Transport Committee on March 6th, 2014

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

We're very proud of our investment in VIA Rail over the past number of years. It's actually in the billion dollar range what we've done in terms of capital. I wouldn't contrast that with respect to New Brunswick. VIA Rail provided their business plan. They indicated the areas in which they needed capital improvements and that's what we funded. We followed their business plan and this is what they came to us with.

What I can say with respect to New Brunswick is what I've been saying in the House, which is that CN is in the process of abandoning that portion of the line. They have asked the federal government if they'd like to purchase it as they go through the process in the CTA and we've indicated no.

One thing to note is that it's not the cessation of VIA Rail service, as there is another route through New Brunswick, but I do take the point that their concern is it's going to be losing service in the Miramichi-Campbellton area. We are working with VIA Rail on the issue. We understand the concerns of people in New Brunswick regarding the matter.

At the end of the day, VIA Rail is in the position to take decisions that they have to in order to make sure they're running as efficiently as possible based upon what their passenger network is. But it doesn't mean we can't continue to have conversations about the matter as we progress through the CTA process that CN is in. As I've indicated to my colleagues in New Brunswick, we'll continue to have discussions around it and understand what their concerns are, but VIA Rail will not be ceasing service throughout New Brunswick because they do have an alternate route to take.

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

Except the alternate route goes through Plaster Rock and nobody lives there. That's the problem. There's a whole lot of people who live between Miramichi and Bathurst who need the train.

Switching gears a little bit to the issue of rail safety and the DOT-111 tank cars, which as far back as 1991 were deemed to be unsafe for the transportation of dangerous goods, you and your officials will have noted there has been a 600-fold increase in the use of these cars for transportation of dangerous goods in Canada, in that crude oil is considered a dangerous good. It isn't currently considered a dangerous good in the same manner by Transport Canada. At least that's what they told us in committee in November, that the DOT-111s are safe for the transportation of crude oil, but they're looking at that.

There are two things. It appears that Transport Canada has not yet done a risk analysis of this 600-fold increase in the transportation of what is, as we discovered in Lac-Mégantic, a dangerous good. In addition, you suggested that we should be following the same kinds of regulations that are going on in the States. As far as I am aware, the U.S. is way ahead of us in some aspects of that. They have now ordered trains to go slow through cities. We have not. They have ordered that trains not go through certain large cities. We have not. What is the ministry doing about making our system as safe as that in the U.S.?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

I'm very proud of our system, and we compare very well to the United States.

What you're referring to is a recent directive that came out of the United States with respect to the operation of trains and what they should be doing. We already have those standards here in Canada. We already have a decreased level of speed for certain goods. The difficulty with respect to rerouting, which the United States is looking at, is that we simply don't have the same amount of infrastructure they do, or the same number of options they have in terms of a rail network.

Let me back it up by saying we've worked very hard with the Federation of Canadian Municipalities on their concerns with respect to transportation of dangerous goods in communities. We issued a protective directive to ensure that they're receiving the information they can and that the communication between the railways and the communities is there so that they can talk about the transportation of dangerous goods in their area as well.

The DOT-111 cars, as I mentioned earlier just for your sake, we are going to phase out. The point of decision is how long it will take to phase out the old DOT-111s. We've already taken a step that the United States has not taken, which is to publish in the Gazette new regulations we'd like to pass to ensure that any construction of new tank cars be done to a higher standard. That does not exist in the United States and there is instead a loose agreement in the industry that this is what they'll build to. We are implementing it into regulation to ensure that it's in place.

As I mentioned, the Transportation Safety Board gave us three recommendations in January. I'm mindful of the time in which I have to report back to the Transportation Safety Board. We're going to be working with those advisory committees that we set up in order to discuss transportation of dangerous goods, means of containment, classification, and of course, response and ERAPs. With those things in hand, we'll be able to set policy moving forward and to make some decisions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Toet, you have the last five minutes.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to put on the record the fact that there have been some questions here about the cold weather. Many people have asked why, when Canada is cold, would the cold weather be affecting the trains this year. I can attest to the fact that in Manitoba, where I'm from, in December we set a record for the coldest December we've had in over 100 years. December and January combined were the second coldest in over 100 years. It has been an extremely cold winter. I'm not saying that to excuse anybody, but we have to deal with the reality. To make it sound as though this has not been an extraordinarily cold winter, which some people have done, is not a fair thing to do. I want to make sure that's there.

Anybody who's on the Prairies, whether they're in a rural or an urban setting, understands the importance of agriculture and how important it is to our economy in the Prairies to address this situation as quickly as we can and to look at the long term. I'm glad to hear that there is both a short-term and a long-term outlook of how we're going to deal with this going forward, to make sure we don't run into this situation again in the future. It is very, very important for our prairie regions.

I also want to touch on the DOT-111s. You talked about some of the enhancements to them and the standards we're going to put in on the new DOT-111s. We talked about the timeframe. I'm glad that you made the statement that 10 years is too long. I'm glad we're trying to be very aggressive on this moving forward. I think it's also important to have a good understanding of what the new standards will be. Maybe you could speak to what the new standards for the DOT-111s will be.

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

That's a great question, because there is another set of discussions happening.

We have published in the Gazette the standards we believe they should be built to. It's something the industry has been abiding by since 2011. There are a good number of improved DOT-111s already on the rails or being purchased. We wanted to ensure that we embedded the new standards in regulation, and that's what we're doing.

There's another discussion happening in the United States. That has to do with, beyond this new regulatory aspect, what a new DOT-111 car would look like. Those discussions are happening within the systems down there. We're monitoring those. We're a part of them, and the railways in Canada are a part of them as well. The goal of everybody is to ensure that we move dangerous goods, crude oil or whatever is inside them, as safely as possible. That's something that all industry can do.

Two weeks ago, Irving Oil made the decision that they would not accept cars that were not up to the new standard that we just published in regulations. That was a business decision they made. I commend them for it, because they are doing something without having to be forced to do it by regulation.

I would expect that other industries, companies, and shippers will be taking a look at the DOT-111 cars and the recommendations that have been made over the years and would come to the same conclusion, while we continue to do what we're doing on our side to make sure that we have that regulatory or policy oversight moving as quickly as we can and given the conditions we have with respect to the United States. There are a number of conversations taking place. Both sides of the border and Transport are seized with this issue. It's a very important issue. It's important that we get it correct, that we can work together, and that we do so without having a detrimental impact upon our supply chain and our prosperity.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Continuing on the rail safety aspect of it, I understand that you asked your advisory council to get back to you with recommendations on rail safety. I wonder if you could give us an update on those recommendations.

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

All the industry-led groups responded in the timeframe. They've provided us with some good reports which we have published on our website in both official languages.

The officials are going through them right now, developing recommendations and advice for us on how to proceed. As I said earlier, I'm mindful of the fact that we do have a deadline with respect to a response to the Transportation Safety Board. We're doing our work right now on how to respond and what to do moving forward with respect to the matters that are before us.

[Lawrence Toet, Conservative, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

There is one last question that I want to ask. It's actually in regard to rail crossings. Especially in the city of Winnipeg, we have a lot of grade crossings. I understand there is some work that is going forward, especially since the tragic accident we had here with OC Transpo bus and the VIA Rail train collision, and that's a really close look at grade-crossing safety measures. I wonder if you could expand on those because that's something that's very, very important to my area of Manitoba.

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

For 20 years there have been conversations going on between municipalities and owners of rail about what is acceptable in terms of grade crossings, because fundamentally, you want to make sure that if there's an intersection of people with rail, you make it as safe as possible.

One thing we do have in the department is a program to help with assistance for closing some of these crossings. I'm proud that we fund that and that we disburse grants in that way.

More importantly, we actually did get agreement and we proceeded with respect to publishing new regulations on grade crossings. It's incredibly important to ensure that municipalities and the rail work together. It's not just about safety. It's about timing. It's about signalling. There is a lot embedded in there, and it's a great coup that we were able to move these forward into the Canada Gazette. I look forward to the closing of the commentary period and moving on the process and having them in place.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thanks very much.

Our time has run out. I know you have cabinet you have to get to, Minister, but I'm going to give you the opportunity to make some closing comments.

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, I'm in your hands on this. As you know, I had made a recommendation to the committee that you continue to study the transportation of dangerous goods. I would hope the committee would consider that study on an urgent basis and that you would start receiving comments and representations on that matter.

It's really important that we continue to focus, and it's not just what we do here in government, but it's what you can do as well to ensure the safety for our Canadian communities and citizens. It's really important work and I appreciate your moving forward on it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you. On that note, I can tell you, Minister, that at our first meeting back after the break we'll be going right into that with witnesses.

Thanks again, Minister. Mr. Lapointe, Mr. Lévesque, and Ms. Borges, thanks for being here.

We're going in camera to deal with some committee business, so I would ask everyone except for staff to please vacate the room as quickly as possible. Thank you.

We'll just recess for a couple of minutes.

[Proceedings continue in camera]