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

Sponsor

Omar Alghabra  Liberal

Status

Report stage (House), as of Sept. 20, 2024

Subscribe to a feed (what's a feed?) of speeches and votes in the House related to Bill C-33.

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament has also written a full legislative summary of the bill.

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 .

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Bill numbers are reused for different bills each new session. Perhaps you were looking for one of these other C-33s:

C-33 (2021) Law Appropriation Act No. 2, 2021-22
C-33 (2016) An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts
C-33 (2014) First Nations Control of First Nations Education Act
C-33 (2012) Law Protecting Air Service Act

Votes

Sept. 26, 2023 Passed 2nd reading of Bill C-33, 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
Sept. 26, 2023 Failed 2nd reading of Bill C-33, 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 (reasoned amendment)
June 12, 2023 Passed Time allocation for Bill C-33, 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

Debate Summary

line drawing of robot

This is a computer-generated summary of the speeches below. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.

Bill C-33 aims to modernize Canada's transportation system by amending several acts related to customs, railway safety, transportation of dangerous goods, marine transportation security, and marine activities. The bill seeks to strengthen port governance, improve supply chain efficiency and resilience, enhance safety and security in the marine and rail sectors, and address environmental considerations. However, some critics suggest the bill could increase red tape and centralize power in Ottawa, potentially hindering port operations and economic competitiveness.

Liberal

  • Modernizing transportation system: Bill C-33 seeks to modernize Canada's transportation system, making it more sustainable, competitive, and resilient. It addresses key modes of transport—marine, air, rail, and road—recognizing their interdependence and impact on the entire supply chain.
  • Strengthening port governance: The bill introduces reforms to the governance of Canada's port authorities. These include improvements to marine safety and security through amendments to the Canada Marine Act, the Canada Transportation Act, the Marine Transportation Security Act, and the Customs Act.
  • Improving railway safety: Amendments to the Railway Safety Act are proposed to enhance the safety and security of Canada's railway system. The goal is to maintain safe, secure, efficient, and reliable services that foster economic growth and benefit all Canadians.
  • Focus on supply chain fluidity: The bill aims to improve the flow of goods through ports and rail, enhance the ability to respond to supply chain disruptions, and facilitate investment in transportation infrastructure. It would enable swift intervention in exceptional circumstances caused by disruptive events, such as pandemics, extreme weather, and hostile state actors.
  • Trade and economic benefits: Liberal members emphasize that the legislation advances both economic and safety interests of Canadians. The bill is presented as part of the government's broader effort to deliver an economy that works for all Canadians from coast to coast to coast.

Conservative

  • Bill is a missed opportunity: Conservative members stated that Bill C-33 does not address the root causes of supply chain issues, rail service reliability or the relationship between shippers and rail companies. They believe it is a missed opportunity to act on the recommendations of the national supply chain task force and improve the efficiency and competitiveness of Canadian ports.
  • More government interference: The party expressed concern over increased government control and red tape in the port system. They are especially concerned about the Minister of Transport's new powers and ability to designate the chairperson of the board, as well as changes to the board of directors, arguing that it undermines the arm's-length independence of the ports, the port tenants and users.
  • Negative effects on economy: Conservatives fear that the bill's measures will burden smaller ports with inefficient and anti-competitive red tape, increasing costs for port users and consumers. They also stated that the bill does not consider the different realities of the ports across the country.
  • Enforcement is key: The party acknowledges the need for clarity on rail safety and support for making blockades of rail lines illegal, but they state the issue is not with the rules but with the enforcement of the existing rules. They also believe the legislation fails to address labour shortages in the transportation sector.

NDP

  • Qualified support for the bill: The NDP supports the bill at second reading but believes there are major shortcomings that require substantive amendments. They believe the Liberal government's approach is too heavily driven by commercial interests of big corporations, especially in the marine and rail sectors.
  • Rail safety concerns: The NDP feels the bill misses opportunities to improve rail safety, particularly regarding private railway police, emergency response plans, regional risk assessments for dangerous goods, and worker safety. They advocate for the dissolution of private railway police due to lack of public accountability and for addressing the safety of workers, which is not explicitly mentioned in the bill.
  • Port authority accountability: The NDP aims to strengthen the role of port authorities as publicly accountable entities, but believes the bill needs amendments to ensure real accountability and transparency. They advocate for labor representation on port authority boards and more robust climate planning aligned with national and international commitments.
  • Addressing community impacts: The NDP emphasizes the need to address the concerns of communities impacted by the transportation of goods, including marine traffic and anchorages affecting ecologically sensitive areas. They seek to protect these areas from the impact of shipping traffic and ensure that community concerns are reflected in meaningful amendments to the bill.

Bloc

  • Supports the bill: The Bloc supports the bill as a step in the right direction, addressing safety concerns with freight transportation. Members believe measures in the bill will improve railway safety and support referral to committee for potential improvements.
  • Need for greater oversight: Multiple speakers emphasized the need to overhaul the Railway Safety Act to end self-regulation by companies, ensuring the government is responsible for establishing and enforcing safety plans. They emphasized that protecting the public is the primary responsibility of the state and cannot be delegated to private companies.
  • Mégantic bypass concerns: There are concerns about the federal government's handling of the Lac-Mégantic rail bypass project, particularly the decision to forcibly expropriate land despite prior agreements with landowners. Members feel this disrespectful approach undermines trust and disregards Quebec's legal processes.
  • Liberal appointments questioned: Members expressed concern over the minister's power to appoint chairs of boards of directors, fearing appointments will be based on political loyalty rather than competence and expertise. This raises concerns about potential political interference in port management.
Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Strengthening the Port System and Railway Safety in Canada ActGovernment Orders

June 8th, 2023 / 11:30 p.m.

Conservative

Larry Maguire Conservative Brandon—Souris, MB

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member, particularly for his comments in regard to one of our major railroads, which of course, is headquartered in his riding, and the training facilities he spoke of. He opened his speech by talking about the plethora of different areas this is trying to cover, and I wonder if he could just expand a little more on the areas he was referring to in his opening comments, as to the number of different areas this bill is trying to cover and if he sees that as any kind of a detriment or not.

Strengthening the Port System and Railway Safety in Canada ActGovernment Orders

June 8th, 2023 / 11:30 p.m.

Conservative

Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB

Mr. Speaker, let us go over some of those detriments inside this bill and try not to go into too many on ports, but there are quite a few issues with the ports that will be affected. There are additional ministerial powers that will limit local decision-making. That is not a good idea.

Additional regulatory requirements will add cost to stakeholders, which, again, will be passed on, like I said, to Canadian consumers.

It is also going to reduce anchorages adversely. Some stakeholders will be impacted. There are a lot of issues here with local decision-making being taken away and handed to the executive. I generally believe that is a bad idea, and it is reflected in many stakeholders expressing that publicly and declining to support the bill.

Strengthening the Port System and Railway Safety in Canada ActGovernment Orders

June 8th, 2023 / 11:30 p.m.

Independent

Kevin Vuong Independent Spadina—Fort York, ON

Mr. Speaker, a lot of people are often surprised to hear that, in my downtown riding of Spadina—Fort York, we also have a port. We had a scare recently because the port authority also includes, within its domain, Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport, and there was a bomb scare. One of the challenges right now, with the different jurisdictions, is being able to put together an emergency management plan. I heard this yesterday when I was in the riding, at a meeting with the Bathurst Quay neighbourhood.

I am curious to hear my colleague's thoughts on how, perhaps, the government could do better in working with other orders of government to ensure and protect the safety of every community that is home to a port, railroad and so on.

Strengthening the Port System and Railway Safety in Canada ActGovernment Orders

June 8th, 2023 / 11:30 p.m.

Conservative

Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB

Mr. Speaker, the member brought up a good point.

Again, I think we should prefer local decision-making that is informed by a national body to have wider information such as a national security list. It gets intelligence from our foreign allies, our international allies, who might provide or tip us off about events or activities that are being planned.

That could then help local decision-makers adjust locally, in how much police enforcement might be necessary or how firefighting services could be improved, and also ensuring some basic operational things such as communicating on the same wavelengths and having each other's contact information. That is some of the basic preparation for emergencies that local port authorities, airports, all of them, could profit from in having that local decision-making placed first, where they know whom to go to and whom to communicate with when they need extra support.

Strengthening the Port System and Railway Safety in Canada ActGovernment Orders

June 8th, 2023 / 11:30 p.m.

Conservative

Dave Epp Conservative Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON

Mr. Speaker, I want to pick up on one of the hon. member's comments. It is a bit tangential to the bill tonight, but I noticed that he said that he has no legions to honour our armed forces in his riding.

I want to extend an invitation. I just took a look at my last November 11 schedule. There are eleven in my riding. I was able to attend three of them and had surrogates for the other eight. I would invite my hon. friend to come my way and help me honour our veterans.

Strengthening the Port System and Railway Safety in Canada ActGovernment Orders

June 8th, 2023 / 11:30 p.m.

Conservative

Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB

Mr. Speaker, let us be clear. There used to be a legion hall in my riding, not too far from my constituency office. Unfortunately, it closed down many years ago.

For the longest time, although I have the second-largest riding by population size in Canada and the largest riding in Calgary, it did not even have a high school in it. It just so happens that I represent a very large area of many suburbs in Calgary, including old suburbs, places like Erin Woods and Ogden and Dover, as well.

I will come to his riding if he invites me.

Strengthening the Port System and Railway Safety in Canada ActGovernment Orders

June 8th, 2023 / 11:30 p.m.

Conservative

Jeremy Patzer Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK

Mr. Speaker, it is great to have such a lively audience here tonight in the chamber just past 11:30 p.m. It is fantastic to have a lively House of Commons. I really appreciate it.

We are here to talk about strengthening the port system and railway safety in Canada act, Bill C-33. This bill is important to me. The reason is that Saskatchewan, the province where I am from, is completely landlocked. We need our ports. We need railway access. Those are two hugely important fundamentals to the province of Saskatchewan.

Saskatchewan, in 2022, had over $81 billion in gross domestic product for this country. That is a fantastic output and a fantastic number. Saskatchewan does a fantastic job. It definitely punches above its weight, especially for a province that has roughly 1.2 million people. We do a great job. Obviously, agriculture and the energy sector are the main drivers of the economy where I am from.

I want to talk more about the agriculture side. In Saskatchewan, particularly southwest Saskatchewan, where I am from, we grow the vast majority of the pulse crops that the world relies upon, particularly the lentil crop. It is exported all over the world. Whether someone is growing organic crops or otherwise, we grow what the world wants and what the world needs.

The only way we can get those lentils around the world to all the countries that have such a high demand for them and for the protein they provide is through rail. When I look through this bill, I see it is trying to do some things around safety. It is trying to do some very important things around modernizing our ports. It is trying to strengthen our ports.

If we look at where our ports rank across the world, we see that we are right at the bottom. I am sure my colleague from Provencher, with whom I will be splitting my time, will want to touch on that later, so I will be sure to leave a few points for him to get to as well.

Access to ports and access to rail are so important. We have CN, we have CP and we have some really fantastic short-line rail operators. Our short-line operators are actually leading the charge on safety in the railway system. In fact, one of the owners of one of the railway companies reached out to me recently to send me an email regarding some of the statistics that the short-line operators have in Saskatchewan around safety. There are zero incidents, month over month. There are zero incidents.

They are running a high-quality rail line, taking care of their employees, providing great jobs and providing a service to the farmers, the producers and the shippers in Saskatchewan, and they are doing so while respecting the safety of the workers and providing high-quality service. That is what they are doing.

The email I got was from the Great Sandhills Railway. Our Saskatchewan caucus recently met with Great Western Rail, another fantastic short-line operator in our region that does a fantastic job of providing that service to farmers. It does so safely, while providing the fantastic jobs that are required to be able to meet that demand.

I was just messaging one of the exporters in my riding. They export farm equipment around the world. They export to 28 countries across the world. It is a farm implement dealership in a small town in Saskatchewan. It ships to 28 countries. How does it do that? It ships through the ports in Halifax, Montreal, Vancouver and, I believe, Prince Rupert.

Earlier today I heard my colleague from British Columbia talking about what the port of Prince Rupert actually means. It is the closest port to the Asian markets. The ports in Halifax and Montreal are some of the ports in North America that are closest to the European markets. They are very important access points.

One of the issues that they are dealing with in Vancouver is that it takes 12 days to get a container through. Montreal is closer to 10 days, and in Halifax, it takes 14 days to get a container through. Sometimes they are waiting over a month to even get a container. Trying to get access to the things they need to ship their products is not being addressed by this bill.

There is mention in the bill about setting up advisory panels and empowering the minister to set up authorities to deal with a variety of issues. However, the one thing that is not included as one of the issues that they would deal with is the actual production of the ports and making sure that they are getting results for producers and shippers. The bill would not require rail companies to make sure that they are providing the fullest service to shippers.

For example, CN does not do any business with Hapag-Lloyd. When we are sitting in Saskatchewan watching a train go past one of the many intersections that we have, we see Hapag-Lloyd's name on many containers. It is one of the more popular company names that we see going across Saskatchewan when we see sea cans going down the rail lines or on a flatbed truck, but CN does not deal with it.

How is that going to work for exporters in a landlocked province trying to export products? They also have to import pieces so they can build the product they are trying to make and then export. However, one of the biggest players, CN does not even deal with it, and there are other companies CN does not deal with as well. This is severely limiting the options for people trying to export a product, but the bill does not deal with that. These advisory panels that the government is looking to set up would not deal with that. It is not a priority for this government.

When we hear other colleagues talking about the bill needing to be withdrawn and strengthened, and that the government needs to do more, I would suggest that these are some of the things that need to be looked at in the bill. Why is it not a priority for the government to try to make sure that we get the best result for our exporters who do such a fantastic job?

All across this country, we care about the environment, reducing emissions and reducing greenhouse gases. We do that all across this country and across party lines; everybody cares about that. We have innovators in the prairie provinces that make world-class products, and they do so in a manner that is environmentally sustainable. These are products that people in the rest of the world need. If they had the technology, if they had the products that our farmers in Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Alberta have, they would be able to reduce their emissions as they harvest their crops in other regions of the world. They need what Canada has to offer, and without a robust port system, without a robust rail line, that cannot happen. I see that one of the advisory panels would actually deal with climate change, but do members think that it would bring this element of it up? No, not a chance. This will not be part of what the panel would talk about.

My hope is that the government, if it is going to appoint these advisory panels, will actually talk to the shippers, exporters and manufacturing companies; the people who are trying to get their far superior products out to the world market. The government should talk to them when it is talking about how it is going to achieve some of the things that these boards are going to do. It should make sure that there are actually people in industry, who are involved in taking real and meaningful actions on these boards to make sure that we can actually get things done in a timely manner, to benefit our country and the rest of the world, and do so in a sustainable manner. That is the power that a robust rail line and port system could have in this country, because Canada has what the world needs and wants.

We grow the products, we manufacture the goods and we export them. Some of those things have to get refined and brought back yet again, which is crazy; we could do much of that here in Canada. However, in order to do any of that, regardless of where we are at, we need a robust rail and shipping system, and we do not have that, but we could.

We have had a trans-Canada rail line for over 100 years. It has been around for a very long time. It was a huge marvel to get that project done. However, we still have not reached the full potential that a valuable resource like that could have. We need to utilize it. The bill before us should be strengthening and building that up. It should be focused on lifting the entire country up so that we can use those ports, especially for landlocked provinces. We have not just what the world wants, but we have what our country needs, if we could even just get our goods out to the provinces and out to the edges. We have what is needed.

I hope that the government will take these considerations to look at the bill and make a serious version of it so that we can actually accomplish what needs to be addressed.

Strengthening the Port System and Railway Safety in Canada ActGovernment Orders

June 8th, 2023 / 11:40 p.m.

LaSalle—Émard—Verdun Québec

Liberal

David Lametti LiberalMinister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

Mr. Speaker, let me first take a moment to congratulate the hon. member for Cypress Hills—Grasslands for his earlier speech with respect to interoperability and the support that he had from his colleagues with respect to that private member's bill. As someone who spent 20 years of his life looking at copyright law, I think it is a great initiative and a great bill. Interoperability is critically important.

When we took over government in 2015, we had a CETA and a TPP agreement that was dead in the water. At the time, I was parliamentary secretary for trade. We put work into reviving those two agreements, as well as signing a new North American Free Trade Agreement, given the new Trump administration at the time.

Would the member not agree that those trade agreements, as well as the investments we are making in the Port of Vancouver now with this bill, are meant to precisely address the kinds of issues he spoke of, without presuming to know what the best solutions are for improving the rail system and for improving the port system? I think we all agree. We share his concern, and we agree that this is what has to be done. Would the member not agree that the bill would do precisely that by calling on experts to give us the best advice to improve the rail system and the port system as we move forward?

Strengthening the Port System and Railway Safety in Canada ActGovernment Orders

June 8th, 2023 / 11:45 p.m.

Conservative

Jeremy Patzer Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK

Mr. Speaker, in short, unfortunately the answer is no.

My private member's bill, which deals with interoperability, could actually help deal with some of the issues in the rail line system. It is going to help pave the way to be able to do that, so we have some commonality there.

When it comes to the trade agreements, my colleague from Abbotsford was somebody who negotiated a lot of those and got deals signed. Unfortunately, due to delays, maybe from some of the other countries and whatnot, the Conservatives did not get them fully implemented. Yes, the government finished some of those off, but it made some changes to them that we do not necessarily agree with.

The big point about the Port of Vancouver in particular is that it is the third-worst port in the world. Prince Rupert is the ninth-worst port. These are ports that could have huge potential. They could be in the top 50 ports in the world with no problem. They could be, and they should be. The potential is there for them to be able to do that. I do not see anything in the 108 or 109 pages of this bill that would actually make sure that those ports go from being at the bottom of the pile to the top of the pile.

Strengthening the Port System and Railway Safety in Canada ActGovernment Orders

June 8th, 2023 / 11:45 p.m.

Conservative

Dave Epp Conservative Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON

Mr. Speaker, my colleague mentioned the ports that are close to our export markets. There are five ports in Canada, namely Prince Rupert, Vancouver, Saint John, Halifax and Montreal, that are licensed to take containers in.

Recently, a number of us in Ontario toured a port in Picton where the owners have applied to be licensed to receive containers because it is closest to the city of Toronto, which is the largest market for our incoming containers. The owners have asked for no federal money. All they need is a licence. They are willing to pay for any CBSA costs required to clear containers, yet they are unable to achieve a licence.

Bringing containers in closer to the city before moving from ship to rail reduces emissions and reduces transportation costs. Would my colleague not agree that this would be a logical, environmentally sound reason to offer a sixth port closest to our biggest market for incoming containers?

Strengthening the Port System and Railway Safety in Canada ActGovernment Orders

June 8th, 2023 / 11:45 p.m.

Conservative

Jeremy Patzer Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK

Mr. Speaker, my colleague is absolutely right. That is the common-sense approach that we want to see from a piece of legislation like this. As I mentioned in my speech, my hope is that, if the government follows through and sets up some of these advisory committees, it will not just stack them with activists but will actually stack them with people who are working on the ground, who have boots on the ground and are trying to find solutions for a positive change, not only in production but also for the environment and for our sustainability, and who would make sure that we get the best deal for Canadians going forward.

They should also be trying to not only get those sea-cans shipped but also have them available to be used yet again for the next load, trying to get things done and dealt with in a timely manner. One of the problems we have is trying to get access to those cans so we can use them again and get products in. Then we could also send more products back out. What the member has proposed here would be a way to help speed that up and get a better result for Canadians.

Strengthening the Port System and Railway Safety in Canada ActGovernment Orders

June 8th, 2023 / 11:45 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Mazier Conservative Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB

Mr. Speaker, could the member expand a bit more on what impacts the transportation system had on the grain handling in 2013 and 2015 and how that impacted the farmers? That grain did not hit the marketplace in Vancouver until a year and a half later. Could the member comment on what negative impacts that had on farmers and on how this act would not react to that or solve those kinds of problems?

Strengthening the Port System and Railway Safety in Canada ActGovernment Orders

June 8th, 2023 / 11:50 p.m.

Conservative

Jeremy Patzer Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK

Mr. Speaker, one of the biggest problems at the end of the day is that it is always the producer who absorbs the costs. The shipper will pass the costs on to the handler, who passes them on to the producer, the farmer. Farmers are always price-takers; they cannot pass costs on to anybody. However, everybody always passes the buck and passes the dollar on, and it is the farmers and the producers who end up paying for it. When we saw those massive delays, the costs kept piling up, but who ended up paying more? It was the farmers.

The quality of the grain that was being shipped was lessened; this was because of how much longer it took to get it somewhere so that it could be refined, dealt with and turned into the goods we need to consume. However, trying to get things dealt with in a timely manner is not addressed in this bill.

Again, there are many upgrades that need to happen so that we can avoid catastrophes like what happened in 2013 and 2015.

Strengthening the Port System and Railway Safety in Canada ActGovernment Orders

June 8th, 2023 / 11:50 p.m.

Conservative

Ted Falk Conservative Provencher, MB

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to speak to Bill C-33 this evening.

My folks always taught me that nothing good happens after midnight, and I want to remind the handful of my colleagues who are still with us and the fewer still who are awake that is it is only 11:50 p.m. and we will be wrapped up by midnight. What better way to spend the waning minutes of our evening together than with another speech on legislation that the Liberal government has brought forward?

This legislation was an opportunity. We have had two reviews: the Railway Safety Act review and the ports modernization review. We had a chance, and we still do, actually, to do something about the issues at our ports. We have critical issues with our supply chains and border security. However, with this legislation, as with many other bills, the Liberal government has missed the point. It does not matter what the problem is; the Liberal government only seems to ever have two solutions. It only has two clubs in its bag. One is to spend more money and the other is to add more government, or a combination of both, actually; there is probably a third option.

Rather than do what is best for Canadians and for businesses, the Liberal government always does what is best for itself. It seems that the best thing for the government is always more government, more power, more control. The bigger government gets, the more pervasive it gets and the hungrier it gets, until it desires to control every aspect of the economy, industry and people, and the very words we say and the very thoughts we think. It is this need to control that has led, at least in part, to the multiple crises we are facing today, including issues with our supply chains, railroads, ports and border security.

Let us go back a couple of years. Governments across the country, including the Liberal government, put in many restrictions during COVID that shut our economy down. They rigged their economies so that wealthy Liberal insiders and big businesses were able to get richer. The big box stores could stay open while mom-and-pop businesses and local businesses across Canada were forced to shut their doors. They borrowed and printed hundreds of billions of dollars and pumped this new money into the economy, creating unnecessary debt and fuelling inflation, which is now resulting in higher interest rates and an affordability crisis.

Through these policies, the government consolidated dependency on government and made government, rather than industry, the central driving force of our economy. Fast-forward to today, and the same disastrous economic policies, policies that the government continues to double down on, have led to crippling inflation, a cost of living crisis for Canadians and higher interest rates, and we are on the verge of a housing crisis.

These same COVID-era policies have crippled our government's ability to execute and provide the most basic functions of government, and the same disastrous policies have pretty much destroyed our supply chains. This is a Canadian problem now, and it is a problem the Liberal government has created through its policies. Government has caused it. It has been perpetuated on us, and it will continue to be that way.

As I said before, the government always seems to have two solutions, more money or more government, or a combination of the two. That brings us to Bill C-33. When I look at this legislation, a few words keep coming up in my mind. First is “government gatekeepers”, and the other words are “more red tape”. The legislation provides a lot of measures to make it easier for government to control things. What it does not do is make things work better, smoother, faster or more cost effectively, while still focusing on safety.

Let us start off by looking at our ports. The legislation adds new layers of red tape and reporting requirements that will make us less efficient and less competitive. There is no great shock here, but smaller ports will be hit harder than the big ones. Whether it is mom-and-pop businesses during COVID or our ports, with the Liberal government, the little guy always gets whacked and loses out. The Liberal government has stacked the deck against the common folk, because it thinks Ottawa politicians and bureaucrats know better than the people on the ground.

New regulations will add to the cost of doing business, which means businesses will have no choice but to pass on those costs to consumers who already cannot afford what they are paying now. Advisory committees and ministerial interference will mean that the ports have less of a say in their day-to-day operations and fewer opportunities to make operational changes that might actually make things more efficient.

The people who know best are usually the people on the front lines. These are the ones who are most impacted by day-to-day operations and often have the best perspective. However, in the minister's plan, those who are tenants of the ports do not even have a seat at the table and have no representation on the advisory committee.

In short, this bill fails to establish that decisions are made in the best interests of our economy and supply chains, choosing instead to keep our ports tangled up in red tape and confusion.

Again there was the potential here, an opportunity for parliamentarians and stakeholders to work together. As for border enforcement, we are all for that. If it is about streamlining, making things run more smoothly and more cost effectively, Conservatives are all over that. If it is about getting cheaper goods, particularly food, to Canadians faster, where is the “yes” button? Instead, we see the government adding more gatekeepers. In the case of our ports and borders, the Liberal government adds more gatekeepers.

The bill is a missed opportunity to provide for the certainty and clarity needed to modernize our ports and supply chains and, by extension, to ensure stability of prices and availability for Canadian consumers.

I would like to shift gears briefly and talk about another aspect of the bill, and that is the provisions for rail safety.

First of all, there is the hypocrisy of the government that went so far as to enact the Emergencies Act on a group of peaceful truckers who just wanted to be able to do their jobs. We can juxtapose that with 2020, when we had groups of individuals blockading our rail lines, setting them on fire and blocking ports, all in violation of a court order, and holding up a construction project that 20 elected first nation councils had approved, a project that should have brought 9,500 jobs, many of them to our indigenous people. Instead the protests cost Canadians 1,500 jobs and the government did nothing, absolutely nothing. The hypocrisy that it would now bring in a redundant new offence for tampering with rail lines is so disingenuous.

This is not an authority problem; it is an enforcement problem. We have measures in the Criminal Code that deal with this exact subject. The police already have authority to lay charges in the case of all these rail blockades. They just needed to be able to do their jobs, but instead their political masters hamstrung them with laws that go after the wrong people, like Bill C-21, for example. The Liberals do not go after the gangs that bring in illegal guns; no, they go after farmers and law-abiding firearms owners.

When it comes to taxes, Liberals do not go after the super-rich who are hiding their money in offshore tax havens; they go after the small business owners and then call them tax cheats. They are always going after the wrong people. Driven by their ideology, they go for what they think is the low-hanging fruit, the easy pickings, like law-abiding citizens, because public perception is more important to them than public safety. This is why any new enforcement measures included in this bill will ultimately fail: It will be because there is a lack of political will to enforce the existing laws.

Whether it is the economy, our ports, supply chains or law enforcement, we do not need to spend more money and we do not need more government; we need government to get out of the way.

Strengthening the Port System and Railway Safety in Canada ActGovernment Orders

June 8th, 2023 / 11:55 p.m.

Liberal

Ruby Sahota Liberal Brampton North, ON

Mr. Speaker, there is a lot of talk in this House about crime. I know that my constituents have been greatly affected by the illegal exportation of vehicles overseas. This piece of legislation would amend the Customs Act and give more authority for the screening of containers. Right now, it seems like everyone wants a free-for-all, but when we get to question period, they all want us to do more in making sure that people are protected and that their vehicles are not stolen.

There are some good objectives in this piece of legislation and there is a need for government to provide oversight when it comes to dangerous goods and stolen vehicles leaving our country. What would the member have to say about that?