In fact, the statistics on derailments, which can be found on the Transport Canada website, are not very informative and cause many people to shudder.
First of all, there are the extreme convoys, that is to say trains with four or five locomotives pulling 200 cars. These convoys often stretch for two or three kilometres. This practice is no doubt profitable to the company, but it poses problems, which I will speak about shortly.
There is the poor rolling stock maintenance, as Ghislain mentioned, as well as poor track maintenance. For example, there can be trains of 200 cars that stretch for more than three kilometres and block traffic on main roads, as is the case in Charny, but I am sure that this occurs in other municipalities as well. Some 75 or 100 years ago, when trains with 10, 15 or 20 cars began to appear, that did not pose a problem, but when there are 200 cars, that becomes a serious issue.
Take the town of Charny, for instance, where the railway runs through the town centre. With 200 cars passing through, Charny is split in two. The Chaudière river is located on one side of the municipality. In the event of an accident, an emergency or whatever, 10,000 to 15,000 people would be surrounded, without any way of leaving the area, because the three grade crossings in the space of one kilometre are closed to let the 200 cars pass through the town. If the train were to derail or stop, people in the southern part of the town would have no way to leave the area, which is surrounded by the Chaudière river. Obviously, it was impossible to foresee such danger when the railway was built.
There are consequences when a company increases its number of cars ten-fold or twenty-fold. We should not wait for a disaster to occur before acting. We want to make it known that at the rate things are going, it is not a matter of whether a disaster will occur, but where and when it will happen.
There is another reason why whistles are not useful. According to Transport Canada Statistics, there are more and more accidents, derailments and deaths at grade crossings. So whistles will not make a difference. Furthermore, trains of 200 cars erode the railway infrastructure, making it less stable. The less stable the infrastructure, the greater the risk of accidents.
In conclusion, I would like to give you a little information on potential solutions to replace whistles. We have thought that instead of whistles, sensors could be installed at grade crossings. Sensors are not very expensive and could easily notify the train conductor that there are no obstacles on the track or at the grade crossing, and that the gates are lowered. That would be achievable. Besides, sensors are already used for cabooses. In fact, an electronic confirmation indicates how they have to be operated.
Therefore, sensors allow you to see what is happening one or two kilometres down the track, without needing to blow a whistle. Whistles might also attract people who are looking to commit suicide. That is one of the reasons why we recommend eliminating the use of whistles.
We recommend that there be sound barriers set up around marshalling yards. This is nothing new, because Europeans have been using sound barriers for at least 20 years. In fact, railways pose a real problem over there, maybe even more so than here. People have dealt with the problem, especially in Switzerland, where authorities installed sound barriers in marshalling yards. In our opinion, that would make things a lot easier.
Solutions exist, and we have indicated some in our brief, which you have no doubt read.
If you have any questions, we would be pleased to provide you with additional information on this issue.