Bill C-14 (Historical)

Fairness at the Pumps Act

An Act to amend the Electricity and Gas Inspection Act and the Weights and Measures Act

This enactment provides for the imposition of administrative monetary penalties for contraventions to the Electricity and Gas Inspection Act and the Weights and Measures Act. It also provides for higher maximum fines for offences committed under each of those Acts and creates new offence provisions for repeat offenders.
The enactment also amends the Weights and Measures Act to require that traders cause any device that they use in trade or have in their possession for trade to be examined within the periods prescribed by regulation. That new requirement is to be enforced through a new offence provision. The enactment also provides the Minister of Industry with the authority to designate persons who are not employed in the federal public administration as inspectors to perform certain examinations.

[Gilles Vinet]

This decision was made further to consultations with the industry and stakeholders, including the representative you referred to. A few years ago, we held consultations and the stakeholders made a unanimous recommendation: an inspection every two years.

In Canada, weights and measurements come under federal jurisdiction, whereas in the United States, this area comes under the individual state. Consequently, every state makes its own decisions. That explains the situation in the United States: in some locations, inspections are carried out every year; elsewhere, this is done every two years. In Europe, the situation varies from one country to the next. In Germany, inspections are carried out every two years, whereas in France, there is a mandatory inspection every year.

We based this decision on our understanding of technology, on compliance rates, the economic situation and measurement techniques. We felt that, for the time being, every two years was appropriate.

You must bear in mind that we will have regular follow-up. Under Bill C-14, the authorized service providers will provide us with the measurements of the equipment following the inspection. So we will be able to assess the situation over the years and determine whether or not the two-year frequency rate is relevant, if ever a review should prove to be necessary.

[Serge Cardin, Bloc, Sherbrooke, QC]

Yes, Mr. Chair.

Ladies and gentlemen, good morning. It is always a pleasure to see you. Your approach is just as balanced as usual.

Last week, we were to hear from a witness, a representative from Option consommateurs. Unfortunately, because of all kinds of problems, the meeting did not take place and therefore she did not come.

I did, however, have the pleasure of meeting her. She wanted to say that she had participated in the process—you began this process a few years ago in order to review all of the aspects—and that people had ample opportunity to express their views.

In a nutshell, if I were to summarize her conclusion, I would say that they are in favour of Bill C-14, particularly those clauses requiring merchants to ensure that their measurement instruments are in compliance on a regular basis according to the schedule established by the minister. They also agree with using outside service providers, providing that they meet transparent criteria and that their work is periodically inspected by Measurement Canada.

Hence, these conclusions contain two aspects tied to inspections. In her presentation, she told us that in certain places—such as in the United States, apparently—annual inspections are conducted. The frequency of inspections will be established in the regulations. It would appear that these regulations may be calling for more frequent inspections.

What is your position on that matter? Do you feel that there is a real need to have inspections carried out more frequently, on an annual basis?

[Gilles Vinet]

As far as the content of Bill C-14 is concerned, we always focus on accurate measurements and regulatory requirements.

As for the title of the act, we are much more concerned about what this bill will allow. It is not up to us to determine whether or not the title is appropriate.

[Gilles Vinet]

No, that is not something that we decide. The minister would be in a better position to answer this question. We are not the ones who decide on the name of the bill. It is still called the Electricity and Gas Inspection Act and the Weights and Measures Act. Those names will not change. The two acts remain the same.

As for the title of Bill C-14, the minister would be in a better position to answer than we are.

[Gilles Vinet]

We have been told that in many cases, the Government of Quebec accepts Measurement Canada certification. Given that Bill C-14 requires inspections every two years, this certification could be used for compliance with the standards of the Régie du bâtiment du Québec. No doubt the same organizations could do the inspections.

[Gilles Vinet]

No. There are no requirements in terms of follow-up. There are initial inspection requirements but once the devices are operating, there are no longer any requirements. As you mentioned, the Régie du bâtiment specifies that these devices should be calibrated every two years. That calibration applies to various factors related to inventory reconciliation, in order to ensure that there are no leaks. Currently, there is no obligatory inspection. If Bill C-14 is passed, every fuel distributor will have to be inspected every two years using certified accurate measurement standards and accepted testing methods to certify testing devices, by a body that has the authority to inspect a device under the Weights and Measures Act. That's what would change. Once the bill is passed, follow-ups will be carried out by authorized bodies.

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

You're saying there will be no overlap. However, there are currently monitoring and inspection activities.

What is happening right now? What changes would occur under Bill C-14? Would something be added to the inspections? Can you tell us what would happen and what would be added to these activities if Bill C-14 were passed?

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Good morning once again. I believe this is the second or third time you're appearing before us.

Last Tuesday the Association québécoise des indépendants du pétrole testified before us. They had read the bill and were concerned about a possible overlap of inspection requirements. According to what we heard, these same inspections are required under Quebec law. Under Bill C-14, there will be inspections. That's why they feel there will be overlap, inspections twice over.

Could you reassure us and tell us that this won't be the case? If it is the case, please tell us.

[The Chair, Conservative, Michael Chong]

Good morning, and welcome to the 24th meeting on the Standing Committee for Industry, Science and Technology, June 17, 2010. We're here pursuant to the order of reference of Thursday, May 13, 2010, to study Bill C-14, an act to amend the Electricity and Gas Inspection Act and the Weights and Measures Act.

I want to thank our four witnesses for coming to appear in front of our committee on short notice. We appreciate that. We have quite a bit of time today to clarify issues regarding this bill.

Before we begin, I just want to indicate that the analyst did do some research for you. He circulated a chart showing the breakdown in taxes for various markets around Canada, because that question was asked last meeting. He also did some research on the cost of ten-percenters. He's not able to break that cost down into its constituent components. He just retrieved the information on the global amount that every member spends on printing. I think those are the two pieces of information that were requested last meeting.

We're not going to begin with an opening statement because Measurement Canada has, I understand, delivered one before and I don't think there is a need to deliver another one. We will begin with Mr. McTeague.

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

My comment has precisely to do with that. I think that before we move to clause-by-clause consideration of this bill, it would be interesting to hear from Industry Canada representatives about this potential overlap. I would not want to see us pass a bill that would force retailers to deal with two laws, one that applies to Quebec and one that has to do with Industry Canada. I think it is important to obtain some information from Industry Canada on the way in which Bill C-14 would apply, given current regulations already in existence in Quebec.

[Robert Bouchard, Bloc, Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC]

Would the situation be different than it is today if Bill C-14 were to be passed?

[Jane Savage]

The intent of the Weights and Measures Act and of Bill C-14 is to ensure that the pumps are accurate. It is also the intent of the retailer to ensure that their pumps are accurate. So to the extent that the administrative monetary penalty enables a non-criminal violation when the pump is not accurate...

To be clear here, this does not mean that the pump has been tampered with or that there's been any criminal intent. What it means is that an AMP will be applied, as I understand the legislation, if the pump is out of calibration. The concern with it is that a random inspection might take place on the 700th day of a two-year cycle, right before it is to be recalibrated, and the pump is found to be out of calibration. An AMP may be applied in that scenario. Certainly there is no criminal intent.

To the extent that this occurs—and possibly the name of the retailer is then published—it is something we have had to think long and hard about, because we worry that while there is no intent to do anything nasty, or even negligence, on the part of the retailer, this may result in the reputation of the retailer being impacted. That is of concern to us.

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

We've heard from Measurement Canada officials that in fact the certification process is extremely involved and rigorous.

Finally, Bill C-14 has an element that introduces administrative monetary penalties. That element seems to have received a fair degree of widespread support. Could you comment on that element of this bill?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Westmount—Ville-Marie, QC]

Thank you for coming to testify.

I agree with you when you say that the scope of the so-called problem has been greatly exaggerated. In fact, I believe that allowing the spread of rumours regarding all kinds of abuses committed by retailers is nothing more than petty politics. Unfortunately, it leaves us with the impression that retailers are dishonest, and this is certainly not the case.

Ms. Marcotte, you described a program that already exists in Quebec and that seems to be very similar to the one proposed in Bill C-14. Have you taken any steps to find out if the government intends to exempt Quebec, given the fact that Quebec is already enforcing its own system?

[Jane Savage]

I think the act is, as I mentioned before, for consumer confidence. I'm not sure it's going to change retailer behaviour.

I think if retailers today are doing something egregious--tampering with the pump, or purposely ignoring a calibration that favours them--there are measures in the current Weights and Measures Act to deal with that. The fines have been increased, and the jail terms, etc., for that kind of intentional criminal behaviour, but we do have to note that there hasn't been a prosecution.

The intentional stuff I think is being taken care of today. Bill C-14 raises the fines for that. We can debate--I'll leave that to you--whether that will make a difference. I'm not sure it will, because we don't see any intentional behaviour today.