumps and they don't say that it's locked for that reason, but it's disabled.
9:40 a.m.
President, Measurement Canada, Department of Industry
We can't actually take them. We tell them that they cannot use the device until such time as they have it repaired.
It's pretty hard to take away a gas pump. So they're told not to use it, and they're given a certain amount of time to fix it. If they do that and advise us they've done that, we'll either do a re-inspection or we will have somebody do an inspection to determine that it's now within the prescribed tolerances.
