Evidence of meeting #13 for Fisheries and Oceans in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was containers.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:35 a.m.
Deputy Commissioner, Operations, Canadian Coast Guard
Mr. Chair, I could not hear the last part of the question. The audio cut out. I heard “could the master have avoided”, and then I lost it. I'm sorry.
11:40 a.m.
Conservative
Clifford Small Conservative Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
Could the master have avoided the area with the tightest isobars and remained in an area of the storm with less wind?
11:40 a.m.
Deputy Commissioner, Operations, Canadian Coast Guard
Mr. Chair, I don't think it's appropriate for me to question what could have happened had the master made a different decision. The master decides. He's in charge of his ship. He would have had access to the weather forecast information and he made a professional decision based on his experience. I think I'd best leave it at that.
11:40 a.m.
Conservative
Clifford Small Conservative Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
Okay, so given the fact that these container ships are coming into Canadian waters in high winds and stormy seas, it's possible they could lose some of their cargo.
Given that jurisdiction lies with the federal government, could a regulation be put in place so that these ships don't deliberately steer into the eye of a storm, for example?
11:40 a.m.
Deputy Commissioner, Operations, Canadian Coast Guard
Again, I think from the perspective of a mariner, I would point out that it would not have been an intentional decision to drive into the storm for that purpose.
As to the making of regulations, I think I will ask Transport Canada to answer that question.
11:40 a.m.
Executive Director, Legislative, Regulatory and International Affairs, Marine Safety and Security, Department of Transport
Mr. Chair, our regulations focus on the safety aspects in ensuring the navigational safety and the environmental protection of all marine shipping activities. However, as Mr. Henderson just pointed out, we would look to the experience and expertise of the masters to navigate their ships appropriately in stormy seas. We would not take it upon ourselves to regulate based on weather conditions.
11:40 a.m.
Conservative
Clifford Small Conservative Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
Okay. I'm going to switch a little bit here now.
Would you please tell the committee about the integrity of the seals on these containers? How long are they estimated to remain sealed tightly, to the best of your knowledge?
11:40 a.m.
Executive Director, Legislative, Regulatory and International Affairs, Marine Safety and Security, Department of Transport
I would have to take that question away and report back through the chair with the specific answers on the details with respect to the integrity of the seals on the container, unless my colleagues from Coast Guard have that information available.
11:40 a.m.
Deputy Commissioner, Operations, Canadian Coast Guard
No, I'm sorry. We don't have that. That's not part of our jurisdiction.
11:40 a.m.
Conservative
Clifford Small Conservative Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, NL
We can't estimate how long it would take for seals to break down.
In terms of searching for missing containers, I assume you would be looking for containers that have dangerous goods or pollutants or things that could damage the marine ecosystem first and foremost. Would you bypass the containers you found that aren't an imminent threat to the ecosystem and continue looking for ones that are a real threat, and then go back to get the ones that are less volatile at a later period?
11:40 a.m.
Deputy Commissioner, Operations, Canadian Coast Guard
Mr. Chair, I'd just like to reiterate that the responsibility for searching for and recovering those containers rests with the shipowner. The Coast Guard's responsibility is to make sure that they keep after that and that they are taking adequate action.
When it comes to actually looking for and finding those containers, the sonar scan would determine where there are containers. It would not be possible to determine which containers are which through that technology. That would require additional surveys, probably using remotely operated vehicles. We work with the shipowner when the time comes, when we locate and then try to identify the containers. The approach is to work on the most dangerous first and the least dangerous later.
We would not intentionally bypass anything. We'd need to look at how to proceed, considering the conditions and the location, if we're able to find them, or if the shipowner is able to find them, at all.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Thank you, Mr. Small.
We'll now go to Mr. Hanley for five minutes or less, please.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
Brendan Hanley Liberal Yukon, YT
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to our witnesses for appearing before us today.
I'm not a west coast member of Parliament, but given the increased traffic in Arctic waters, I'm very cognizant of the implications that the scenario has for all of Canada's coastlines.
One item, Mr. McKay, is that under current laws, the responsible party to the spill of any cargo has to inform the government of such. Under polluter pays, they bear, as discussed, their financial responsibility for the cleanup. To my understanding, the provincial and territorial governments are responsible for ensuring that the responsible person is successful in responding to the situation. Who ensures that the polluter actually does pay?
11:45 a.m.
Executive Director, Legislative, Regulatory and International Affairs, Marine Safety and Security, Department of Transport
Thank you for that question, Mr. Hanley. I'd like to turn it over to my colleague Mr. Marier.
11:45 a.m.
Director, International Marine Policy, Department of Transport
As I mentioned earlier, under the Wrecked, Abandoned or Hazardous Vessels Act and the Marine Liability Act, Canada has implemented international conventions that make the shipowner strictly liable. This means you don't need to prove negligence on the part of the shipowner. They are automatically liable for the cost of responding to a spill or an incident.
Those conventions also require the shipowner to carry adequate insurance in order to deal with their liabilities.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
Brendan Hanley Liberal Yukon, YT
Thank you.
Mr. McKay, you point out that Canada is “leading international efforts to establish a global liability and compensation regime for damage...to contribute to adequate global compensation for victims of pollution damage”. I wonder if you could elaborate on how Canada is doing this and how it's playing that leading role.
11:45 a.m.
Director, International Marine Policy, Department of Transport
I can answer that question.
Canada in 2018 ratified an international convention on liability and compensation for hazardous and noxious substances. This covers thousands and thousands of different kinds of dangerous goods that are transported by ships. That convention is not yet in force internationally. We're about halfway there. A number of states need to ratify it. We've been leading international efforts to promote the convention and to get other states on board to become party to it so that it can come into force.
11:45 a.m.
Liberal
Brendan Hanley Liberal Yukon, YT
Thank you.
I think in both of your addresses, it was mentioned that there were lessons learned from this incident.
Certainly, Mr. Henderson, you highlighted how complicated a response operation it is. I'm wondering if you could tell me a little bit about, from your point of view, some of the early and key lessons learned that could apply to a future situation.
11:45 a.m.
Deputy Commissioner, Operations, Canadian Coast Guard
Mr. Chair, it might be best if I ask J.J. to answer that question, because you'll get a more realistic answer from the person who was on the ground dealing with it.
J.J., go ahead.
11:45 a.m.
Regional Director, Incident Management, Western Region, Canadian Coast Guard
Thank you, sir.
Thank you for the question.
In every case you can always do better. We do a post mortem in all of these cases. Right now we're actually in the middle of the after action report. We have three groups we're talking to. We looked at the command post staff. We did that one in December. We've done external agencies. That was last month. We're just about to consult with the indigenous communities and look at things like notification and involvement. Once that's done, we look at compiling or normalizing the results and then distribute those around for further work and understanding and then share them with our partners.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
Brendan Hanley Liberal Yukon, YT
Thank you.
I think I have a little bit of time. Maybe I can throw the same question over to Mr. McKay.
11:50 a.m.
Executive Director, Legislative, Regulatory and International Affairs, Marine Safety and Security, Department of Transport
Thank you, Mr. Hanley.
As Mr. Brickett and Mr. Henderson pointed out, this is an area in which we can continue to evolve and develop our internal regulations. We look forward to working with the Coast Guard on their after action report and taking those lessons learned away and further using them to enhance the already strong regulatory marine framework within Canada.
11:50 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Ken McDonald
Thank you, Mr. Hanley.
We'll now go to Ms. Gaudreau for two and a half minutes or less.
11:50 a.m.
Bloc
Marie-Hélène Gaudreau Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
People are listening and also trying to understand how we can do better.
I'd like a clarification about something I think Mr. McKay said. The need for vessels to keep clear of the eye of a storm was also discussed.
Can we legislate when we are in a position to see that there's a risk of spillage?
Regulations are sometimes subject to modulation for our lakes, rivers and routes. However, from what I've heard, it wouldn't be up to us to legislate navigation.
What changes could be made and who could make them?
11:50 a.m.
Executive Director, Legislative, Regulatory and International Affairs, Marine Safety and Security, Department of Transport
I apologize if that was what was heard. It was not up to us to legislate with respect to shipping; it was more with respect to telling masters of ships where they must go in the face of inclement weather.
In terms of a regulatory framework for ensuring the protection of both the navigation system and the environment, we have the Canada Shipping Act, 2001. As well, in the specific instances of containers, we have the Safe Containers Convention Act. Under both of these acts, we have a number of regulations that are tied into international standards and regulations with respect to ensuring both the safety of sea and the safety of the environment in the maritime setting. It's through these that we have domestic regulations like the cargo, fumigation and tackle regulations or the vessel pollution and dangerous chemicals regulations that govern the way in which we ensure the safe transit of materials in the marine space, the safety of ships within the marine space and the safety of those crews and masters operating within Canadian waters.