Transport Committee on May 1st, 2014

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

Thank you.

There was another fire involving DOT-111s yesterday in Lynchburg, Virginia. The river was on fire. The issue of the DOT-111s is occupying a lot of our time because of Lac-Mégantic, but one of the things that the Transportation Safety Board told us is those vehicles are unsafe even at 20 miles per hour; that they will break and open and spill and catch fire even at 20 miles an hour. CP told us they're not prepared to go slow.

When we asked the ministry at a town hall in my riding last week—the minister's chief of staff was there and representatives from Transport Canada—what is the appropriate speed, their answer was that they've asked the rail companies to do a risk assessment.

I'm going to come back to you, Mr. Therien, because you made this part of your presentation. Is it appropriate for the rail companies themselves to do the risk assessment about how fast they should go through communities or whether they should re-route around communities given that it's a conflict of interest for them. They may be prepared to take a risk but the public isn't.

[Emile Therien]

You're absolutely right, and I think I made that point in my presentation.

Let me tell you about phasing out the tank cars that don't come up to speed. I commend the minister's announcement that she wants 5,000 gone within three years. I think we've got to put that in perspective. By the time you order one, a new car takes two years before you get delivery, if you're lucky. If you take 5,000 cars out of service within three years, I don't know if the replacements will be there. First of all, these cars are not owned by the railway companies, they're owned by the customer, the leasing companies and others. I think it's a major challenge. I hope it happens, but I'm a cockeyed optimist on it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you.

Mr. McGuinty, you have three minutes.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thanks for that, Mr. Therien. In fact, it's interesting to hear that you can't predict and clearly conclude that those cars will be available in the next three years, nor can the minister. Despite the fact that she's been asked repeatedly for the evidence or the analysis that backstops her claims that she can do it, she hasn't provided anything for Canadians.

Mr. Marit, I want to go back to your assertion. On two occasions you said that if municipalities were advised in advance of dangerous materials going through their municipal jurisdictions, this would be fraught with risk. What are the risks?

[David Marit]

I don't know how to say it, but I think it opens itself up for risks of someone doing something—

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Do you mean security risks?

[David Marit]

Yes, that's right. Yes, it could open some big security risks.

In talking to and listening to communities in our province and to the firefighters and that regime, if they know the history of what's been going through their community, then they know.... I think the issue comes about where, if there's an incident, it's that communication strategy of knowing at that time what's on that train and communicating that to the fire departments so they know. I think that's where this really has to get to in order to do what it has to do.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

So what you're saying is that the reason why the Government of Canada has an agreement with the FCM to inform municipalities after the fact is that there are security risks involved?

[David Marit]

I'm saying that, not the FCM.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

What is the FCM saying? You're both members of the board—

[David Marit]

Yes.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

—the advisory board. For the FCM, what's their rationale? Because I asked them that question.

[David Marit]

Their rationale probably is just how soon and what would be the timeline as far as...? How soon would you want to know? The day before? It's really logistically impossible, because what community do you tell and which community do you not tell? Are you going to tell them all?

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

You tell the communities through which the train is going.

[David Marit]

That's right. Well, in many cases in Saskatchewan, that train, within a 10-hour period, could go through hundreds of communities—

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Sure.

[David Marit]

—and you're going to let them all know?

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

And by 2024—

[David Marit]

If they don't have the resources, then you have to make sure that somebody has those resources. It also becomes an issue of liability, then, and I think somebody has to have that discussion.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

I think municipalities in Canada at any size are mature enough and wise enough—

[David Marit]

They are—

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

—to hear this, aren't they?

[David Marit]

Yes, they are, to some degree, but the issue will become an issue about liability. They're going to say, “Then if you know, you should have everything in place.” If something happens, the municipality may be liable for any incident. I have a concern with that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you, Mr. Marit.

Your time's up, Mr. McGuinty.

We'll now move to Mr. Watson.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

I'm not sure I can say this enough, but on protective direction 32, which is the information-sharing one—and maybe it's good that we're having some clarification and discussion around the table here—the Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs was also part of the ongoing dialogue that was part of the consultation on this. They were clear at this committee that they didn't need, for purposes of planning, to have advance warning or advance knowledge of what's coming through.

The protective direction provides two things, not only the yearly aggregate information. The second requirement is that significant changes are provided as soon as practicable after the fact or immediately after the fact if a change is occurring. It also sets up, as I understand it, a registry, if you will, of the first responders in communities, who are the ones to be contacted and the information circulated to. It has requirements about how that information is used and not disclosed, etc.

The Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs was here this week, and they said they have what they need with respect to protective direction 32, and that advance notice was, and I quote again, “futile” and “unrealistic”.

Additionally—and this too is just to clarify for the record—companies' risk assessments are also auditable as part of their safety management systems by Transport Canada. For those who were at the public accounts committee yesterday and who were reviewing chapter 7 of the Auditor General's report that we looked at back in December, Mr. Chair, the department now has...instead of having 40% of their inspectorate untrained in doing SMS audits, they're down to 4%. The remaining five are a question of the availability of workers to be trained, so they're on track to have that completed, as I understand it, by June of this year.

I'll leave it at that, Chair.