Evidence of meeting #46 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was track.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Luc Bourdon  Director General, Rail Safety, Department of Transport
Phil Benson  Lobbyist, Teamsters Canada
William Brehl  President, Teamsters Canada Rail Conference, Maintenance of Way Employees Division, Teamsters Canada
Rob Smith  National Legislative Director, Teamsters Canada Rail Conference, Locomotive Engineers, Teamsters Canada

February 10th, 2011 / 5:25 p.m.

Conservative

Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to our witnesses for appearing here today, and for your written submission as well.

Mr. Brehl, you said you were a track monkey. I was a major assembler on the assembly line at Chrysler, so I appreciate a working man.

First of all, let me just say thank you for your approach. I appreciate the balance in it, giving credit where credit is due, raising this to the level where it belongs: it's a public safety issue, it's not a partisan issue, right? I think all members of the committee are very serious-minded about coming to some agreement.

Notwithstanding that, there may be some differences. On non-punitive reporting, as I recall it, with respect to the Aeronautics Act, we did have three-party consensus on that. It actually got through committee, after being filibustered by one of the parties, and then was hoisted in the House, leaving us with no opportunity to pass the bill. It had to be done through regulation. We'll see whether or not we succeed with respect to rail safety in addressing that issue as well.

I have a press release from back in June that was issued. You talked about how the legislation was “the right thing to do”. What are some of the elements—no pun intended—where we're on the right track? If you can just elaborate briefly on those, we'll use that as a starting point, and then I have a few subsequent questions.

5:25 p.m.

Lobbyist, Teamsters Canada

Phil Benson

I think the key part of this is to allow Transport Canada Rail Safety to do their job, to inspect, to move forward. Even though I have a great deal of concern about the safety management system, that whole approach, in the long run, with all people being fair, is something that can work to make a better model of working railway, if you like.

5:25 p.m.

Conservative

Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON

Or, as we've said with respect to the SMS on the aviation side, it's an additional layer of safety on top of a regulatory regime.

5:25 p.m.

Lobbyist, Teamsters Canada

Phil Benson

That's what the department tells me, that's what you tell me, but it's not what the companies tell me. And when I deal with them, in all the regulatory hearings and meetings I go to, they have a different interpretation.

I think properly applied, it is a really good method of having a continual upgrade of safety built into a culture of safety. And over time, Mr. Watson, I think that's what will happen. That's what this bill will actually help do--not in the short run, but in the long run. It's a good bill for the long run.

5:25 p.m.

Conservative

Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON

Are the administrative monetary penalties one of the contributing factors, perhaps, to changing the ongoing safety culture? It's not just having the natives with some of the sticks.

5:25 p.m.

Lobbyist, Teamsters Canada

Phil Benson

I know we always have them. My hope is that over time they'll be looked at and kind of laughed at. If this bill works properly, the administrative penalties won't come into it in the long run. But in the short run they're needed.

5:25 p.m.

Conservative

Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON

Are you suggesting they're too low or at some point they're going to be obsolete?

5:25 p.m.

Lobbyist, Teamsters Canada

Phil Benson

I'll be honest, too low or too high to a company that's making billions of dollars--how high can you raise them?

Do me a favour. Change the law about how much money you can get in tort suits. Make it like Louisiana, $100 billion, and they'll obey the law. That's the problem with administrative penalties, because quite often they simply become a cost of doing business. Hopefully the culture will change more than the administrative penalties will change them.

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON

With respect to your position on non-punitive reporting, I think I've heard two things today, and I'm not sure if they're conflicting or not. You'll have to forgive me--maybe use it as an opportunity to clarify.

I think in one instance I heard that there's support for the idea of NPR within the SMS, but then there was also the additional call for a direct reporting line to Transport Canada. Are both of those elements key to your position today? Have I understood it clearly?

5:30 p.m.

Lobbyist, Teamsters Canada

Phil Benson

I'll put it this way. I think the bill, as written, is fine. I hope for the day I can come before you and tell you that the membership have full confidence in calling their safety officer. As Mr. Bourdon said, that's what's part of this SMS we have to have.

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON

Sorry to interrupt, but I only have limited time. Are those elements of your position, having both of those?

5:30 p.m.

Lobbyist, Teamsters Canada

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON

For me, what's a little difficult to understand logically is, if they have a direct line to report to Transport Canada, will they ever use a non-punitive reporting system in an SMS?

5:30 p.m.

Lobbyist, Teamsters Canada

Phil Benson

I am hopeful that over time the answer to both of those questions will be yes.

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

I have to interrupt there.

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB

Yes, on a point of order.

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

On a point of order, Mr. Jean.

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB

Mr. Watson talked about one of the parties wasting hundreds of hours of this committee and witnesses a couple of years ago by doing a hoist moist motion in the House and wasting all of our time in committee. I was just wondering if he could clarify which party did that? Was it the NDP? I wanted to clear it up.

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

It's not a point of order.

Thank you.

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB

I wanted to clear it up.

5:30 p.m.

Liberal

Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC

Just forget about it. Right now, let me—

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB

Are you sticking up for your NDP buddies?

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Order, please. We just had a compliment from our guests on the working of the committee.

With that, I will thank you--

5:30 p.m.

Some hon. members

[Inaudible--Editor]

5:30 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed

Order, please.

Thank you for coming. We appreciate your input, and we look forward to talking to you again.

The meeting is adjourned.