Not at the moment, no.
Evidence of meeting #3 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was international.
Evidence of meeting #3 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was international.
11:35 a.m.
Director General, Surface Infrastructure Programs, Department of Transport
Not at the moment, no.
11:35 a.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Okay. Was any possibility of providing that within the bill considered?
11:35 a.m.
Director General, Surface Infrastructure Programs, Department of Transport
No, not really.
11:35 a.m.
Director, Bridge Policy and Programs, Department of Transport
This is actually the first time that anybody has raised this question with us. Not only have we consulted with the people I mentioned before, but we have consulted and dealt with the provincial governments in New Brunswick, Quebec, and Ontario. Until this morning, nobody has actually suggested that we talk to local elected officials.
11:35 a.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Okay. Coming back to the issue of provinces then, are there mechanisms within the bill for ongoing consultations with the provincial authorities?
11:35 a.m.
Director, Bridge Policy and Programs, Department of Transport
I guess it's a little unclear to me what those consultations would consist of.
This bill gives the federal government an oversight role on these bridges. When we're talking about things like safety, security, and operations, the individual bridge owners and operators would be sending documentation to us.
I'm not really sure what you have in mind for the consultation. It's not like we're going out and imposing things on the operators. This bill gives us the authority to receive information from them, and then, if something is deficient, to have a conversation with the owners and operators. I'm not sure what the local officials would want to discuss with us.
11:35 a.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
I'm coming back to the provinces, though. I understand there's no—
11:35 a.m.
Director General, Surface Infrastructure Programs, Department of Transport
We are talking to the provinces. We have talked to Ontario, Quebec, and New Brunswick. Those are the three provinces that are involved.
11:35 a.m.
Conservative
11:35 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to refer back to clause 15, specifically paragraph 15(b), which of course provides the ability for the minister to make regulations regarding tolls, fees, and other charges that might be imposed on the operators.
I'm interested in the financial impact this will have on the operators themselves. I'm sure you're aware that they have raised some concerns about the impact this will have on their financial viability and, more specifically, to borrow at advantageous interest rates, especially those who have intentions of expanding in the future. Of course, expansion would presumably lead to a greater viability for those facilities.
I would assume this is the first time the federal government has actually intervened in the free market of setting tolls. Is it not?
11:35 a.m.
Director General, Surface Infrastructure Programs, Department of Transport
No.
11:35 a.m.
Conservative
11:40 a.m.
Legal Counsel, Legal Services, Department of Transport
Yes. As Evelyn mentioned in her introductory remarks, international bridges have been governed until now by specific statutes. In many of them, if you read them, you will see there are provisions that enable the company to charge tolls. Depending on the statute, because for each of them you have various variations on that theme, sometimes there's a reference to the railway act or sometimes there's a reference to a specific review mechanism.
I would need to check the date when there was a uniform recourse vis-à-vis tolls that was introduced by legislation. I believe that recourse was introduced in the 1950s and existed up until 1996, when the National Transportation Act, 1987, was repealed. But until then, there was definitely a regulation respecting applicable tolls.
11:40 a.m.
Legal Counsel, Legal Services, Department of Transport
Prior to 1996 you need to go back to the specific statutes applicable to each bridge.
11:40 a.m.
Conservative
11:40 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
To go back to paragraph 15(b), the minister now addresses the issue of tolls by regulation. I notice the proposed legislation doesn't have a specific process in place whereby those tolls would be established according to certain formulae, or through some other process that would be fair to the operators.
May 11th, 2006 / 11:40 a.m.
Legal Counsel, Legal Services, Department of Transport
You may have noticed that paragraphs 15(b) and 15(c) both have the word “tolls” in them. Paragraph 15(b), as you mentioned in your question, gives regulation-making powers vis-à-vis tolls, but you may also have noticed that it is to ensure the efficient flow of traffic. In other words, it's not to come and regulate things just for the sake of regulating; it is regulating within the circumscribed circumstance put in this provision, which is to ensure the efficient flow of traffic.
As long as tolls imposed by or charged by bridge operators don't impact the flow of traffic, then that power cannot be exercised to regulate.
11:40 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Have the operators been in touch with you to express their concerns about their ability to borrow money, and the impact that will have on their credit rating, or their ability to borrow, and also on the interest rates they will have to pay in order to expand their facilities?
11:40 a.m.
Director General, Surface Infrastructure Programs, Department of Transport
Yes, they have told us they are concerned about that clause. As Éric just explained, that clause is.... We will negotiate what it will mean and how far we will go as we go through the regulation processes.
The objective right now is to be reactive, as opposed to proactive. We don't intend to tell the bridge owners or operators how much they can charge, but if they increase their tolls, we want to be told. We want to be informed of that, and if increasing the tolls in one area creates problems--it could be decreasing as well, by the way, or it could be increasing or decreasing, which then affects the flow of traffic, and that goes against the grain of this act—then the government wants to sit down with the operator and have a conversation.
This is the objective behind it. Again, it's to be reactive, as opposed to coming in at the outset.
We have explained that to the operators. They understand it. They are concerned about how this issue may affect their credit rating. We're hoping it can be resolved if they have conversations with their bankers, but I understand they might need representation to you, the committee, as well. We're open to discussing what, if any, changes they want.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Mr. Chairman, I'm looking forward to hearing from the operators. The object here is to be fair with them--to ensure they can operate business in a way that's comparable to the rest of the market out there, can borrow at proper rates of interest, and can generally feel they're being treated fairly.
I found that missing here. We didn't have some kind of process in place ahead of time, but I'm assuming the minister is already putting his mind to working on a way of addressing the concerns of these particular operators.
11:45 a.m.
Director General, Surface Infrastructure Programs, Department of Transport
Absolutely, and we are in contact with them on a regular basis.
As I said, this will go through a regulation process. The regulations will cover the maintenance, the repair, the operation, the use, the ownership, and the tolls. Conversation will have to take place, and common sense will have to prevail.
