Transport Committee on May 1st, 2014

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you.

Ms. Young, you have five minutes.

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

Thank you very much.

I'm going to be splitting my time with Jeff, and Jeff's going to go first I think. Thank you.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

I have a matter of correction for the record, Mr. Chair.

With respect to the provision of advance warning, the Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs were questioned earlier this week on that particular issue. They said that such information is and I quote, “futile and unrealistic”.

Further, they went on to suggest, unlike what has been misrepresented across the way, that it was unnecessary for proper planning for first responders and that the protective direction No. 32 in fact was adequate along the lines that Mr. Marit has suggested.

I encourage members to check the blues on what CAFC actually said.

Mr. Chair, I'll defer back to the member.

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

Thank you gentlemen. I'd like to thank you for coming.

Welcome back, Mr. Tweed.

Thank you, Mr. Demers, for being here and for sharing your horrible experience with us.

I wanted to not talk about the railcars and SMS, because I think we've covered that quite adequately. But one of the things we did not talk about—and certainly it is in your rebuilding, Mr. Demers—is this whole transload facility issue.

We heard recently from other witnesses that there was no standard across Canada, that these transload facilities were being built sort of wherever they were required, but there was no zoning, no planning, no emergency response training, or even plans around some of these transload facilities, some of which are quite basic and others of which can be quite complex.

Maybe you can each share with me your knowledge and/or your thoughts around what can and should be done around some standardization or rules and regulations or safety around that, because often they are in communities or quite close to communities.

Maybe Mr. Demers could start, because of your recent experience.

[Jacques Demers]

I do not think that question, which concerns transloading, should be addressed to me. Mr. Tweed is in fact the safety expert. Your question seemed to focus more on that point.

We, both FCM and the municipality, have not worked on the principle of transloading. That file does not concern us.

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

Let me be a bit clearer then.

In the rebuild of Lac-Mégantic, or in the consideration of building new transload facilities across Canada near or in communities, do you think that you or FCM should have a role in having some zoning, having some safety standards, insisting on some ERAP, emergency response assistance protocols, around that because that is where apparently there is a weakness and some safety concerns.

[Jacques Demers]

Pardon me, but I did not clearly understand your first question.

Yes, you are absolutely right: we are making good progress. There has to be communication between the government and the railway industry, which was not previously the case. We all have to be able to speak to one another. That is our responsibility at the municipal level. You are absolutely right. When we discuss the development plan, when we safely locate the resources in our region, everything absolutely has to fit, and we have to be able to discuss it together. We have to do that based on an overall vision of our region. That is essential.

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

Exactly.

My concern is that we've been spending a lot of time talking about the DOT-111s and the safety of the tracks, and these things are of course very important. I think equally important is this troubled transload facility issue. And please, if you could bring it forward in the different committees and the different work that you're doing, I think that would be very important.

Please go ahead, gentlemen, if you maybe want to make a comment on that.

[Mervin Tweed]

We are obviously looking at developing some transload facilities. In fact, we opened one on Monday and we spent the better part of seven to ten days training the employees who are there.

Quite often what you'll find...and it was our decision at this point to put the facility on our property, so basically we assume the responsibilities and the liabilities that go with it. Therefore, it's important and imperative for us to have our employees trained and ready to go.

In other locations we're looking at, they are going to be producer car driven, and the people who are going to provide the supply of grain are the ones who will invest in the transload. It's not fancy, just a basic auger system that can handle the capacity a little more than most. We will go out and work with those communities that choose to go that route and provide our safety advice and our safety training. Again, when it's on our property, we take the full responsibility and the liability that goes with it.

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

May I ask you an additional question, Mr. Tweed? You have stated here and on the record that the safety standards and the protocols you use for OmniTRAX are higher than what you have seen across the board. Given that the tracks basically interrelated, as you know, and you shuffle trains off to other companies, etc.—because we do have an integrated rail system in Canada—how do you respond as a company when you know or notice that another company with which you work closely has lax standards, or no SMS in place, or weak protocols?

[Mervin Tweed]

We don't notice that, simply because we are responsible strictly for our property, our line. We run our own engines and trains.

Everybody has a responsibility, and we have a big enough challenge keeping track of our own. We have over 600 miles of track that run in very difficult circumstances in the north. We run a car up there every second day, a high rail car that basically measures the steel, the wood, and advises us where it needs repair.

When we say that we meet or exceed, in a lot of cases, the new regulations that came out after Mégantic, what we have found is that we are exceeding eight or nine of the 10 recommendations. For us it's probably more out of necessity, because of where we are. We can go a long way without seeing people or living things, so it's imperative that we do it right.

[Wai Young, Conservative, Vancouver South, BC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you.

Mr. Toet, you have the last questions of this first round.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you all for being here today, I do appreciate it.

Just to reinforce Mr. Watson's intervention a little bit, it is very true that the chiefs, when they were here on April 29, did say that what's of paramount importance is what goes via what route, rather than knowing what is going on each shipment. I think the key issue is that using that real-time expression is somewhat misleading about what you're really trying to accomplish. Maybe some rephrasing might be helpful so that we don't have this confusion about what we're really asking for. Obviously what you're essentially saying by “real-time”, Mr. Demers, is not needing to know exactly at what point.... You've been very clear on that, but real-time does kind of imply that. Maybe we have to come up with new terminology so there's no confusion on that. But it's good to have that point clarified.

Mr. Marit, I'm from Manitoba where there are many rural communities, and so I just wanted to ask you the following, given that you are from a rural community in Saskatchewan. In your opinion, why were most of those communities established and built where they were built?

[David Marit]

The railroad.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Exactly. That comes back to the point. We talk so often about having to re-route the railroads around towns, communities, and cities, etc., the reality that we have to understand is that the railway opened the west and towns were developed around the railway. So we have to be somewhat realistic in our expectations here. Yes, safety is paramount. We need to have those rail lines maintained properly, and it comes a little bit to my question to you, Mr. Demers.

There seems to be some implication in your statements—and I'm hoping you can clarify it—that there's no maintenance happening on rail lines.

Is that what you believe? Or do you want to see enhancement on the maintenance work that's done.

[Jacques Demers]

I am not saying there has been no maintenance, but there has been virtually none on the section I am talking about. That can be checked.

The issue since July has been the MMA line. Speeds have had to be reduced to 10 miles an hour on increasing numbers of lines over the past 10 years. It has been said that maintenance has been done on that line, but if you ask people who live in the region, they will tell you there has been none. If you ask people who work there, they will tell you there has been no maintenance. CP sold the line to MMA because it needed investment; that is clear.

We are not saying that no maintenance is being done on Canada's railways. We are talking about specific lines. We are asking that those lines be upgraded so that the speed limit is no longer 10 miles an hour.

Someone said that speed limits are lowered when work is being done on highways. That is true, but that is because people are at work. For the lines we are talking about, however, speeds are reduced when no one is doing any work. There is currently no obligation to do work when speed is limited to 10 miles an hour. It is important to mention that.

You asked a question about getting information in real time. I clarified that earlier. In fact, we really want to know what is going on in our region. The idea is not to learn one year later what goods were transported across our region. We want to know what the situation is now.

We could use another term; you are definitely right. However, when we talk about getting information in real time, that means that we want to know what goods are currently being transported around our region. It does not mean knowing what goods are being transported right now, but it could mean knowing in advance what goods will be transported next week or the following month. In this way, we can anticipate what is coming and determine whether we are ready to take action.

That is what I mean by the expression "in real time". We are responsible at all times for knowing whether we are able to take action in our region and how we can do that.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you. Thanks, also, for the clarification on the maintenance aspect. So you're saying that we have to look at certain areas of rail and ones that may not have kept up for a period of time and maybe put some parameters on that. That's very good and we appreciate that being brought forward.

Mr. Marit, I wanted to pick up on the line of questioning regarding the recommendation that FCM has put forward or may have put forward. You've said there were some recommendations put forward in regard to the proximity of development to communities. Could you maybe give us some idea of what some of those recommendations have been? Even as an MP, I deal with it all the time. I'm kind of in a rail town, and I have CP and CN lines running through. I have new residential areas being built in my city that are in very close proximity to the rail lines; they're brand new houses and people buy them and a year later I'm the one getting phone calls complaining about the noise from the trains. That's not my role. How are the municipalities going to start dealing with this? I think you are building too close to rail lines, especially residential.

[David Marit]

I don't bring that expertise to this table because I don't sit on that proximity committee. I know that FCM has that committee, and if you want those recommendations and that discussion, I can sure have somebody from FCM get back to you on it, Mr. Toet.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

So there are recommendations being brought forward by them?

[David Marit]

Whether it's recommendations or guidelines that they're looking at, I don't formally know that process, Mr. Toet, but I can sure get it for you.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

That would be very much appreciated.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Okay, you're out of time, Mr. Toet. There's never enough time, I know.

We are getting down to the end and I'm going to suggest that I'll go to Mr. Mai and Mr. Sullivan combined and Mr. McGuinty and then two over here. You will have about three minutes each, including the answers, so use your time wisely.

Mr. Mai.

[Hoang Mai, NDP, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

In my case it will be more clarification, because Mr. Watson came up with, in quoting the blues....

I would simply like to reassure you, Mr. Demers. The representatives of the Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs who appeared before our committee said it was not necessary to get information immediately or to be informed about all cars passing through. Consequently, they do not intend to set up trucks beside the railway tracks in case an incident occurs. However, they said they wanted to know what was happening so they could determine whether they had all the necessary resources. We agree on that. We agree with you.

In addition, I did a railway safety tour of Quebec. The rail maintenance situation is pathetic. We were told about loose spikes and bumps in the rails that caused people to panic. That is really the way it is.

Mr. Tweed, you're confirming what we've been saying, that it is self-regulation in terms of the rail companies. Because the safety standard is a bit low, companies that have more concerns about safety standards will bring them up. That's what we've been saying, that it's where the government has not been doing its work.

Those are just some comments. I'll let Mr. Sullivan go.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Mr. Sullivan you have a little less than two minutes.