Evidence of meeting #23 for Public Accounts in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was transport.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Michael Ferguson  Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada
Louis Lévesque  Deputy Minister, Department of Transport
Laureen Kinney  Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Safety and Security Group, Department of Transport
Luc Bourdon  Director General, Rail Safety, Department of Transport
Régent Chouinard  Principal, Office of the Auditor General of Canada

4:45 p.m.

NDP

The Chair NDP David Christopherson

Out. Perfect, actually, right on cue.

Now over to Madam Jones again. You have the floor.

4:45 p.m.

Liberal

Yvonne Jones Liberal Labrador, NL

Thank you.

I'd like to follow up on the question that Mr. Allen was asking, because I think it's really important to get clarification. Maybe I could ask the Auditor General to respond to this question because it was, as was stated in his report, under paragraph 7.40. It says that

The Department has a methodology for planning its oversight activities of federal railways. However, we found that Transport Canada’s methodology does not require the use of uniform risk and performance indicators to help staff identify areas of railway operations that might be more likely not to comply with the regulatory safety framework.

That's the issue that my colleague and the committee was raising. If you go back to paragraph 7.36, when you talked about the fact that

...the Department was missing other important risk and performance data to supplement inspectors’ knowledge gained from previous inspections. Missing were: the federal railways’ risks assessments, information on the sections of track used in transporting dangerous goods, information on the condition of railway bridges, and

There are others as well.

I'd like to ask the Auditor General to explain to us what he was indicating when he was writing this in the report. And is this one of the pieces that the department is taking seriously and taking responsibility for at this particular stage? Has the fact that these reports have not been done and this information has not been reported on appropriately, impacted on any of the accidents that we have seen with regard to railway operations in the country?

4:50 p.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada

Michael Ferguson

I think probably the best way for me to explain it is, when we were looking at how this work was being done, and we talked about it in paragraph 7.40, we found that what was done in one region was not necessarily the same thing that was done in another region. We found that the way that risks were being assessed and risks were being used was different across the country. We feel it's important, of course, that there be a uniform methodology so all of the inspectors understand what types of things they're supposed to consider when they're considering risk, and how they're then supposed to build that into either their inspection or their audit plans.

What we found was that this wasn't consistent. Understanding the risks, as we say, in that paragraph is what allows the inspectors to understand what things they should be zeroing in on when they're doing either their inspections or their audits. So they need to assess the risks so they know what to look at, but there needs to be a consistent way of doing that that is used by all inspectors in all regions.

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

Yvonne Jones Liberal Labrador, NL

Okay.

Did you want to respond?

4:50 p.m.

Deputy Minister, Department of Transport

Louis Lévesque

I agree 100%.

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

Yvonne Jones Liberal Labrador, NL

Do I have time for another question?

4:50 p.m.

NDP

The Chair NDP David Christopherson

You have a minute and a bit.

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

Yvonne Jones Liberal Labrador, NL

Thank you.

Under paragraph 7.25, you mentioned that three recommendations made by the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in 2009 were not implemented because the committee was dissolved before the department was able to report. Can you tell us what those recommendations were, if the department ever revisited those recommendations, or if they were put in place afterward?

4:50 p.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada

Michael Ferguson

I'll ask Monsieur Chouinard to respond to that.

4:50 p.m.

Régent Chouinard Principal, Office of the Auditor General of Canada

The reason for those two recommendations that the department could not address was that the committee was dissolved. There were two recommendations to report back to the committee, but because it was dissolved, the department was unable to report back, and we accepted that as a fact.

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

Yvonne Jones Liberal Labrador, NL

Okay.

4:50 p.m.

NDP

The Chair NDP David Christopherson

You have 10 seconds.

4:50 p.m.

Liberal

Yvonne Jones Liberal Labrador, NL

No, that's fine.

4:50 p.m.

NDP

The Chair NDP David Christopherson

You're good? Very well. Thank you. In fact, any question would have taken us over, so I appreciate that.

Now we'll go over to Mr. Watson, who's here with us today.

I hope you're enjoying your time with us, sir. You now have the floor.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON

Very much so. It's a Smokey and the Bandit moment: we have a long way to go and a short time to get there.

I want to thank our witnesses, of course, for appearing.

Mr. Ferguson, let me thank you for the important work you've done with respect to chapter 7. I understand, as we've heard here today from Transport Canada officials, that they have accepted all of the recommendations and have developed an action plan in response.

I just want to establish a few basics of the audit, or some of them already have.... The work itself was for fiscal year 2011 and 2012. Is that correct?

4:50 p.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada

Michael Ferguson

That's correct.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON

The field work was completed in June of 2013, correct?

4:50 p.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada

Michael Ferguson

That's correct.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON

Okay. So this is a snapshot in time.

When was Transport Canada given a draft copy of the report? In June of 2013 or in July? When would that have been?

4:50 p.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada

Michael Ferguson

I believe June would have been the first time that we provided them with a draft.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON

June? Okay.

Its responses that are included in the report were submitted to the Office of the Auditor General when?

Mr. Lévesque, if you remember, or either one of you....

4:50 p.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada

Michael Ferguson

It would have been much later than that, probably in September or October or something like that.

4:50 p.m.

Conservative

Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON

Thank you very much.

As a backdrop to the fiscal year audit of 2011-12, I have the Transportation Safety Board's statistics on railway safety with me here. In 2011, the number of railway accidents was down by 5% versus 2010, and down 10% versus the five-year average—I'm quoting from the Transportation Safety Board, not from the report, actually—and the number of accidents involving transportation of dangerous goods was down 16% versus 2010 and down 25% over the five-year average.

For the year 2012, according to the Transportation Safety Board, the number of railway accidents was down slightly again versus 2011. They were down 10% from the five-year average. Also, the number of accidents involving the transportation of dangerous goods was unchanged versus 2011 and down 20% over the five-year average.

So railway safety has been improving, including during the time of the audit itself.

Mr. Ferguson, you appeared at the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities on December 4 of 2013 in relation to the report we're currently talking about. At the time, you said you'd received Transport Canada's action plan, I think in the last week in November 2013, as you testified, but at the time of December 4, you hadn't yet reviewed Transport Canada's action plan. Have you since and do you care to comment briefly on its contents?

4:55 p.m.

Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada

Michael Ferguson

I think as I said in my opening statement, Transport Canada had shared its action plan with us, and it includes actions for each of our recommendations, so we are again encouraged to see that the department has accepted our recommendations and has put together an action plan, and that action plan talks about each of the recommendations we made. But I can't give you any information about whether those actions will be sufficient or not, because we haven't audited them.

4:55 p.m.

Conservative

Jeff Watson Conservative Essex, ON

Fair enough.

Let's examine some of Transport Canada's accomplishments at the time of the completion of your audit until now, in chronological order, according to Transport Canada's action plan.

In April of 2013 when your workers were still in the field, Transport Canada says it put in place an annual schedule for SMS audit training of its inspectors and plans to complete training by the spring of this year. Were you aware of that annual training schedule, as it was put in place during your team's ongoing fieldwork? Is it assessed in your report? It is in part addressing recommendation 7.74, but can you answer as to when you were aware of it at the time while your workers were in the field?