Bill C-33

Strengthening the Port System and Railway Safety in Canada Act

An Act to amend the Customs Act, the Railway Safety Act, the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, 1992, the Marine Transportation Security Act, the Canada Transportation Act and the Canada Marine Act and to make a consequential amendment to another Act

This enactment amends several Acts in order to strengthen the port system and railway safety in Canada.
The enactment amends the Customs Act to require that, on request, any person in possession or control of imported goods make those goods available for examination in accordance with regulations and deliver those goods, or cause them to be delivered, to a secure area that meets the requirements set out in regulation.
The enactment also amends the Railway Safety Act to, among other things,
(a) add a definition of “safety” that includes the concept of security;
(b) prohibit interference with any railway work, railway equipment or railway operation, or damage or destruction of any railway work or railway equipment, without lawful excuse, in a manner that threatens the safety of railway operations;
(c) prohibit behaviour that endangers or risks endangering the safety of a station, railway equipment or individuals who are at the station or on board the railway equipment and unruly behaviour toward employees, agents or mandataries of a company;
(d) authorize the Minister to order a company to take necessary corrective measures if the Minister believes that
(i) a measure taken by the company in relation to a requirement of a regulation made under subsection 18(2.1) has deficiencies that risk compromising the security of railway transportation,
(ii) the security management system developed by the company has deficiencies that risk compromising railway security, or
(iii) the implementation of the company’s security management system has deficiencies that risk compromising railway security;
(e) authorize the Minister to grant, refuse to grant, suspend or cancel a transportation security clearance;
(f) strengthen the administrative monetary penalty regime; and
(g) require a review of the operation of the Act every five years.
The enactment also amends the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, 1992 to, among other things,
(a) require persons who import, offer for transport, handle or transport dangerous goods to register with the Minister;
(b) provide to the Minister powers relating to the management of safety risks; and
(c) establish an administrative monetary penalty regime.
The enactment also amends the Marine Transportation Security Act to, among other things,
(a) set out the Act’s purpose and allow the Minister of Transport to enter into agreements with organizations in respect of the administration and enforcement of the Act;
(b) set out regulation-making powers that include powers respecting threats and risks to the health of persons involved in the marine transportation system, the sharing of information and the establishment of vessel exclusion zones;
(c) authorize the Minister to make interim orders and give emergency directions and modify the Minister’s power to give directions to vessels; and
(d) create new offences, increase certain penalties and extend the application of certain offences and the administrative monetary penalty regime to vessels.
The enactment also amends the Canada Transportation Act to, among other things,
(a) specify that the Minister may use electronic systems in making decisions or determinations under an Act of Parliament that the Minister administers or enforces and provide that a power of entry into a place under such an Act may be exercised remotely by means of telecommunications; and
(b) reduce the threshold above which the Minister and the Commissioner of Competition must receive notice of proposed transactions relating to a port.
The enactment also amends the Canada Marine Act to, among other things,
(a) set out that port authorities are responsible for management of traffic and create regulatory authorities respecting fees and information and data sharing in respect of that management;
(b) provide the minister with the power to require, by order, the taking of measures to prevent imminent harm to national security, national economic security, or competition; and
(c) require port authorities to establish advisory committees, which must include representatives from local Indigenous communities, require periodic assessments of port authorities’ governance practices and set out new requirements respecting plans and reports relating to climate change.
Finally, it makes a consequential amendment to the Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada Act .

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

Mr. Dekovic quantified three things: nimble, predictable and cost-effective. Bill C-33 is none of those.

What is your reaction to that?

[Justus Veldman]

It's a touchy subject. I will answer that as carefully as I can.

I think the opportunity to enhance the Welland Canal by way of having a change of management through the Hamilton-Oshawa Port Authority is positive. We're happy to contribute, and I feel we are.

I guess the fact of the matter is that, over the last 50 years, Transport Canada has owned all kinds of lands along the Welland Canal and has had its port infrastructure basically.... The ability for vessels to stop along the Welland Canal has significantly decreased. Allowing investment into the Welland Canada through Bill C-33 and localizing some of the inland port investments I think will help not only the private companies along the Welland Canada but also the Transport Canada lands that the seaway corporation currently manages.

Yes, some change is required, because it hasn't worked for the last 50 years.

[Justus Veldman]

My quick answer is yes, absolutely. Some of the infrastructure along the Welland Canal corridor needs fairly significant capital upgrades. By levering the private sector's investment and Transport Canada's ability to now invest into some of these assets through Bill C-33, it would allow the Welland Canal to flourish and, by that, the Niagara region would attract more industry.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I appreciate all the witnesses for coming out today.

My question is for Mr. Veldman.

Mr. Veldman, you're very much involved in the economy of my area, the Niagara region, as well as many areas throughout the country from coast to coast to coast.

You mentioned in your presentation that the Welland Canal corridor is, in fact, a port, because of its partnership with the Hamilton-Oshawa Port Authority, and with that is amongst the five biggest ports in the country. You also mentioned that it needs to modernize to fully optimize this Transport Canada asset. I want to emphasize this, because the Welland Canal is, in fact, a Transport Canada asset, currently managed by the St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation.

Do you feel that the Welland Canal corridor, being a port and this bill is attaching itself to modernizing ports, should be aligned with the intentions set out in Bill C-33?

[Marko Dekovic]

I can speak only to the one port authority where we operate, the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority. We did operate terminals in the ports of New York and New Jersey, but there is a very different approach there.

There isn't much in Bill C-33 other than perhaps that there will be a mechanism for the minister to appoint the chair, which, as I mentioned earlier, would then at least give some powers for tenants and users of the port to at least go to a political master of the port authority to ask for some remedies or at least to review our input. That is not provided right now, so that is potentially the only way that it can improve a situation where tenants, port authorities and users are maybe not collaborating or seeing eye to eye.

Historically, when terminal operators grow, port authorities grow, and there's a symbiotic, must-have relationship there. We've had some challenges and bumps along the way. I can report that, even with the recent leadership changes at the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority, we're starting to see some change in how the Canada Marine Act is interpreted by the port authority and approached with the tenants.

There's some improvement and light on the horizon.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Mr. Dekovic, as a terminal operator, can you speak to some of the challenges you face in working with the port authorities? Do you think Bill C-33 will help improve the relationships between ports and tenants?

[Bruce McConchie]

It's not the case currently, and that's why we're hoping that the amendments come through.

I worked in the aviation industry for 39 years, and I'm very familiar with efficient arrival systems and especially non-efficient arrival systems. I can't understand, in this day and age, how the port of Vancouver cannot communicate with vessels that are across the ocean and schedule them in properly like an airport would do. Airports that didn't schedule properly paid the price. The ones that got their scheduling improved and expanded.... A good example is Chicago; it has excellent arrival systems. Other areas have poor arrival systems, with aircraft circling overhead burning excess amounts of fuel.

In essence, we have sort of the same thing. Unfortunately, I take a little exception to Ms. Gee's comments about ships needing to come and be checked and that taking time. Does it take weeks and months? We have to look at that kind of thing.

Bill C-33 needs to strengthen the ability of the port and demand that it improve its infrastructure, as I mentioned, with all-weather grain loading and those kinds of things.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Okay. Thank you.

Mr. McConchie, I have the same question for you on the provisions in Bill C-33. Will it help the port better manage its traffic and also improve the overall situation with the anchorages?

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Does Bill C-33 change anything? Does it bring some improvements?

[Bonnie Gee]

The ports, and the port of Vancouver specifically, are already moving forward on allocating anchorages, so there are authorities within their current letters patent that enable them to direct traffic within their jurisdiction and vessels that are due into their port as well. Data is a big part of what we need to improve our operations. Our vessels definitely want to improve the port optimization. They also definitely don't want to be sitting around waiting for cargos.

I think we're all on the right track. We're moving in the direction of getting more data to better understand where the bottlenecks are, but I don't think that Bill C-33 necessarily changes the direction that's already under way.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to welcome all the witnesses. Thank you for all your input with respect to Bill C-33.

Ms. Gee, do you think the provisions in Bill C-33 will help the port to better manage traffic? Do you think that this will improve the overall situation with anchorages in B.C.?

[Marko Dekovic]

In Bill C-33, it is not clear where it actually makes the operating environment for the private sector more cost-effective, more nimble or more predictable. Those are things that attract private sector investment, and it appears that it adds more regulatory advisory bodies, more hoops and challenges for anybody looking to invest into the gateway, more procedures, etc. It is not clear that this would be attractive to the private sector.

Furthermore, with regard to existing private sector operators, if limits to borrowing powers of port authorities are further removed, or if there is less accountability and fewer checks and balances, this will further provide a cold-water shower onto investment from the existing terminal operators because they won't know what the cost burden will be.

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

You talked in your opening statement, as well, about unleashing private sector investment. I think that's important if we're going to achieve what I think is the intention of supply chain fluidity and the economic potential we have. Obviously, the port of Vancouver is our gateway to Asia, and it's critically important to our economy. Maybe you could elaborate a bit more about that and where Bill C-33 may be deficient in that regard.

[Marko Dekovic]

Yes, the right balance is to be struck. I think that a cost analysis of these additional advisory bodies' oversights should be done. At the same time, additional powers that would be granted to port authorities to assess fees also need to be balanced with the kinds of powers they have and with transparency on what they do with those fees.

I think it's important to actually look at Bill C-33 in companionship with Bill C-52. It will be important to get Bill C-52 right so that the right level of transparency is provided to the tenants and the public about what port authorities do with the revenues they generate.

[Dan Muys, Conservative, Flamborough—Glanbrook, ON]

You raised the point that there are different sizes of ports. We've had witness testimony that it could be $200,000 per annum. That's what one group told us. There were a couple of additional employees from another group who told us.... You said at the outset that private companies like yours are assuming all the risks.

Do you see Bill C-33 adding to some of these burdens? Is it excessive? What's the right balance?