Evidence of meeting #59 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was shipper.
A video is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Ed Holder Conservative London West, ON
I have a curious question.
Minister, if I recall, you said that this would not apply, if I understand it, to American railways in Canada.
Could I ask a very terrible question? What would happen if one of these railways, CP, sold to the United States and then wanted to...? Let's hope that never happens, but let's just say it did. Would they all of a sudden be exempt from this legislation?
I'm not encouraging that, just for the record.
February 12th, 2013 / 4:25 p.m.
Senior Legal Counsel, Team Leader Modal Transportation Law, Department of Transport
The proposed bill applies to every railway in Canada that is federal in nature. Whether the railway is American, whether the railway is Canadian, if it's a railway that operates in Canada under federal jurisdiction, it applies.
What the minister said was that the jurisdiction of the government or the agency or the arbitrator will not extend to the United States to impose obligation in the U.S.
Senior Legal Counsel, Team Leader Modal Transportation Law, Department of Transport
But it would apply to an American railway in Canada. At least then, they have an obligation in Canada.
Conservative
Ed Holder Conservative London West, ON
I appreciate that clarification.
I know my time is almost up.
We talk about the amount, up to $100,000, of fine in the event of non-compliance. Does the legislation respond to repeat problems? Let's say it was with the same shipper and the same railway. Would the $100,000 be the maximum, or is there any sense of changing that in the potential for repeat offence, knowing that your intention is to never have to utilize it?
Conservative
Denis Lebel Conservative Roberval—Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Up to, but it would not be automatically $100,000. It can be more than.... It's per event. It can be $10,000 or $25,000, depending on what the arbitrator decides, but it's per event.
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Mr. Minister, I know the time is very close to when you have to leave.
Ms. Chow, you have time for one question.
NDP
Olivia Chow NDP Trinity—Spadina, ON
I'm not sure I heard an answer to the last question I asked.
There has been a lot of discussion about the need for a transportation costing review. This has been kicking around for quite a few years. During a stakeholder consultation, every group was talking about the pricing, the actual cost.
The question I had earlier was on whether you are planning to do a full railway grain transportation costing review.
A lot of the farmers are saying the cost is so high for them, and because it's a monopoly, CN and CP basically can charge them whatever. They say they have no choice. They can't just use trucks. It's costing them millions of dollars, partially because sometimes they don't arrive to the containers on time.
Are you planning a costing review?
Conservative
Denis Lebel Conservative Roberval—Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
For certain, we are focused on this bill for the moment. That's our main goal. We're focused on this.
These enterprises are doing business together. We have to respect the agreements they have signed. We will continue to encourage that this kind of agreement be signed.
In the future what we'll do.... I think we have started something on some reviews, but for the moment....
Do you have...?
Director General, Surface Transportation Policy, Department of Transport
No, there's just the final offer arbitration.
Conservative
Denis Lebel Conservative Roberval—Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Yes, the final offer arbitration. We are focused on this bill for the moment, and that's the way we would prefer to leave that for the moment.
NDP
Olivia Chow NDP Trinity—Spadina, ON
Because there's a monopoly situation, you have one side that has all the power, when on the other side, the customers and the shippers really have none. This is why we have the bill in front of us anyway, just to make sure it's balanced and to make sure there's a level playing field.
We've heard, especially for small customers, that the legal fees might be too high, the year timeframe may be too high, and it could be a deterrent for small shippers.
What are you doing to protect them? They've been saying that they desperately need the government's assistance.
Conservative
Denis Lebel Conservative Roberval—Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
All of the stakeholders have been involved in this process for years. We saw the reaction of these stakeholders after we announced Bill C-52. We proposed the bill to let them have the space to have a commercial agreement. That's what they wanted. We will let them have these kinds of agreements. The arbitration will be there if they are unable to have it.
We're sure that's the right tool now to support the Canadian economy.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
With that, Mr. Minister, I know you have to leave.
We appreciate your taking time out of your busy schedule to be here.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
We'll suspend for a couple of minutes to allow the minister to leave. Then we'll have more questions for the department.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Could I have the members back to the table, please.
Ms. Gibbons and Mr. Langlois, thank you for sticking around.
We'll go back to Ms. Chow, for five minutes.
NDP
Olivia Chow NDP Trinity—Spadina, ON
A news release from your department on March 18, 2011, indicated that the government intended to take additional actions to improve the performance of the rail supply chain. At that time there was a commitment to establish a commodity supply chain table to deal with logistical concerns and develop a performance matrix to improve competitiveness, as well as to lead an in-depth analysis of the grain supply chain in collaboration with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.
I was beginning to lead into that question to the minister but I ran out of time. What is the status of these two initiatives? It's long past March 2011.
Director General, Surface Transportation Policy, Department of Transport
The commodity supply chain table is something that the department intends to get up and running this spring. We've been doing some work on preparing for that. The intention is to reach out to the stakeholders to actually form the group in the coming weeks.
On the supply chain study, the study is just about final. We'll be reviewing a draft of the final report, and expect to have it completed by the end of March.
NDP
Olivia Chow NDP Trinity—Spadina, ON
The timeline for how you're planning to move ahead, the work plan, the report on the supply chain study once the minister has seen it, would you be able to table that at this committee so that we are able to connect it all and get the big picture? Would you be able to do that?
Director General, Surface Transportation Policy, Department of Transport
The intention is to make that report, the grain supply chain study, public.
Director General, Surface Transportation Policy, Department of Transport
I really can't give an exact date. I know that we expect to have a complete report around the end of the fiscal year, so around the end of March. If it will be, you know, final-final at that date, I don't know, but we do expect it to be pretty close to completion by then. It will be the government's decision on when exactly it's ready to release it.