Transport Committee on May 11th, 2006

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

However, the following paragraph refers to the security of bridges and the safety of persons. So a distinction is drawn between the two terms. I'd like to be sure there isn't a problem here.

[Éric Harvey]

Mr. Laframboise, I raised this question myself in my discussions with my drafter colleagues.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

That's good; we'll have a chance to talk about it again.

If I understand correctly, without this measure, you can't issue directions to operators. Even the contracts you've signed with them don't contain these kinds of measures.

[Éric Harvey]

Currently, for each bridge, we have to analyze the legislation that enabled the creation and incorporation of the company in order to determine the scope of the legislation.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

That's very good.

Let's go back to clause 15, which is entitled “OPERATION AND USE”, and which grants powers to regulate the use of bridges, to regulate the tolls that owners may charge, and so on. I've previously had the chance to ask you this question, but I'd like to hear from you again.

Did you speak with our partners, the provinces in particular, which operate and manage a number of these bridges? I believe there is some interference here. This gives you a power that goes beyond safety issues. You'll be able to intervene and limit, regulate the use of a bridge and tunnel at all times, based on the type of vehicle. For example, you could order operators to prohibit truck traffic on a given bridge or in a given tunnel.

Have I correctly understood the meaning of this clause?

You've no doubt reached agreements enabling you to negotiate with your partners. However, if the bill is passed as it stands, you'll be able to make them do what you want. Have you discussed this with them and do they agree on it?

[Evelyn Marcoux]

When the bill is passed, we'll have to go on to the regulatory stage. That's when all these questions, in particular those concerning clause 15, will be negotiated. We'll have to agree with the operators and determine what's reasonable.

The aim of the bill is not to impose unnecessary, extraordinary measures. Consider international bridges, for example. We manage three bridges, and our objective is to facilitate the movement of goods and people. We can negotiate so that a bridge can have a FAST/NEXUS lane, for example. These are new programs that have been adopted since September 11. In other cases, it might be more effective to allow truck traffic on one bridge and car traffic on another, but that will be negotiated. We don't intend to impose measures that aren't reasonable or that won't achieve traffic flow objectives.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Why didn't you add a subclause to clause 15 providing that agreements and negotiations will be reached and entered into by regulation?

[Evelyn Marcoux]

It wasn't done because it's understood in a bill like this one.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

I'd like to go back to clauses 13 and 14, which concern maintenance and repair.

You can make regulations on equipment maintenance and repair, but there's no mention anywhere of funds that would be available to the Department of Transport in order to discharge its financial responsibilities.

Are you telling us today that new money is available or that the big boss has authorized you to sign off on it all and to postpone the financial negotiations?

[Evelyn Marcoux]

We're not here to announce any new money. The maintenance and repair of bridges is something that's part of...

the business proposition of running a bridge.

The management of this type of facility is part of the inherent costs. Furthermore, as I said earlier, we don't intend to adopt extraordinary and unreasonable measures. This is part of the operating costs of these facilities, and no budget is specifically provided for implementing these measures.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Clause 15(c) states: 15.(c) respecting any matter relating to complaints in respect of tolls, fees and other charges, including the procedures [...]

You're telling me you don't intend to use it, but if you establish a complaints procedure, people will file complaints. You'll have to identify people or organizations that will handle those complaints. Clause 15, which concerns operation and use, follows immediately after the section on maintenance and repair. People will no doubt think it's now possible to complain about the quality and condition of bridges, and they'll do it. Do you want a complaints service to be officially established?

[Evelyn Marcoux]

That wasn't our goal. The purpose was to provide for a mechanism in the event we didn't reach an agreement with the operator. Then there would be an independent mechanism to resolve the matter.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

So this would concern operator complaints, not public complaints. That's good. That's fine with me.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Julian.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'm interested in the process you underwent with the stakeholders and the consultation that was done with local authorities. I'm thinking specifically of the City of Windsor, Fort Francis--those areas where there are private bridges. There were some concerns raised at the local level around that.

Have there been consultations?

[Brian Hicks]

If I can, I'll answer that.

There have been extensive consultations. When we introduced Bill C-44, we had a series of consultations. A lot of the large Ontario-U.S. bridges are members of the Bridge and Tunnel Operators Association, and on numerous occasions we briefed them as a group. We've also briefed a number of them individually--this is back with Bill C-44. Then when Bill C-3 was introduced, we went back and had subsequent briefings, again with the Bridge and Tunnel Operators Association as a group, and we've had subsequent phone calls and meetings in our offices.

You mentioned the City of Windsor. We've met with the owners and operators that operate those facilities. With the Fort Francis bridge, we did that over the phone and had a lengthy conversation with them.

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

But my question was specifically about the local elected officials in the City of Windsor, in Fort Francis, and in other municipalities that are affected by this.

[Brian Hicks]

Our consultations have been with the owners and operators of the facilities.

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

Okay.

Why haven't you consulted with the local authorities? This particular bill is important legislation, but the weakness in the bill seems to be in the local input for these bridges and tunnels that have a profound impact on local economies--particularly in Windsor, but I'm also talking about other cities that are impacted by it.

I'm wondering why there hasn't been consultation with those local authorities.

[Evelyn Marcoux]

The City of Windsor and the local authorities are, as you know, very involved in the whole process of the new crossing, and as part of that process, there are extensive consultations taking place with all stakeholders through the environmental assessment process or through other consultations.

We did not contact the City of Windsor directly for Bill C-3. If they feel they should be contacted, we would be happy to do so.

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

Currently, we're referring some of the local officials to the clerk. We're in contact with the City of Windsor to see if they would like to come and provide input on the bill.

Coming back to the weakness that we've seen in the bill, it's the interaction between the federal government authority--generally, we support the thrust of the bill--and local input.

What provisions are there for local input on decisions that are made by the federal government in regard to international bridges and tunnels?

[Evelyn Marcoux]

Maybe this will give me an opportunity to come back to Mr. Laframboise's questions. When I told you about paragraph 15(c), that the complaint is only for the operators, I was wrong. It's for operators and the public. There is a mechanism set up in the bill for public complaints as a result of the operations of the bridge.

It is in the bill.

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

I'm specifically referring to local authorities--elected officials. And as you know, this issue has been a long-standing one in Windsor. Windsor MPs such as Brian Massey and Joe Comartin have often spoken to this issue. I think it's fair to say it's a fairly hot topic in that city.

I'm asking specifically if there are any mechanisms in the bill currently that allow for that local input beyond the possibility for public complaint, something that on a regular basis would allow for local input on the federal government's overseeing of these important....

[Evelyn Marcoux]

We met with Mr. Masse and we met with Mr. Comartin. They have been consulted on the bill, and there are ongoing consultations with them on the Windsor crossing project. They are very much in contact with Transport Canada.

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

I'm specifically referring to local authorities, though. I understand that you've spoken with Mr. Masse and Mr. Comartin, but there are no provisions that you foresee beyond the public complaints process that would allow for that local input.