Transport Committee on March 10th, 2011

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I don't see anyone coming forward. The “ask” has been put.

Is there any further comment?

All right.

Shall the NDP-3 amendment carry?

(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clauses 19 and 20 agreed to)

(On clause 21)

We are on government amendment four, on page 11.

Mr. Jean.

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

Yes, Mr. Chair.

I beg to be corrected if I'm wrong, but I understand that what we're doing in this case is adding the word “company” so that it would specifically state that it would be a “company supervisor”, and not, for instance, as Mr. Julian might put it, the ability to farm out.

We want to make sure--under both (a) and (b)--that a company supervisor is the person doing the work that is necessary.

Is that correct, Mr. Bourdon?

[Carla White-Taylor]

This was simply an oversight. “Company” has to be included so that it's specific.

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

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Comment?

Seeing none, I'll ask, shall amendment G-4 carry?

(Amendment agreed to [See Minutes of Proceedings])

(Clause 21 as amended agreed to)

Shall clauses 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, and 31 carry?

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Up to clause 36.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I was just going to do it by the page.

Shall clauses 22 to 31 inclusive carry?

Mr. Jean, go ahead.

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

Just to clarify, there are no changes on any of those?

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

There are no amendments.

(Clauses 22 to 31 inclusive agreed to)

Shall clauses 32, 33, 34, 35, and 36 carry? There are no amendments.

(Clauses 32 to 36 inclusive agreed to)

(On clause 37)

We have several amendments here.

We will start with Liberal amendment two. Again, I would suggest that it and the NDP amendment, NDP-4, are identical. One or the other can take the lead on it.

Mr. Jean, go ahead.

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

Chair, I just have a point of clarification.

Was there a coalition between you two guys on these amendments? I'm just totally curious here. They're identical.

Great minds think alike, or...?

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Just intelligent thinking, that's all it is.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you.

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

I'm not afraid to say it, Mr. Chair: yes, there was a coalition.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Dhaliwal, do you want to take the lead?

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We heard from the workers that there is always a fear of reporting to Transport Canada. We also talked to Transport Canada when they were here, and they had no problems if we included this particular amendment to the act.

That way, their employees will be able to report directly to Transport Canada instead of to the Transportation Safety Board, which is responsible for investigating accidents. It doesn't take a proactive approach to prevent accidents.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Does anyone have any comments?

Go ahead, Mr. Jean.

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

I know it comes as a surprise, but I do have a comment on this.

We did hear from witnesses who indicated that the TSB already has a system set up to receive complaints, but as a government fully transparent and accountable, we want to make sure...and I think it's a good amendment, but what I'm suggesting is maybe making a friendly amendment to it, to allow them to report to either Transport Canada or the TSB, or both, because both of them have a system.

I wanted to let you know as well that we did a little research on this to make sure that we could report back to the committee properly. I discovered that in the 2009 budget, our government, the Conservative government—

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

The Harper government?

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

Yes, you're right. Thanks for the correction.

The Harper government put a significant amount of money into the budget so that complaints through Transport Canada could be more accurately and better dealt with.

Mr. Bourdon, I don't know if you know that exactly, because I didn't get that information from you, but is that your understanding as well?

[Luc Bourdon]

Yes, but there's one thing that the current bill was trying to do under SMS. It has tried to change the safety culture in the company, and get the company and the employee to try to resolve their issues first, before they come to us, and have the company put in place a non-punitive reporting system.

I think it's important that, before they report to us, there's an opportunity to try to fix their differences. We cannot ask the government to be involved in disciplinary measures with the companies. I'd say more than 99% of these workers are very professional, and I don't think anyone in the morning wakes up to get involved in an accident or in a derailment. But from time to time, you may get some negligence. It's not because someone comes to Transport right away and says “I'm going to report what I've just done, then I won't be disciplined for it.” I think they have to resolve these issues first at the company level and then, if it fails, they can come to us at any time, which they're doing right now.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Jean.

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

I do want to respond to this, Mr. Bourdon. First of all I agree, I think your department does an excellent job—I really do. But at the same time, I think we've heard evidence somewhere that suggests one company in particular has had over 6,000 complaints and another company has had 500 complaints.

I do understand that it should be resolved first at the company level, as with all companies. At the same time, I also believe that if you are the regulator, as Transport Canada is—the Transportation Safety Board is separate from that.... When people are working on something as important as rail, especially when you're transporting people...as you've seen, we've had that amendment come through, which I think is a much better thing. I think they should have the opportunity to address the issue with the company first, but then they should have the ability through Transport Canada...which, of course, we've given more money in the 2009 budget, and the TSB, which already has a 1-800 tips line set up.

After speaking to the opposition in particular, speaking to some union members, and hearing the evidence, I think they should have the options. Although I don't think the disciplinary measures should be doled out by Transport Canada in regard to this, I think the making you aware of it is very important. I think we've heard clearly that they want your involvement, because you are very good at your job, and you get results.

Bluntly, then, I think it has to be in there. I would welcome any comments from anyone else. The options are necessary, and it gives Canadians options.

I would also suggest, if I may say this to the department and those people listening, it would be a good idea for people to know they can call. Honestly, I think if TSB would have had that 1-800 tips number...a lot of witnesses came before us and they didn't realize they could actually tell the TSB. Maybe it's communication, but whatever it is, it's not working.

That's why I'm suggesting this friendly amendment. I think we want to make sure that everything works, and this will make it work.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

I accept that amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

If the subamendment is accepted, then we want to make sure that the whole committee agrees.

Is there more discussion? Do we want to work on the subamendment?

I have three people left to speak.

And I need to know the exact wording.

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

I can read it out.