Transport Committee on May 4th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Please proceed.

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

There are two motions. Why don't I begin with the shorter one? It's probably faster that way.

I trust that you have the first motion in front of you. It asks us to support “the introduction of a regulation under the Motor Vehicle Safety Act requiring side under-run guards for large trucks and trailers to prevent cyclists and pedestrians from being pulled under the wheels of these vehicles”.

Quite a few years ago, a coroner's inquest studied the deaths of cyclists in Ontario over 10 years. It discovered that the largest percentage of deaths among cyclists was caused by cyclists being sucked into the wheels of big trucks, between the front and the back wheels. The coroner's inquest at that time had recommendations, one of the top ones being to install these under-run guards on large trucks. That was quite a few years ago.

Since then, different municipalities have said that we should do this. I have asked the minister to do so. The trucking industry said that it would cost a bit more money--and you might understand their point of view. I note that most of the European countries—in fact, all of the European Union—have these under-run guards between truck wheels.

Since the start of this campaign, there have been other deaths, unfortunately, one being that of Jessica Holman-Price, whose mother...it was a very high-profile situation in, I believe, in Newfoundland. There is now also a private member's bill before the House of Commons requesting the same thing, so I want to present this motion for this committee's consideration.

Mr. Chair, do you want me to talk about the next motion or do you want to do them one at a time? It's whatever you prefer.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I think we'll do one at a time, okay?

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

Okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Debate?

Mr. Volpe.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Welcome, Ms. Chow.

First of all, I think this is a worthwhile motion to consider. As Ms. Chow has indicated, there's already a private member's bill before the House, by the member for St. John's South—Mount Pearl, who just happens to be a caucus colleague of ours. I guess we can use names in committee. It's Siobhan Coady, who also presented a motion in the House.

I say this because it's a reflection of a general interest in the safety issue. The private member's bill calls for an amendment to the Motor Vehicle Safety Act. If, in fact, the bill is read in the House and passes second reading, it would come before this committee, at which time the committee would have all the procedural mechanisms to express its views on this.

Perhaps at that time Ms. Chow could join the committee and give some input, along with some of the experience she has already shared with us on what led to the coroner's findings as reflected in a tragedy in Montreal not that long ago.

So I think that in principle we would probably do this procedurally; the mechanism is already there for us. I think we should just follow the process that's open to us.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Jean.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

I agree.

Frankly, the vehicles on the road right now, including the trucks, are provincial jurisdiction as far as safety goes, so it would only affect new vehicles. My understanding is that there are some studies out now that actually question the effectiveness of having these on all vehicles.

But certainly, I think it would be best to deal with it through the normal course of private members' bills and to encourage the provinces to regulate the safety of the vehicles on their own roadways. The way the motion is worded, quite frankly, I believe that it would infringe on provincial jurisdiction, and we're not prepared to do that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Monsieur Laframboise.

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

Yes. I agree with Mr. Volpe and Mr. Jean. We need to wait to see the private member's bill, among other things, with regard to the future of this bill.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Ms. Chow, do you have a final comment?

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

Well, Mr. Chair, I'm disappointed, especially with Mr. Volpe, because the private member's bill will never arrive at this committee in this term; it does not have the order of precedence. Unless the Liberal Party chooses to bring it forward in the order of precedence, Ms. Coady has privately told me that it would not be possible for it to be discussed and debated in this parliamentary session, unless we are here for five more years, for many more years--never say never.

It is not under provincial jurisdiction, necessarily, because—we have checked—in terms of all new vehicles, it is the national government's responsibility. I would prefer that this committee do a study. If you are just tabling this motion, it is a disappointment to all the families who have unfortunately lost their loved ones because of these motor vehicles, these large trucks, not having side guards.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Volpe.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Mr. Chairman, the reason I suggested what I did is that I was hoping the committee wouldn't pronounce itself on this motion, because if the committee pronounces itself on this motion, it prejudices the bill and the motion that are already before the House.

I wouldn't be so presumptuous as to suggest that there is no avenue for Ms. Coady to present her bill further up in the order of precedence. It would be presumptuous on my part to suggest that things are going to stay the way they are.

Secondly, there is nothing that prevents Ms. Coady and those who would support her bill, were it to come up in the order of precedence, to come before the committee when another bill aiming at amending the Motor Vehicle Safety Act on items that are safety related would come before this committee. There is a great chance that it would come before this committee prior to the other bill.

So for us to prejudice which way the House would be going on this issue by expressing a view on it, by vote, I think would be harmful to the debate down the road, whether in the House or in this committee. I'm hoping that Ms. Chow would put some of her personal views to one side and say that this is going to be handled by the committee and the House, one way or the other, and thanks for listening.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Monsieur Laframboise.

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

First, I take note of Ms. Chow's comments, but this is a political strategy being used by the NDP. There is a private member's bill. Since this isn't moving forward quickly enough, the decision was made to take it to committee. This is a choice. The opposition parties have a certain number of days which the NDP could use to see if this could move forward more quickly. I do not want them to start blaming the committee.

Mr. Chair, we have a very full agenda. You know that. We have very important issues to study. So, once again, because there is a private member's bill, I think it's interesting for us to decide that this is the way we will deal with this issue. We are holding a hand out to the NDP. If it wants to move forward more quickly, it has opposition days, and it won't teach us any political lessons today.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Jean.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

I want to clarify this, Mr. Chair. I just want to be sure that she understands this. I think she does. This would relate only to new vehicles, so it would relate to 1% of the vehicles that would actually be on the road. If each province regulated the issue, it would be 100% of the vehicles within that province.

Your bill and the effectiveness of it in the long term are in question, quite frankly, because it's not going to affect the vehicles that are currently on the road. It's not going to affect the vehicles that come in from other jurisdictions that are on the road.

So the safety aspects of it should really be dealt with by provinces. That's what I would encourage at this stage without making a predetermination in relation to the PMB, but certainly notwithstanding that, the PMB should take precedence over any motion that you would bring forward.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Watson.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Just briefly, to affirm that, I think it would be wise for the committee to take its direction from the House and not to try to direct in the opposite direction. So I am against the motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Do we want to table the motion? Is that the will of the committee?

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

So we'll leave it on the table.

Are you satisfied with that, Ms. Chow, if we table the motion for now?

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Can we vote on it? Do you want to call the motion and have a vote?

[Olivia Chow, NDP, Trinity—Spadina, ON]

I would prefer that, but it depends on the will of the committee.

I have a motion in front of you. I'd rather not see it tabled, because tabling it actually kills it. I believe that the federal government should take some national leadership.