Transport Committee on March 10th, 2011

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

If you would, that would be good.

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

It would say:

reporting and confidential reporting to the Transportation Safety Board or Transport Canada by employees of contraventions

The reason I've proposed the elimination of “Transport Canada Rail Safety Directorate” is that we're putting it in legislation, which is very restrictive, and the regulations will deal directly with how it is done, but if there is a change of name, for instance, of the rail safety directorate, then of course the legislation would have to be changed. If it's Transport Canada, the regulations will specify to whom it goes and what their job is, once the complaint has been made.

Mr. Chair, I'll read it one more time, if I may:

reporting and confidential reporting to the Transportation Safety Board or Transport Canada by employees of contraventions

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

That's a good amendment. It strengthens it even more.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

So everybody's comfortable with that?

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

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

We'll deal with the amendment as it's been amended.

I'll go to Mr. Julian.

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

I think everyone accepts the amendment by Mr. Jean, which is very helpful. I want to reinforce my support for the amendment that is offered by the Liberals.

The teamsters put forward the concerns about being able to report these confidential issues that come up. It seems to me to be incumbent on the committee to have a confidential reporting structure so we can have whistle-blowers working in a climate that allows them to raise these concerns.

I support the amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Laframboise.

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

I am going to support the amendment and the subamendment, but I have a question for Mr. Bourdon.

You seem to have some fears. Are you afraid that the current system is not working?

[Luc Bourdon]

No, not at all. There is one thing in the safety management system that we are trying to push a bit. To the extent that it is possible, we want the companies to try and sort out their differences, and make an effort to improve employee communication and culture. If that doesn't work, they should come to us, just like local health committees do.

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

This is what it says in what he submitted: you prepare an internal report or you can...

[Luc Bourdon]

Yes. We don't really have a problem with that. The TSB already has a program called SECURITAS. I would suggest that they perhaps report to Transport Canada in order to avoid having two groups running after the same files.

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

That's the gentleman's subamendment.

[Luc Bourdon]

If it were possible to limit it to ourselves, it would be easy, given that there is already a program in place.

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

He is adding the Transportation Agency. You personally wouldn't want him to add the Transportation Agency.

[Luc Bourdon]

It's because they already have a program in place, a well known program that is not in the legislation. If we want to have it in ours, I think we should make sure that everything that is reported under the Railway Safety Act goes to one agency only, so that we don't have complaints from both sides and have two separate groups...

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

I am having trouble with this. You are not getting it. I told you earlier that urban transit authorities certainly don't want to have to report to two authorities. In Quebec, they are already reporting to the Quebec government, and they will now have to report to the Canadian government. I am just pointing that out.

[Luc Bourdon]

No, the TSB has authority when something happens on federal tracks.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Watson.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have one important clarification: it was the Harper as opposed to Martin government.

With respect to the friendly subamended amendment—I don't know if we can call it that or what terminology would apply to it—I think it's actually a step forward with respect to worker safety. I think the consensus emerging around the table, for the benefit of course of our witnesses who are here today, embodies the fact that there's little confidence yet that there's been a measurable improvement in the safety culture with respect to some rail companies, the same lack of confidence in those same companies that was expressed in the expert panels review and by this committee at an earlier point.

To correct Mr. Jean on one other thing, these aren't complaints that have been registered at the companies; these are grievances more specifically. We heard that at CN it was more than 6,000 grievances that have been unresolved. At CP it was more than 400 unresolved grievances. The CP number was actually confirmed by CP. CN did not refute. Although it had opportunity to refute the number, it didn't.

Leaving this simply to CN and CP to resolve at this particular point I don't think is workable. I support the concept of safety management systems as that additional layer of safety. Perhaps that will evolve a little further at some point when CN and CP show measurable improvement in their safety culture. You may see the committee willing to accept that at some future point, if this is ever reviewed again by the committee. But as it stands right now, I'm not sure, in good conscience, I could simply leave it to the safety management system at this point.

That's why I'm supporting the sort of “friendly amended amendment”.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Dhaliwal.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In fact, making this amendment to the amendment, which we proposed here on this side, strengthens it. Right now, if we look at it this way, the Transportation Safety Board operates under the regulations. Including that into law would strengthen it even further.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Jean.

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

I will just be very quick, Mr. Chair, and I appreciate that.

I do want to clarify a couple of things.

First of all, we have--and I think you know this--an excellent relationship, on this side of the table, on the Conservative side, but I know with many the other members, with some of the unions that have come forward, especially.... Actually, I'd like to show my appreciation of Phil Benson of the teamsters, in particular, who has helped us with some of these amendments.

But to make it clear, for the record, the TSB and Transport Canada are two separate entities. After dealing with Transport Canada and the TSB for some period of time, I know they take great pride in the fact that they don't report directly to Transport Canada and they're not accountable to you. I think this gives employees the opportunity to let both parties know.

I looked, quite frankly, very considerably at your amendment, and this particular one, but I think we need to give that option. It clearly identifies, as Mr. Watson said, that CN and CP have to get their acts together in relation to these grievances and in relation to their employees. I think it's very important.

But in no way do we want to take away the fact that they should be dealing with the company at first instance, and make sure, in relation to that, when the regulations are drafted, I think, to reflect that, because I think that is the will of the committee. It makes good business sense as well. Certainly any employee who has grievances that are not answered should be able to go to the next step, but before that they should deal with the company and solve it. I think that's clear.

As you say, 99% of them are very professional and will do that, but for that 1% who may not, well, we're going to suss those people out, or you will suss those people out in time.

I would like to move forward with this amendment and try to get this wrapped up today, if we can. I think it quite frankly is a good amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Trost.