Transport Committee on Sept. 26th, 2006

[Robert Carrier, Bloc, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Therefore, generally speaking, it is stated that the agency could arbitrate, but without specifically mentioning railway sharing, which could be subject to arbitration?

[Helena Borges]

Yes, but these are the terms and conditions to run a passenger service.

[Robert Carrier, Bloc, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Earlier, my colleague spoke about the issue of noise included in the bill. However, nearly all members who spoke in the House said that this is open to interpretation, because the bill refers to unreasonable noise.

What is unreasonable noise within the framework of railway operations? Noise might be acceptable to a company, but unreasonable to residents who live nearby. That is why we deplore the lack of standards that companies have to comply with.

Did you dismiss the application of standards?

[Helena Borges]

Not entirely. The bill allows consultations with individuals affected by the situation, including communities as well as railways, in order to determine standards or guidelines upon which the agency can base its decision. Sometimes the noise impact is different depending on whether an urban or rural community is involved.

We will have to take all these aspects into consideration before making a decision. For its part, the agency will have to visit the sites and see what the best solutions are. Sometimes it is not the level of noise but rather the activity causing the noise that must be changed. The agency has more flexibility when it comes to such cases.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Julian.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to come back to the issue of rail corridors. What you said about urban transportation was very clear. That use remains an option. However, if this option were not available for any reason at all, there is nothing in the bill to ensure that this corridor could be converted into regional trails, bike paths or anything else, at least as far as I understand.

[Helena Borges]

I am going to answer you in English.

Currently the process applies to the railway discontinuing operations or abandoning the railway line. Once the railway discontinues operations—it will no longer offer a freight service—it has to offer the line up for sale to another private entity, for example, a short line. If there are no takers, it currently has to go through the process of offering the line to the levels of government. The federal government receives an offer if the line crosses municipal jurisdictions or a first nations reserve; then it goes to the provincial government, and subsequently to the municipal government. Each level of government has 30 days to decide whether or not it wishes to acquire that corridor for any purpose that the municipality or the level of government would want.

If there are no takers and the municipality, which has the last offer, does not take the line for urban transit purposes, a bicycle path, or whatever, then the railway has the authority to discontinue it. Then it becomes a piece of property like any other that can be sold, as with any piece of property. It is no longer under the process, because it has already followed the thorough discontinuance process.

What we are adding through Bill C-11 is one intermediate step between the province and the municipalities for urban transit authorities that cross multiple jurisdictions—for example, West Coast Express or TransLink in B.C., AMT in Montreal, GO Transit in Toronto. Where they serve multiple municipalities, they would be dependent on getting all the municipalities together to agree to buy that line for them. This allows them, right after the province—because they are provincial creatures—to put in an offer themselves and buy that whole corridor for their urban transit purposes. It in fact makes the process stronger and preserves more of these corridors for potential urban transit or other community uses.

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

And if the railway line is pushing for an unreasonable price...?

[Helena Borges]

It's already in the law that when it's offered to government it's at net salvage value. Net salvage value takes into account the value of the property, but also the environmental remediation or cleanup that has to be done on the property. It is quite a fair value that the government would be getting the asset for.

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

Thank you.

I'd like to come back to air travel complaints and airfare advertising from the public's side. I'd appreciate your running through complaints from the public who have concerns about air travel or about a trip they've taken or about airfares they believe are inappropriate in terms of disclosing all the information. How does the public, under this legislation, go through the various hoops in order to get justice?

[Brigita Gravitis-Beck]

There are a number of recourses. The public can always write to the minister to bring issues to his attention, but the minister will refer to the process that is in place, which allows complainants to go to the agency and to raise concerns. Concerns with respect to particularly prices, terms of carriage, baggage loss, overbookings, a perception of unfairness in terms of treatment, those are all core functions of the agency. The first step is always to approach the carrier. Individuals can choose to do that on their own, or they can choose to go directly to the agency, and the agency will approach the carrier. That's the first step.

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

Okay, let's take an example of a constituent in Burnaby--New Westminster--

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Very briefly, Mr. Julien.

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

--two fine communities. If an individual in that area has a problem, how do they approach the agency?

[Brigita Gravitis-Beck]

They would go to the complaints program, which is available, I believe, on the agency website. Certainly anyone who approaches Transport Canada or the Minister of Transport is referred to the agency, the website, the toll-free number to register the concern. We also encourage all the players to work with the carrier that is perceived to be at fault, as a first step.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Fast.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, both of you, for attending today.

Like Mr. Julian and like Mr. Bell, who is normally at this table, I'm also from British Columbia, and we have suffered two major derailments in British Columbia in the last two years. One ended up with the loss of two lives, and the second resulted in significant environmental degradation and resultant loss of fish.

The safety issue I'm assuming we're going to address separately, and I understand that. I think the rest of the committee understands that. I do notice the bill provides for a new national transportation policy statement. That statement embraces not a new principle, but one that hadn't been addressed before, and that is the whole issue of protection of the environment. But we all know that policy is just policy; it's not a regulatory scheme. The policy is not an enforcement strategy. I'm wondering how you are going to parlay this policy statement into something that has teeth.

As a follow-up question, how do you see this policy actually impacting, if at all, in situations such as the one we had in British Columbia, where the environment suffered significant damage as a result of a derailment?

[Helena Borges]

The environmental issues that evolve as a result of accidents are dealt with as part of the legislation that deals with railway safety, the Railway Safety Act. They also may be implicated by the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act. The cleanups and things like that are addressed through other pieces of legislation that deal specifically with the environment.

In terms of this act and the policy statement here, up until the amendments proposed in bills C-26, C-44 and now C-11, this act had no mention at all of environment, and yet there are provisions in this bill that will benefit the environment. Railway noise is probably one of the best examples. The abandonment of the railway corridors is also an environmental issue, and it helps ensure that those corridors that are abandoned or that are sold off are cleaned up when the abandonment happens. So those are two very concrete examples of where the environmental aspect will come into account.

The policy statement assists the agency and its members when they are handling complaints or adjudicating or issuing orders. It guides their decision-making, and like the other aspects of the policy statement in terms of accessibility and principles such as that, it's to guide the agency in the decision. There are no specific environmental clauses in there, other than the two I mentioned, that have environmental implications. In this particular act, they are dealt with through the other pieces of legislation.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Another quite unrelated question: in terms of the reduction of the number of members of the agency, and also the requirement for residency in the national capital region, what's the purpose behind that?

[Helena Borges]

Currently, the seven members that the agency has are part-time members and they're spread throughout the country. It is sometimes difficult when the agency is doing a hearing, for example, or working on decisions for which it has to have a certain number of members available, to discuss the decision and then sign on the decision. That can often have delays. They are administrative delays, but it could have delays.

With the proposal to reduce the numbers and make them full-time and have them located in the national capital region, they still can represent and come from various parts of the country, but they would be available here in the national capital region so that, when they are discussing the issues pertaining to an individual case or complaint, they're all around the same table discussing the same issue, hearing the same issue, and then making the decision and signing off on the decision there. We believe it will make the agency much more efficient in terms of workload to have five permanent versus seven temporary. We think in fact it provides more people power and that there will be a financial benefit in terms of reduced travel time and reduced numbers of people to pay.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Has any thought been given to ensuring that we have regional representation on that agency?

[Helena Borges]

Definitely.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

I'd hate to see the west left out. That's where many of these derailments take place.

[Helena Borges]

And normally that is a very important consideration the government takes into account in making appointments to the agency.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Thank you.