Evidence of meeting #40 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was vessels.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:35 a.m.
External Relations, Western Canada Marine Response Corporation
No, we have a response plan in place that we provided to them.
11:35 a.m.
NDP
Mike Sullivan NDP York South—Weston, ON
Finally, Mr. Lowry, has there been any impact from the coast guard closures on your operations, the closure of the Kitsilano station, etc., and their reduction in budgets?
11:35 a.m.
External Relations, Western Canada Marine Response Corporation
We do get that question quite a bit. We don't rely on the coast guard for our actual boots on the ground. It's all our own equipment that we're using. The coast guard's role in a spill is called the federal monitoring officer. They are responsible for making sure that the spill is being managed properly and if it's not, they can step in and take a management role. The reductions there did not impact how we would respond to spills.
11:35 a.m.
NDP
Mike Sullivan NDP York South—Weston, ON
Thanks.
For the port authorities, one of the things you said, Madam Zatylny, was that whatever changes were to be made they should be “proportionate to risk”. Can you explain what you mean by that? Does that mean there are risks we should accept and risks that we shouldn't? What does that mean?
11:35 a.m.
President, Association of Canadian Port Authorities
It means that all of the regulatory regimes that are in place...and the approach that was taken, for example, by the world-class oil tanker safety review panel was a risk-based assessment. They're operating in a real-world environment, and there are always things that potentially might occur that present a risk to the environment or to the communities, but what we are recommending, what we are saying, is that any kind of regulatory regime meant to address those potential occurrences should be based, first of all, on an assessment of the probability of the risk as well as looking at what are the mitigation and response measures that are in place.
The reality is that within the marine environment there is never just a plan A to deal with something. There's always a plan B, a plan C, and a plan D that provide multiple levels of resilience, if you will, and so that is our recommendation. That's what we're saying. We're saying that a risk-based approach is more than robust for addressing any potential hazards.
11:35 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Mr. Sullivan, your time is well expired.
Mr. McGuinty, for seven minutes.
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Good morning, everyone.
I will begin with Mr. Whitworth.
Congratulations on the attention of your contracts for coast guard ships and other expansions. That's a great success story. Congratulations. That's very encouraging for your company, very encouraging for the coast, very encouraging for Canada, so good luck with all your expansion and going from 2,500 to 3,500 employees in a short while.
I want to come bac to your comments about being a strong believer in regulations. You said it was a differentiator. I would assume it's a differentiator nationally and internationally. I suspect you're talking from a competitive perspective as well. Is that right?
11:35 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Seaspan ULC, Seaspan
That's correct.
There's the ability for the commercial market to actually recognize and reward those who have safety systems, who ensure that the environment is taken care of, and who ensure that they meet or exceed safety criteria especially in the case of customers in the oil business, for example. They do differentiate between those who meet or exceed the regulations and those who just meet or—God forbid—don't meet the regulations.
11:35 a.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
In a system in which we have regulated parties and a regulator, Transport Canada, is it your view that the economic competitiveness of your company is enhanced when you have a fully functioning regulatory system with proper follow-through and enforcement?
11:40 a.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
It makes you a better company. It makes you more competitive. It generates more wealth. It creates more jobs, etc. Is that correct?
11:40 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Seaspan ULC, Seaspan
That's correct.
One of the things that I think stands out with Seaspan, for example.... By the way, all of my discussion points so far are really comparing the coastal tug and barge and marine business. I'm more than willing to talk about the international tankers and the international vessels, but I'm really just talking about the domestic fleet. At Seaspan we spend close to a million dollars a year in training. We at Seaspan, and I personally, look at that as an investment. Some people would look at that as a cost or an expense. That's an investment to make sure we have all of those young men and women trained up to do those jobs in the future, and again, that goes back to making sure we meet or exceed the regulations. Another competitor might see that as money right off the bottom line and ask why the heck they should spend a million dollars.
11:40 a.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Right.
It makes you more competitive as a company, but it also levels the playing field. Making sure you have regulatory follow-through and enforcement levels the playing field, so there aren't laggards who are undermining the good efforts of Seaspan, for example.
11:40 a.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
That's what makes it difficult for us here. Just last week I confirmed again with the Parliamentary Budget Officer that the government is not providing the information the Parliamentary Budget Officer needs to do the objective assessment as to whether the department, Transport Canada, in its cuts has affected front-line regulatory enforcement. Over the last five years it has cut 27% of the marine safety budget. We're trying to find out whether the government's claims that these cuts have all been to the back office and not to front-line enforcement are true. The problem is that the government won't release the information.
As a man, a CEO, who's going from 2,500 employees to 3,500 employees, how do you react to that? Do you think that's a very smart thing for Canada to be doing?
11:40 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Seaspan ULC, Seaspan
Actually, the largest portion of that growth is in the shipyard business that we talked about a little earlier. I don't want to compare apples and oranges. Those additional 1,000 employees are going to be here on land and will not fall under the Transport Canada regulations that we were discussing. I'm not as concerned about our growth aspect and this having an impact on that. I still stand by my earlier comments that regulation is good, but we have to just make sure that the compliance matches the regulation.
11:40 a.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Your principal recommendation today is that we have good regulations, but they're not being enforced. The capacity isn't there to enforce them. Is that correct?
11:40 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Seaspan ULC, Seaspan
There could be more done, and that would be my recommendation.
11:40 a.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Thank you.
Ms. Zatylny, I want to go to your comments about your Green Marine certification. Congratulations on launching that process. It reminds me of the responsible care program that was launched in Canada some 25 years ago now and in almost 90 countries worldwide. Most people don't know it's a Canadian invention. I dare say most people wouldn't know that the Green Marine certification process was started in Canada.
Do you see that Green Marine certification process also, as Mr. Whitworth has described regulation, as a differentiator to help Canadian ports compete with American counterpart ports, for example? You're driving up overall green performance to be able to compete. Is that right?
11:40 a.m.
President, Association of Canadian Port Authorities
Thank you for the question.
I think that's an interesting take. The reality is that the Green Marine program has actually started to expand around the world. While it started in Canada, as you have said, it has now been taken up by members of the American Association of Port Authorities, so it is in fact being expanded and is becoming a de facto North American standard.
A few weeks ago I was in Seattle meeting with some of the Asian ports. They were very interested, because they're looking at developing their own certification programs. They were looking at Green Marine as a template or a set of standards to comply with or adhere to. What we're actually seeing is the spread of a global set of very robust voluntary activities and standards that all of the port authorities are adhering to.
To your question about the competitive edge, if you will, the interesting thing from what I'm seeing is that the entire marine community, certainly on the port authority side, in every country on various continents, whether it's in Europe, over in Asia, or here in North America, is seeing environmental stewardship and concern for local communities and local ecosystems as benefiting the position of the port within their communities. It's simply being a de facto very important area to be focusing on, ex of its being a competitive advantage. That's why we're seeing this spread of the global standards to all the port authorities around the world.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Mr. Chair, in my recollection, one of the officials from the Department of Transport indicated that the budget was increased by $15 million or perhaps $18 million, dedicated specifically to the transportation of dangerous goods. I just want to make note of that.
My questions will be for you, Mr. Lowry. Specifically, I noticed that in your testimony you said that you deal with oil spill response and you have an oil pollution emergency plan, and then, of course, a certificate of arrangement with third parties.
First, with respect to the oil pollution emergency plan and the demonstration of your ability to respond to a spill, how do you do that? Who do you demonstrate it to? How often do you do that and what might it involve?
11:45 a.m.
External Relations, Western Canada Marine Response Corporation
Thank you for your question.
We do have a very robust certification requirement. Transport Canada is the auditor of that program.
For Port Metro Vancouver, we do a 150-tonne equipment deployment annually. We also must do a 1,000-tonne tabletop exercise. Every two years, we do a 2,500-tonne equipment deployment, and every three years we do a 10,000-tonne tabletop exercise.
Just this year, about three or four months ago, we did our 1,000-tonne tabletop exercise along with one of the oil-handling facilities in Burrard Inlet, Suncor, and we also brought in vessels for that particular one. That was the first time we did that. That's a full-day exercise. We operate the ICS, incident command system, and Transport Canada comes, observes the exercise, and provides feedback.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
When the port authority was talking about simulated actions or interaction, is that tabletop what you undertake to see how you might work under real or simulated conditions?
11:45 a.m.
External Relations, Western Canada Marine Response Corporation
That's correct. As part of that ICS, which is an incident command system, a worldwide system that agencies use to manage emergency response, there is what's called the unified command. At that table would be Environment Canada, Transport Canada, the coast guard, first nations, and the municipalities. They're collectively making decisions on how the spill is handled.