Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Laframboise and I have worked for years together on this particular committee, and with great respect to his position on this one, I just can't agree to it. First of all, with respect to the evidence relating to what they are seeking, it is an exemption from being required to operate a track with a certificate from the federal government, which in essence means to be exempted from this legislation to be safe.
From my perspective, when I was listening to them ask to be exempted, I thought to myself that they were asking for the safety of the act to apply to transportation of products—desks from Montreal, or furniture from Montreal, or clothing or vehicles, or whatever the case may be to be covered by the Railway Safety Act—but not people, and it just did not make any sense to me. The most precious cargo we can carry on the rail system is people, and they are asking to be exempted from it because they're carrying people, which to me just doesn't make sense.
Specifically, the evidence they produced was not substantial enough to warrant excluding them from federal authority. In fact, one witness particularly said that something in the neighbourhood of 50% or 60% of their operation was on federal tracks. My understanding is that if this is adopted as well as amendment BQ-1, it will create an environment that would mean they would not have to comply with the federal authority on this track just because they're running people. There is no logic to that for me.
My understanding, and I'd like to be corrected if I'm wrong, is that even though they may be exempted, the company they rent the track from on which they operate the train would still be required to maintain the federal obligations.
In essence, even though the owner of the track is obligated to maintain that safety level, exempting the operator of it first of all confuses the law, I would suggest, and second does not make any sense whatsoever, because although as a transit authority I certainly don't want to be under federal jurisdiction, it doesn't make sense that we would allow people to be exempted from safety when we are requiring product and goods to abide by the safety regime of the federal government.
Mr. Bourdon, I know, has vast experience on this, and I'd love to hear his position.