Transport Committee on June 15th, 2006

[Marc Grégoire]

As I said in the beginning, we consulted a large number of international experts in risk management. Then we looked at what the chemical industry was doing. We did hire a consultant to see how we should establish this. We did look at what was going on around the world. But what you see now in the various modes, in the end product, is the product of our own professionals working in the various groups.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

I have a very small question. I'm very interested in the safety of the environment because I think long term that's going to damage all humanity, especially Canadians. What's being done today for rail that wasn't done a year ago? We've had some accidents; we've had some mishaps. Is there anything that's changed, that the department has done, besides handing out tickets, to ensure the environmental integrity of some of these larger chemical transportation issues?

[Marc Grégoire]

Is that a rail question?

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Yes, it's more of a rail question because I think that's primarily what happens.

[Luc Bourdon]

Could you just repeat that?

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

I'll try. I'm wondering if anything is being done differently today compared to a year ago in terms of, in essence, the rail transportation of dangerous chemicals that would have environmental integrity problems.

[Luc Bourdon]

Other than the measure we took by putting special emphasis on track and on some of the equipment, no, we're just more out there than we were before.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

I'm just going to say that being from Alberta, most of the complaints I have from these areas that have been part of this has been about speed. It was mentioned by one of the other members, and I think it's something that certainly should be looked at immediately.

[Luc Bourdon]

Train speed is determined by the track safety rules, and actually if they meet the parameters we have in the track safety rules, that's how we allow speed. When we inspect the track, there are six different categories. If the condition of the track meets, let's say, a class one track, then it will be a certain speed. If it meets a class six track, it will be a certain speed. It's up to the railway, actually, to maintain their track to the speed they want to use.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Is there any way to get that tabled, Mr. Chair, so we can take a look at those six levels?

[Luc Bourdon]

We can provide that to you, yes. No problem.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I am going to allow one more question each to the people on my left, about two or three minutes.

I do have one brief question, if I may, Mr. Grégoire. You mentioned about going after--it's not the right term, but dealing with the smaller companies, particularly in the air industry. One of the concerns I've heard from some of the small ones--and I know you emphasized economics and safety in your briefing--is that there is a big concern about the burden that may be applied to not only small airports but the small industry, the mom-and-pop industry of the airline service. I don't know if I put that out there as a caution or just to make sure it's part of the consideration and deliberations that take place.

[Luc Bourdon]

Merlin is anxious to answer.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Sure.

[Merlin Preuss]

I'm always anxious to answer, Mr. Chairman.

Frankly, this has been the single outstanding issue from the industry's perspective: what about this burden? We are getting very close to the end in terms of analyzing the pilot projects that have been out there now for the better part of a year. The conclusion we've come to so far--and I must admit it's preliminary, and I haven't had a full briefing myself--is that the big difference we see between how we need to implement it at Air Canada, for example, or at Nav Canada, or at the Pearson airport and the smaller areas, is we're simply going to have to provide them with more tools up front, rather than their developing them themselves. But the results are the same. The complexity, of course, will be less because the operations are less. We're quite positive we're going to be all right.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you.

Mr. McGuinty is next.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Chairman.

I have three very quick questions.

Monsieur Grégoire, if I had at this table the Air Transport Association of Canada and the flight attendants association and we were discussing the issue of moving to 1 in 50, would I have consensus in this room?

[Marc Grégoire]

Today, you mean?

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Right now. Would I have consensus?

[Marc Grégoire]

I don't think so. No.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Okay. Your responsibility as a department, of course, is to consult and to bring in stakeholders and find middle ground. At some point, if this issue is debated here pursuant to a motion of yesterday, is it typical practice for Transport Canada to be assured there is consensus in Canadian society before it moves to such a shift in regulatory standards?

[Marc Grégoire]

As much as possible, especially in the last 10 to 15 years, we try to develop regulations by consensus, but there is a limit to the debate. At some point the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities has to draw the line, analyze all of the aspects, and make a decision.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Could you provide for this committee a three-page brief that outlines in plain English the differences between the different parties right now on this issue?

[Marc Grégoire]

Absolutely. Yes.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

That would help us understand.