Evidence of meeting #7 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was amendment.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:40 p.m.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
They would not be subject to this. The purpose of this bill was quite clearly laid out by the minister, and this amendment will just ensure that the bill follows the intent of the minister as detailed to us.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
3:40 p.m.
Director General, Transportation of Dangerous Goods, Department of Transport
For us, this provision is basically a part of a bigger security prevention program. It's true that our first intention is to deal with cross-border transport, but I think it's important that we get the authority to require that people transporting very dangerous goods in very large quantities be required to have a security clearance. Not only that; we understand that they are licensed, but under the Transport of Dangerous Goods Act, there's no review of their background, and we need to do this.
3:40 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
That is the question I asked last time. This section applies to all international transport to the United States and to interprovincial transport. Are truckers going to be ready to get their clearance the moment this goes into effect? The answer I was given was no, it would take about two years before it could be made applicable to everyone. Is that true?
3:40 p.m.
Director General, Transportation of Dangerous Goods, Department of Transport
Certainly, we are going to have to have regulations for both national and international levels. There will be some delay, but that is what will happen one day. We have not yet determined, on a national scale, the people to whom the requirement for security clearance would apply. But we want to keep this power in case it were decided that people transporting explosives must have a security clearance. We want to keep the door open, but no policy, no regulations and no firm positions are in place.
3:40 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Transports Québec has told us that they have no problem with the bill. So I am inclined to support it. But are the provinces aware that interprovincial trucking is going to come about at some stage?
3:40 p.m.
Director General, Transportation of Dangerous Goods, Department of Transport
The provinces have been consulted. They have read the bill and have all agreed. They know our approach very well. The Minister's committee has said that, at some stage, emergency plans will be necessary for dangerous goods. That being the case, we wanted security clearances ready to be issued in the near future.
3:40 p.m.
Bloc
3:40 p.m.
Director General, Transportation of Dangerous Goods, Department of Transport
For some dangerous goods...
3:40 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Right, for some goods, you could put different regulations in place for interprovincial transport.
3:40 p.m.
Director General, Transportation of Dangerous Goods, Department of Transport
We are talking about the more dangerous goods like explosives, propane, chlorine, as well as radioactive and infectious material, but in very significant quantities.
3:40 p.m.
Liberal
Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
I want to get a little clarification on that. In the first instance, I guess what we want to do is harmonize the expectations of, in this instance, the United States with those of Canada.
I can see why Mr. Bevington has asked this question. In an environment where we have people who are anxious to keep their jobs, what kind of constraints will this put on those who are already employed in the transport of dangerous goods without a transportation security clearance? Do we have an estimate of how many might be affected and how much time those people would have to address the obstacle that will be presented by this legislation?
3:45 p.m.
Special Advisor to the Director General, Operations, Department of Transport
Indirectly, nobody will be impacted until you make regulations. So anybody who's employed currently would continue to be employed, and there's no requirement for a security clearance. There would be no requirement—
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
Excuse me, Mr. Coyle. Are you saying that we're going to “red circle” anybody who's currently—
3:45 p.m.
Special Advisor to the Director General, Operations, Department of Transport
No, what I'm saying is that currently.... If you look at the proposed act, it's an enabling authority. You would have to bring regulation. That regulation needs to be considered in consultation with the provinces, the territories, and industry before you could apply any constrictions. Having enabling authority doesn't mean you can actually do anything, until you have brought the regulations forward.
If you look at the numbers, Statistics Canada says there are 264,000 truck drivers, and out of that number, maybe 10% transport dangerous goods. That's the estimate from Statistics Canada. We do not have concrete numbers, as individuals flow in and out of transporting dangerous goods. I may transport dangerous goods today in a truck, but I may not do it again for another five years.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
But we heard the other day, and I'm sure you followed this as well, that people who have what some refer to as minor light drugs offences would not pass the test. If you're looking at the number you just gave me as an approximate figure, it would suggest that about 26,000—give or take a thousand—would probably fit under the category of those who would not be able to continue their work.
3:45 p.m.
Special Advisor to the Director General, Operations, Department of Transport
The notion of security clearance and the way the department has handled it has been that it has been a security difficulty or problem or a security notion related to what type of work you're doing. So if you unfortunately have some issues at home and you do some bad things at home, that does not necessarily make you a security risk for being a truck driver. Therefore, not all criminal references in your background are necessarily going to determine if you get an assessment or a clearance or not.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
Now I feel uncomfortable as a citizen. Sincerely, Mr. Coyles, I do feel uncomfortable, because if somebody has a criminal record it tells me as a citizen that the state is anxious to make sure I'm protected from that individual's activities. If that individual is transporting--to use the parliamentary secretary's phrase--nitroglycerine, I just became nervous.
3:45 p.m.
Special Advisor to the Director General, Operations, Department of Transport
In fairness, sir, as an example, if I am a wife beater, it may have nothing to do with my transporting dangerous goods. Although it can make us all uncomfortable, and it may not be a person in society that we may be around this table, it may not have a direct application in relation to transportation security. That's the example I was trying to bring forward.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
Mr. Coyles, I think a criminal record is nothing more than a public recognition of somebody's state of mind and psychological preparedness to commit something that goes against the convention. I don't want to belabour the point, but it strikes me that a wife beater probably goes against the acceptable conventions of the day. That tells me that psychologically somebody has already defined this individual as someone who is prepared to go against the conventions, whatever they might be, to address it as something that happens at home, inter nos, but has no impact on somebody else. I think that puts to one side the mental preparedness of somebody to address goods like nitroglycerine and others we would identify as dangerous goods. That's why I feel uncomfortable.
3:45 p.m.
Special Advisor to the Director General, Operations, Department of Transport
Maybe I can help you feel more comfortable, in the sense that history has shown that those transporting dangerous goods are usually the better of the truck drivers, for example. You gravitate toward looking at all kinds of things in relation to moving your goods. Dupont, for example: if you look at price considerations and other things, it's 17 on a list of 18 things they consider. So many things are above looking at who you choose as your carrier, especially under programs like responsible care and others where they're really looking at understanding the risks associated with the transport of dangerous goods. The public risk that's associated with that is therefore determined on who they're hiring and who they're bringing in to do that type of work. Most likely we won't have these types of individuals working in this type of industry.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
As you say, you've not yet done the consultation for establishing the regulations on the enabling part of the legislation.
3:50 p.m.
Special Advisor to the Director General, Operations, Department of Transport
No.
