Evidence of meeting #55 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 amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Okay.
And, I'm sorry, Mr. Bourdon, are you a lawyer, a drafter, or...you're an expert with safety?
4:20 p.m.
Director General, Rail Safety, Department of Transport
I'm...yes, I have spent most of my career with—
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Now, isn't it right that Ms. White-Taylor is the lawyer and drafter with expertise?
March 10th, 2011 / 4:20 p.m.
Carla White-Taylor Director, Rail Safety Secretariat, Department of Transport
No, I'm not.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Oh, my goodness.
We have too many lawyers at the table already.
4:20 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Does that meet with your approval as well? Does it seem to be appropriate?
4:20 p.m.
Director General, Rail Safety, Department of Transport
We have our lawyers here, so....
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
It's just to know whether it means—
Oh, I see; of course. You were blocking the light before. I can see him behind you now.
Could he just add a perspective on whether or not the word “human” would make sense in terms of legal precedent?
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
He has to come to the table, if he's going to speak.
If you wouldn't mind, would you just introduce yourself into the microphone and make your comment, please.
4:20 p.m.
Alain Langlois Legal Counsel, Legal Services, Department of Transport
Good afternoon. I'm Alain Langlois from Transport Canada legal services.
Bearing in mind that I'm not a drafter but spent considerable time in a drafting room drafting this legislation, let me say that the notion of “human” adds some clarity to the notion of “fatigue”, so in that sense it's probably of benefit.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
I was just going to mention that the French version seems to identify “human” in both the Liberal and the NDP amendments, so it would seem that “human” would make more sense, if that's all right with Mr. Julian and Mr. McCallum.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Absolutely.
I just mentioned that the Liberal amendment already had “human” in the French version. I think, based on that, I'd prefer your version.
4:20 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to share the credit with the Liberals, though; I think we've both come up with the same amendment.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
If everybody is comfortable, we will accept the NDP amendment, which talks about “human fatigue” as opposed to just “fatigue”. Is everybody comfortable with that?
4:20 p.m.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
Okay.
Then I would ask whether the NDP amendment carries.
(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])
4:20 p.m.
Director General, Rail Safety, Department of Transport
I just want to add something. The definition of “fatigue”, I believe, was included as an amendment because it makes reference to another amendment that makes reference to rules on scheduling.
