Thank you.
Just as a comment to Mr. Jean's comment, I hope we don't get into partisanship on this. We're dealing with safety. We should deal with this as a committee.
I have to respond softly to the extent of saying that the reason, I believe, that the number of derailments is down is that the action initiated by the minister under the Liberal government caused these two reports to be done, and I can see the actions taken since then by the current minister to bring pressure on the railways and to give focus.
This is not just the actions of the current minister; this was a process that was started—and was supposed to be made public, and that was part of the concern we had.
What I would like to say is, I have no problem recognizing that we do not want to interfere in a labour relations process or labour negotiations, a strike or lock-out situation. In fairness, to be able to address some of the issues that are here—and they're not, as I understand it, on the basis of the current dispute.... There are areas here where reports or recommendation.... Report G, for example, in the audit says that safety culture improvements initiatives included in the safety management submission of Transport Canada have not been effectively implemented in the mechanical services department, where many employees stated that at three of six locations, a high percentage of mechanical employees stated they were reluctant to report minor injuries because it had resulted in discipline.
Those are the kinds of things. Fifty-three percent of the locomotives have faults, including brake faults. That's a question of maintenance, and maintenance may be related—in fact, obviously is—to issues of having enough staff to do the job.
I'm asking whether you want a motion that we hear the witness now. I'm happy, whether we just have the understanding that you will use your discretion as chair or whether you want to have it formally added to by Mr. Jean's suggestion, on the understanding that we will not in any way attempt to intervene in the current strike and lock-out situation at CN. Some of these issues are inescapably related to decisions made by CN as to staffing levels, inspection levels. That is not what I see as the heart of the current labour dispute, but they are issues that have been addressed here and they are at the basis of the concerns.
When over half the locomotives have minor or major problems, and a more significant number of the rolling stock, and with such things as not having lists—they call them “consists”—of what's in the train, and where in the train it's located.... Mr. Fast has talked about the impact on his community in North Vancouver. I have chlorine tanks running out of my community daily. Speaking as a former municipal politician, they would understand it's important for your hazardous team—your hazardous materials team, your fire department, whoever it is who responds—to know what's in that train and where it is, if there's a derailment or an accident takes place.
Those are the kinds of things I'm concerned about. I would like to have the opportunity to question the witnesses, I would like to question CN, and I'd like to question Transport Canada, all in due order.
I'm prepared to rely on your judgment. I would like to say, as in my comments earlier and as other members of this committee have said, that I have complete confidence in the way you chair the committee. I think the decision you made was not the one I would have liked to see made, and I appreciate your explanation, but I think we need to move forward.
I will make a motion, if you would like, Mr. Chair, that we hear Mr. Rhodes now and that we invite the other witnesses to come back for Wednesday if they are available.
I'll leave it to your discretion on the labour issue. Certainly I think it's the intention of all members on this side that we not interfere in the current labour dispute and ask questions that would do that.