Natural Resources Committee on Dec. 2nd, 2013

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I'll be splitting my time with Ms. Duncan.

Thanks to our witnesses for being here today.

I'd like to take up a subject that we had asked the Department of Natural Resources in the first half of today's meeting, which is the whole issue around the independent safety regulator.

As I'm sure you noted, our representatives from the Department of Natural Resources did say that there were ongoing discussions with the provinces and with the offshore boards about putting in place an independent safety regulator, but it's not in the bill, That's a matter of real concern.

I want to start off by asking you if you are aware of any ongoing discussions about putting into place an independent safety regulator such as other countries have, including the United Kingdom and Australia.

As well, do you have concerns about this bill going forward without putting that into place, as was clearly, as Justice Wells said, his number one recommendation?

[Scott Tessier]

I don't have those concerns. I am aware that there are differing views concerning the idea of a separate safety agency.

I want to underscore the importance of distinguishing independence in terms of the function as opposed to independence in terms of the board. The board is fiercely independent with respect to governments, the operators, and stakeholders. We are truly an independent regulatory agency in which safety is the top priority.

The board, I think, has quite appropriately left the question of Judge Wells' recommendation 29(a) to the governments. We have a very professional staff. Safety is our top priority. I can't say it enough times. We do it well.

The board has taken measures consistent with recommendation 29(b) from Judge Wells. We put measures in place to strengthen the independence of the safety function within the board. There are mechanisms in place for the chief safety officer and the safety officers to communicate with the other parts of the board. We've done a gap analysis. We've got a continuous improvement process in place with respect to the safety function. We have bimonthly round tables wherein the chief safety officer comes in, meets with our board, sets the agenda, and the board members are, in turn, free to ask any questions of the chief safety officer.

We've taken it as far as we can, from the board's perspective.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Just so I understand this, you're not aware of any ongoing discussions about putting into place an independent safety regulator. I understand the measures you're taking to work around the absence, but are you aware of any discussions going on?

[Scott Tessier]

Sure. I think it's a matter of public record that the federal and provincial governments are still discussing that matter.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Okay.

I don't know if you wanted to add anything, Mr. Pinks. I have another question to ask you both, but did you have anything on that you wanted to say?

[Stuart Pinks]

No, I think Scott's answer would be very similar to the answer I'd have given.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

Yes. Thank you very much.

My next question, and then I'll turn it over to Ms. Duncan, is on the whole issue around there's only so much that you can do in the jurisdiction of safety. A lot of this is really within the jurisdiction of the federal government. I'm thinking of Transport Canada and the recommendation of the Transportation Safety Board to have the 30-minute run-dry capability. As you know, that was a crucial element in the tragedy around the Cougar aircraft. The Transportation Safety Board has said very clearly that the federal government needs to impose that. The federal government hasn't done it. We have a situation where there's pressure for night flights. The federal government hasn't put in place the ability to enforce that clear safety requirement that has to be enforced, there is no doubt.

Does Transport Canada come to you? Do they say, “Are we okay just allowing for 10-minute run-dry capability on offshore helicopters?” Is there any consultation? Is there any discussion, or is what the federal government does completely separate from any decisions that you may make?

[Scott Tessier]

There was fairly extensive consultation with the board with respect to the most recent suite of Transport Canada regulations. That work ended just a couple of weeks back. A fundamental point here, which you reference, is that the jurisdictional oversight of air transit does fall to the responsibility of Transport Canada. Helicopters to be used for offshore travel would fall under their jurisdictional responsibility.

Our aviation advisers, who were put in place following the crash of flight 491, tell me that we need to proceed with caution here. There's no one perfect helicopter. There are pros and cons to each type. Thirty-minute run-dry is certainly an important capability, but it's only one consideration among many if you're doing a holistic assessment of the safety of a particular model of helicopter. Other considerations would include things like seating and window configuration, ease of egress, flotation ability, one-engine inoperability capability, range, and anti-icing. We need to be careful. There are only a couple of helicopters designed to meet the requirements of our offshore, and again, there's no perfect answer in that regard.

[Peter Julian, NDP, Burnaby—New Westminster, BC]

I'm not sure that answers my question, but I'll turn things over to Ms. Duncan.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

How much time do I have?

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

You have a whole minute and a half.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

I'd just like to comment at the beginning that frankly, I find it bizarre. Alberta, of course, has had oil and gas activity for decades, and in Alberta oil field workers have the protection of a separate agency. I find it bizarre that just because this activity is on sea all of a sudden they don't need an independent agency. I haven't really heard a clear answer why workers, just because they go onto the ocean, should be treated differently.

The legislation actually provides for the appointment of special officers to avoid serious risks. Flying by helicopter, often in very precarious weather, onto an offshore installation sounds like a pretty serious risk. Operating on a rig offshore is serious risk.

What is the difference between a health and safety officer and special officers?

Do you have plans in place immediately to put in place new improved measures that weren't in place since 1986 under this legislation to avoid such major incidents?

[Stuart Pinks]

I can start with the differentiation of the types of officers.

Under this legislation, the boards, through recommending to governments, will have occupational health and safety officers in their employ who will enforce the provisions of part III.1 of the legislation.

The special officers are a provision whereby if the board reaches a very serious issue where it's basically incapacitated and not able to act, the governments would have the ability then to appoint a special officer to go over—

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Which governments?

[Stuart Pinks]

Well, it would have to be a joint appointment between the two governments. It has to be jointly agreed between the two governments, and it would be appointed then by the provincial minister of labour, on agreement from the federal government.

I can throw out an example. We have some sort of pandemic and all of our officers are sick. We have nobody we can send offshore and there is a serious situation. The governments could step in to appoint a special officer and send a special officer out to assume that duty.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Thank you very much.

Your time is up, Ms. Duncan.

Mr. Regan, you have up to seven minutes.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I had questions in relation to the recommendation of the Wells commission and the question of conflict of interest, but that's been fairly well covered. Let me go on to some other things.

Mr. Pinks, the newer activity in offshore Nova Scotia in terms of Shell and BP and what they're doing is of great interest in the province and is obviously economically very important, particularly when we see the decline in terms of revenues from the Sable offshore energy project.

What is your board doing to ensure that health and safety remains a key priority in relation to that activity?

[Stuart Pinks]

With the prospect of drilling in deep water and drilling for oil, we started about 18 months ago with a very detailed action plan of all the additional things we wanted to have in place ahead of a drill bit turning to the right. We're looking at that from both a safety perspective and an environmental protection perspective.

You're aware, of course, of the CESD audit, and it validated a number of the plans we had already started working on to get ready for deepwater drilling.

We are looking primarily at prevention, to prevent any major incidents from occurring. We're looking at things like independent well examinations by outside experts to ensure wells have been properly designed. We're looking at the emergency response plans and spill response plans of operators. We're also working jointly with our colleagues from the Newfoundland board to make sure that both of our boards are adequately and properly resourced to respond to any major emergency around spills and the like.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

How big a challenge was it, in terms of the fact that you are really adapting...you were accustomed to dealing with natural gas, and suddenly you're dealing with oil?

What kind of changes have you had to make because of that? What kind of expertise did you have to bring in to deal with a different kind of activity?

[Stuart Pinks]

The expertise we have been acquiring, either by hiring them on staff or having consultants who can assist us, has been around deepwater drilling for oil and oil spill response. They are the primary areas where we've had to beef up our resources and our expertise.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

In relation to the fact that both Bill C-4 and Bill C-5 propose to amend section 144 of the Canada Labour Code, but they do so in different ways and for different reasons, if Bill C-4 is enacted before Bill C-5, then section 144 of the Canada Labour Code will be inconsistent with other provisions of that act.

I wonder why there is no provision that would coordinate the competing amendments to the Canada Labour Code. Do you have any information on what's happening there in terms of coordinating the two?

[Stuart Pinks]

My response honestly is that we assist the governments in providing advice on drafting of regulations and legislation, but we are not the party who actually drafts it.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Fine, I'll move on then.

Let me ask you this. What does it take for you to say “don't fly”? When do you step in and stop something from happening?

[Scott Tessier]

That decision is typically made by the helicopter operator or the operator who holds the authorization.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

You can imagine no situation in which your board would step in and say, “Wait a minute. You have to stop.”