Transport Committee on Nov. 25th, 2013

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

We'll call our meeting to order.

We're just beginning our study on rail safety review.

With us today from the Department of Transport, we have Mr. McDonald, Mr. Bourdon, Ms. Dagenais, Mr. Eley, and Mr. Roussel. I don't know who's going to start, but I understand, Mr. McDonald, that you have a presentation.

Just so members are aware, this presentation will be longer than the normal 10 minutes. There's a lot of information, and then we'll move into questioning.

With that, Mr. McDonald, you may begin.

[Gerard McDonald, Assistant Deputy Minister, Safety and Security, Department of Transport]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thanks to the committee for inviting us here today to talk about what we feel are some very important issues facing the transportation industry.

As you know, Minister Raitt appeared before the committee last week, and she tasked the committee with looking at both the safety of transportation of dangerous goods and the implementation of safety management systems in the transportation sector.

What we'd like to do for you today is help you start off that study by presenting a bit of a primer on safety management systems and how we operate them at Transport Canada. Then on Wednesday, I believe, we've been asked to come back and we'll be giving you a presentation of our transportation of dangerous goods program.

We're very pleased that the committee is undertaking this work, and obviously, beyond those two presentations, we'll remain at the disposition of the committee to come back and answer any further questions that may arise subsequent to your other witnesses appearing. We eagerly anticipate the results of this study and the recommendations that the committee may have.

With that, I'll start my presentation. I'll be doing the main introduction to the safety management systems piece. I'll ask my colleagues to talk to their specific modal areas with respect to how safety management systems are implemented in the various modes of Transport Canada, and then I'll reach a conclusion thereafter.

Obviously, safety management systems are a key priority for maintaining transportation safety in Canada. Indeed, it's an international priority to ensure that our shared skies, seas, and rails are safe, reliable, and ready to move people and goods safely and efficiently. Transportation safety, first at home and then abroad, makes a significant contribution to Canada's agenda with respect to public safety and economic growth. As a trading nation with a huge land mass, we must rely on transportation to get our goods to market, our consumables into Canada, and our citizens to their families and communities.

First, let me give you some context on Transport Canada's safety portfolio. There are some 3,400 employees in the safety and security group, of which I'm the assistant deputy minister, across our regions and at headquarters. Of these employees, 2,900 are professionals focused on the safety of the air, marine, and surface modes of transportation. The rest have responsibilities to keep our transportation system secure.

Safety employees are responsible for policies and rule-making, licensing and certification, monitoring, enforcement, and third party outreach programs. Almost half of our employees are inspectors responsible for delivering our oversight program, which includes monitoring, compliance, and enforcing legal requirements. Most of these highly trained professionals are in the regions, on the ground, and interacting with Canada's transportation industry.

Various activities are used by the department to achieve a safe transportation system. For example, one of our regulatory roles and our responsibilities includes consultation, where any change in a policy or regulation is discussed with the relevant transportation industry to outline the intent, direction, and benefits of the changes before they are brought into effect.

The department also plays a role in the granting of licences and certificates. This is to ensure that document holders meet the standards of fitness and skill. Otherwise, the department is required to cancel or refuse to review a new document. One of our biggest responsibilities concerns the oversight of our regulatory program. Departmental monitoring and surveillance comes in various forms, including safety management systems, or SMS, audits and assessments, in addition to traditional inspections.

Another major responsibility concerns our duty to protect the public and individual operators. When a document holder contravenes a regulatory requirement, it is our responsibility to deter them from doing it again in order to promote safety. Deterrent actions the department can take range from a written warning, to suspending a document or licence, to pursuing judicial action. Selecting the appropriate action is central to promoting future compliance.

The continual evolution of the world is something we see every day and it affects transportation and how Transport Canada must do business. We are faced with concurrent challenges and opportunities that require us to adapt and to be agile.

When we look at a transportation accident, we know that most links in the accident chain are controlled by the organization. The accident is likely to have been caused by a series of events or a combination of factors related to human error, the organization, technical problems, or the environment. We also know that an organization can comply with all of our regulatory requirements and still pose a risk to safety, which combined suggest that there are few opportunities to improve safety by means of addressing a single issue or event.

The department knows that Canada has one of the best transportation records in the world. However, this record is being jeopardized by population growth, globalization, increasing traffic and emergence of new technologies. All these factors are leading to a more complex and extensive transportation network.

This means that Transport Canada has to position itself in order to respond to the constantly evolving rate of change. This, as well as increased pressure to meet international standards, has led the department to adopt safety management systems.

We adopted safety management systems in order to respond to the evolving nature of the transportation sector. This marks the beginning of an approach that will allow the industry to systematically manage risks.

SMS builds on the principles of quality management that are already embraced by most of our transportation industries and provides them with a systematic way to identify hazards, control risks, and continually improve. Put another way, the department requires transportation entities to integrate the management of risk into their day-to-day activities.

Safety management systems allow industry to become more responsible for proactively identifying and mitigating critical safety risks. They also move an organization towards more effective compliance and force it to be more proactive in its management of risks. The bottom line for SMS is that it fosters a culture of safety throughout organizations, and the transportation system, as a safety management system, promotes the adoption of a safety culture. Safety management systems also allow the department to prioritize and target its resources towards areas that pose the greatest risk and require the most attention.

Safety management systems require action and performance from industry. On top of the need to comply with our regulatory requirements, SMS places an additional responsibility on the industry to manage its own safety through the identification, assessment, and control of risks.

If I can use an analogy, to protect our children, society has mandated the wearing of helmets for children riding a bicycle or playing hockey. However, as parents, we know that the simple wearing of a helmet does little to address the potential risks a child faces when out riding in the street or skating along the boards. As a result, we not only make sure they wear their safety equipment but also teach them about the potential danger of cars, of riding with no hands, or of standing with the puck while facing the boards.

The same can be said for safety management systems. As the regulator, Transport Canada requires industry not only to follow the rules but also to put policies and processes in practice to identify and address potential safety issues. Some of the minimum actions or processes that industry must implement include: hazard identification or having a method for identifying hazard; occurrence reporting, a process for the acquisition of safety data; risk management, a standard approach for assessing risks and applying risk controls; performance measurement, having management tools to analyze principles and determine whether the entity's safety goals are being achieved; quality and safety assurance, which are processes based on quality management principles that support continuous improvements of the entity's safety performance; and safe employee involvement and senior management commitment to ensure all components are supported and function effectively.

When monitoring a transportation entity, should any of these components be missing or if a safety concern or a regulatory infraction is identified, the department will follow up with the entity to verify if the issue or concern has already been identified by the entity itself, and if it has, find out what is being done about it.

With the adoption of safety management systems, our oversight of the transportation industry is strengthened in a number of ways, including: increased accountability and responsibility in the industry; active pursuit of efficiency; systematic risk management of safety and security; monitoring and evaluation of performance to achieve objectives; and that the results support Transport Canada's strategic outcome, which is safety.

Safety management systems have gained international acceptance and have been adopted by standardizing bodies such as the International Civil Aviation Organization, the International Maritime Organization, and the International Organization for Standardization. As a member of these international bodies, this acceptance has placed additional pressure on Transport Canada to adopt safety management systems, and for good reason.

The need to use SMS dates back to 1998 when marine safety implemented the international safety management code for certain vessels trading internationally.

As you may know, rail and civil aviation safety followed in their footsteps and told the industry to formally adopt SMS in 2001 and 2005 respectively.

In the following slides I will focus on each mode of transportation, the implementation of SMS, and the work that remains to be done.

Before I begin, I would like to point out that dangerous goods transport has no formal SMS program but the SMS principles have been embodied in the various components of the program.

With that introduction, Mr. Chair, I'll turn to my colleague, Mr. Martin Eley, the director general of civil aviation, who will give us a short overview of how SMS applies in the aviation sector.

[Martin Eley, Director General, Civil Aviation, Department of Transport]

Thank you.

The accident rate in the last 10 years has continued to decrease. At the same time, we've seen a significant increase in air traffic. The outcome of that is that the actual number of accidents has gone down year over year. In fact, last year the total number of accidents in Canada declined to the lowest recorded figure in modern aviation history.

As previously mentioned, many of today's air transportation accidents can be attributed to human or organizational factors. Safety management systems offer the most promising means of preventing these types of accidents by requiring companies to have processes that proactively and systematically minimize the risks caused by these factors.

When our inspectors inspect a company, they determine the effectiveness of its safety system, verify its regulatory compliance, and analyze its corrective actions, if applicable. By interviewing employees, managers, and CEOs, and asking how they assess risk, we broaden our scope to help companies minimize risk at every level.

The path to achieving excellence in safety can be entirely different from one company to the next. This is why we have moved toward a systems-based approach that asks companies to have systems in place to identify, assess, and mitigate risks; to acquire safety data; to analyze if the organization is meeting its safety goals; and that support continuous improvement in the organization's safety performance.

It's worth noting that a recent review by the Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority found that recent studies have demonstrated that well-implemented SMS, especially those where the organization invests effort into the SMS, are associated with enhanced safety performance.

In terms of implementation, Transport Canada is a world leader in SMS requirements for aviation organizations and continues to work with the front-line staff and the industry to further improve the program. At the present time, our level of implementation covers 90% of the fare-paying passenger kilometres in Canada. We're one of the few authorities in the world that have implemented SMS to that extent.

We've conducted SMS assessments of all Canada's airlines and related maintenance organizations to verify that the SMS in these companies are working and contributing to a healthier safety culture within the organization.

In 2008 and 2009 we also introduced regulations for airports and air navigation service providers in Canada. Following implementation in those sectors, a decision was made to further delay implementation in other commercial sectors to make sure we had additional time to refine our own procedures, training, and guidance based on both inspector and industry feedback. Since then, we've begun an assessment on further implementation that will help us determine industry readiness and Transport Canada's capacity to carry out the necessary surveillance.

We are currently considering additional information with respect to the feasibility, timing, and benefits of implementing SMS in these other areas. We will review and communicate proposals for moving forward within the next year.

Since the implementation of SMS, we have also refined our oversight tools. A lot of progress has been made internally to strengthen the oversight of aviation organizations subject and not subject to SMS requirements. We found that many of the tools we had developed were equally applicable in both worlds.

We exercise a systems-based approach to safety oversight that includes assessments, program validation inspections, and process inspections.

Assessment means the surveillance activity conducted to look at the effectiveness of a company's SMS, and the level of compliance with the civil aviation regulations. We use the compliance level for all sorts of companies.

The second form, the program validation inspection, means a systematic review of one or more regulated areas of a company subject or not subject to SMS. It is used to determine if regulatory requirements are documented, implemented, in use, and effective within certified organizations.

Third, the process inspection means an in-depth review of the processes used to produce an output, for example, the maintenance of training records. Other inspection activities occur in the course of delivering services to the industry.

These surveillance tools complement one another and together provide for comprehensive oversight of compliance with safety regulations.

Multidisciplinary inspection teams work together to provide the necessary surveillance of a company's entire operation. On-site inspections are built into Transport Canada's surveillance schedule and can be planned or unplanned. The department conducts thousands of such inspections a year.

Companies with SMS are required to have management tools to analyze whether the company's safety goals are being achieved and processes based on quality management principles that support continuous improvement of its safety performance.

Our own program, our risk-based surveillance program, has brought several benefits to the organization in terms of resource allocation. We are now in a better position to proactively allocate resources to provide the greatest benefits. We can also better achieve a balance between workload and capacity by moving resources and/or moving work around as those priorities are identified necessary.

This new approach links the surveillance of activities to risk profiles of companies, allows flexibility for smaller oversight interventions and unplanned work, and allows us to assess the adequacy of resources to deliver the program. We've also identified specific points in the planning process to make sure that we have adequate management review and we review the data annually in conjunction with ongoing workload and capacity analysis.

From an enforcement perspective, as we introduced safety management system regulations as a means to trigger proactive approach to regulatory compliance, we also needed to make sure that we didn't just react to findings when they arrived from TSB, for example.

Our approach has been two-pronged. One, it focuses on a non-punitive reporting culture in the companies, which encourages companies to take corrective and preventive measures even before we necessarily become aware of an issue. It also provides for punitive measures when TC inspectors do identify non-compliance, and the enforcement action TC takes can include oral counselling, fines, or even suspension or cancellation of the company's certificate. We do not hesitate to take action if we determine such action is necessary.

Enforcement is taken with a firm but fair approach and is based on the examination of surveillance activity, historical records, and informed judgment. When necessary, we may place a company under an enhanced monitoring program that provides for increased surveillance, as well as additional assurance that deficiencies are being dealt with effectively and appropriately. If Transport Canada detects a situation that poses an immediate threat to aviation safety, an inspector may issue a notice of suspension of the organization's certification or detain the aircraft.

Internally, we've developed an action plan to guide the civil aviation program. That was not entirely, but largely, aimed at many of the results that came out of the OAG audit that was released in April 2012. The action plan included many activities to strengthen the civil aviation program, including in areas related to the oversight of aviation organizations and their safety management systems.

Transport Canada has staff instructions that describe the procedures and responsibilities of inspectors when it comes to surveillance and enforcement activities. Beginning last year, we also held oversight workshops with inspectors across the country to discuss surveillance and enforcement. Those staff instructions were revised based on some of the feedback we had during those meetings. TC continues to work with the front-line department employees in industry to improve understanding of the SMS regulatory approach.

In summary, to continue this improvement, as discussed, further analysis is needed prior to moving forward with SMS implementation into other areas of air transportation, and we continue to further refine our processes to ensure that we focus our resources consistently on the areas of highest risk.

Thank you.

[Gerard McDonald]

Thank you, Martin.

We'll now ask Donald Roussel, our director general of marine safety, to talk about the marine mode.

[Donald Roussel, Director General, Marine Safety and Security, Department of Transport]

Thank you very much.

In response to a number of significant marine accidents, the International Maritime Organization instituted SMS through the incorporation of the international management code for the safe operation of ships and for pollution prevention, which is called the International Safety Management Code, or the ISM Code. It was introduced into the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, SOLAS, in 1998.

All countries that are signatory to SOLAS have implemented the ISM Code. Pursuant to the Canada Shipping Act, Canada implemented the ISM Code in 1998 by introducing the safety management regulations.

As Canadian vessel operators recognize the benefit of SMS, many have adopted the ISM Code voluntarily.

Currently the safety management regulations apply only to vessels subject to the SOLAS convention. However, Transport Canada is proposing to amend the safety management regulations to apply to the Canadian domestic fleet. As a result, preliminary consultations were initiated in the fall of 2010, and consultations will continue through 2013.

The proposed regulations will apply to the following vessels and the companies that operate them.

A Canadian vessel subject to chapter IX of SOLAS currently covered by the safety management regulations will have an SMS audited and certified.

We are proposing that a Canadian vessel of 500 gross tonnage and upwards have an SMS audited and certified.

We're proposing also that a Canadian vessel certified to carry more than 50 passengers have an SMS audited and certified.

For smaller vessels that are more than 24 metres in length and less than 500 gross tons, we propose to have SMS but no audit and certification requirement.

We are currently preparing alternate means to encourage SMS and safety culture on smaller vessels. For instance, we are publishing an online SMS manual and guidelines. The work towards the development of the regulation is well under way. Drafting of the proposed regulation is targeted for completion by the second quarter of 2014.

We strive for continuous improvement. Amending the safety management regulations will improve the safety culture of Canada. By moving forward with the proposed regulations, Transport Canada would establish one set of safety management requirements based on the International Safety Management Code.

In addition, this will facilitate industry's ability to comply with regulations and other requirements, which will improve safety performance overall. It will also enhance risk management, information sharing, and allow for flexibility and innovations. Companies will be able to develop safety management systems that reflect their specific operation; each SMS is tailored for the individual vessel and its operator.

Finally, as part of our effort to improve continuously, we are preparing alternate means of encouraging SMS and safety culture on smaller vessels, leveraging and educating municipalities and provinces involved in the issuance of commercial licences and compliance programs. We are informing underwriters and proposing to increase the number of agreements with provincial compensation boards.

Thank you.

[Gerard McDonald]

Mr. Chairman, I will now call upon my colleague, Mr. Luc Bourdon, the director general of rail safety, to describe the railway situation.

[Luc Bourdon, Director General, Rail Safety, Department of Transport]

Merci, monsieur McDonald.

The SMS regulations were added to the Railway Safety Act in 2001, following some amendments that came into force in 1999. As per a provision in section 51 of the act in 1988, four years after, there was a mandatory review that took place, in 1994, and that was followed by another one. Nothing that was recommended in 1994 was actually put into the RSA review.

In 1998 there was a second review and it was recommended that the Railway Safety Act be amended to include the provision to have the SMS regulations in place, so that in 2001 the provision came into force.

As we speak, the SMS regulations apply to all federally regulated railways and some of the provincial railways. Some provinces have adopted the federal regime.

A company must implement the 12 components of SMS as part of the SMS regulations. The components deal with policies targeted toward systems, processes, procedures, and documentation.

The regulations require railway companies to develop their own safety policies and procedures and measure their safety record. It's important to note that before SMS, a company still had the responsibility to develop their own policies and procedures. Since SMS came into force, now it is regulated to do so. It's not something that we transferred to industry. They were doing it before. Now it's regulated under the safety management system regulations.

In order to support industry and the unions, we developed some guidance material in 2010 jointly with the unions and management, the Railway Association of Canada, their members, and Transport Canada. We produced some guidance material, which is in the kit that we can distribute later on, which is guidance material to help the company. We've got best practices for all railways, best practices for small railways. There is also a little brochure on the safety culture, as well as a little pocket document on SMS in order to assist the railways and the unions.

Currently, there are approximately 35 railways in Canada that are subject to the SMS regulations. Once the SMS regulations are amended, we'll have about 80 railways, 79 that will come under SMS.

On progress to date, both the Railway Safety Act review, which was a panel that was mandated by the minister to do a review and they tabled a report in 2007, as well as the Standing Committee on Transportation, Infrastructure and Communities, made some recommendations in 2008 and enhanced the implementation of SMS on the rail industry. Many of these recommendations required legislative amendment. All of them, or most of them, are included in the act that was amended on May 1.

In terms of continuous improvement, as a result of the amendments to the Railway Safety Act that came into force on May 1, 2013, work is under way to amend the SMS regulations that respond to the RSA review, as well as the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities recommendations. We're currently amending the SMS regulations to include many of the recommendations.

Amendment to the RSA reflect the central importance of SMS and recognize the responsibility of railway companies to demonstrate that they continuously manage risk related to safety matters using SMS. That's now clearly in the act. As well, we've also included, as a result of risk management analysis, that a railway must maintain the highest level of safety.

Amendments to the regulations will also clarify Transport Canada's expectations and require railway companies to identify an accountable executive as a focal point of accountability for the safety of a company's operation. This will require the involvement of employees and their bargaining agent, which was a recommendation also on the Railway Safety Act, as well as developing a non-punitive reporting system and to have the ability for employees to report directly to Transport Canada in a confidential manner.

We were planning to prepublish the SMS amendment in the Canada Gazette , part I, by summer 2014.

[Gerard McDonald]

Merci, Luc.

In summary, Mr. Chair, after more than 10 years of experience with safety management systems, we've learned a few lessons along the way that will benefit ourselves as the regulator, as well as the transportation industry we serve.

For instance, we realized that performing SMS assessments must be supported by random or planned inspections. The use of monitoring and surveillance activities is necessary for the department to get a true picture of the operations of a transportation entity. Another point we've learned over the past decade is that we cannot take a one-size-fits-all approach to SMS, as this would advantage larger transportation organizations. To be fair to smaller businesses and operations, regulations and policies must be scoped and tailored so that safety requirements are appropriate to smaller operators.

We are very aware of the fact that before we apply SMS to other areas, whether it be the aviation or marine sectors, we will have to undertake a full evaluation of the risks and resources in order to ensure that all parties have the ability to implement safety management systems.

Even though Canada has one of the best transportation safety records, we acknowledge that there are still challenges.

I can tell you that our department strongly supports safety management systems and that it is determined to improve the overall safety of the transportation network.

I'm confident that we can address any challenge by continuing our hard work with our employees, unions, stakeholders, and interested parties. Together we can all enhance and strengthen the safety of Canada's transportation system.

I want to thank you, Mr. Chair, for allowing us to make this presentation today. Of course, we would be happy to take any questions that members of the committee may have.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you, Mr. McDonald and all your officials.

Before we get started, I want to recognize somebody who is here today as a spectator. Ms. Esther Bardo was a former member of the international parliamentary internship program in 2006. I had the pleasure of having her in my office for six weeks. She's sitting over on the far side. She obviously had a good experience here in Canada and she came back. Please welcome her.

I also want to remind the members of the committee that part of the job of the officials here today is to carry out policy for the government. I want to remind you to be cognizant of that as you ask your questions.

With no further ado, Ms. Crowder, for seven minutes.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

You're telling me that the officials can't rewrite policy as we speak then.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Yes.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

I want to thank the officials for coming before us today.

I have a question that comes out of an article in the Toronto Star. To give you a bit of context, it says: As a growing number of train derailments raise public safety concerns, documents that contain a rail company’s safety plan — and play a key role in the regulation of the rail industry — are “locked up in a vault,” say some industry experts and safety advocates. Amid calls for increased transparency about rail companies and the products they carry, company-specific safety regimes — which detail practices, policies, employee training and more — are not available through Transport Canada. Although the federal regulator audits the safety plans, known as safety management systems (SMS), for compliance, a spokesperson said they’re “third-party information” and should be accessed through the companies.

Later on in the article, we read that retired Justice Virgil Moshansky believes that a penchant for secrecy concerning transport regulations documents continues. “Not disclosing”—a safety management plan—“is really an excuse to get around from disclosing faulty management systems or operations within the industry to the public.”

Can you comment on the fact that the public cannot access SMS plans and we really have no way of knowing whether the plans meet community needs and whether I need to be worried about a train rolling through my municipality?

In fact, in this article, contrary to what I think Monsieur Roussel said, the union raised questions about their lack of access to SMS plans in companies that they worked for.

Can you comment on that, Mr. McDonald?

[Gerard McDonald]

Certainly.

Obviously when we're dealing with company information, we have to be cognizant of commercial confidentiality of information that we receive. We are subject to the access laws, like anyone else in government.

Anything we would be able to release would have to go through the appropriate assessment on access to information. If it is third party information, we're not at liberty to release it ourselves without going to that third party to assess whether there may be commercial confidentiality aspects to it that might be breached should we do so.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

You'll forgive me if the public would have serious concerns about that response, although we're talking about an SMS rather than transportation of dangerous goods. I want to refer to the report of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development. That report raised some serious concerns about Transport Canada's oversight of the transportation of dangerous goods. Given the track record from the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, what mechanisms do you have in place that can provide assurance to the public around your oversight of SMS plans, your ability to follow up, and your ability to ensure compliance?

[Gerard McDonald]

Yes. The report you talk about was published in 2009, and since then the department—

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

It was actually 2011.

[Gerard McDonald]

Sorry, 2011.

Since that time we've done a great deal of work to address the recommendations of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development. With respect to assuring the public, we are totally open in what our inspection process comprises. We inform them of what inspections we may have done. We can educate anyone who wishes to know what the system is made up of and the quality assurance in the system. All of these elements would hopefully add to the degree of trust the public has in our program.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

That's the process; that's actually not the results of the inspection. That's not the result of whether or not you're working with a company in terms of compliance. Telling me what the process looks like doesn't mean that you actually do it.

Mr. Eley indicated in his presentation—actually it was a note on page six of the document when Mr. Eley was talking about moving ahead on SMS—that in part there's a slowdown on moving ahead on SMS because of the fact that you're reviewing the capability of the department in order to do that. How can we have confidence that the review, the necessary corrective action, and the follow-up review around compliance is happening when all you tell us about is a process? We don't have any results of the actual SMS process.

[Gerard McDonald]

As I said, we are somewhat restricted in what information we can release on individual SMS audits. That is not of our own doing; those are the laws that we have to live within and respond to. We also, as I said, have to be cognizant of commercial confidentiality and ensure that organizations are not using information that may be made available to them to gain commercial advantage.

I'm not sure what I can add to that.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

My understanding is that part of your role as Transport Canada is to ensure public safety, and the public needs to have confidence that is actually happening. When things are clouded by secrecy and lack of transparency, it's very difficult for the public to have confidence on that matter.

I want to follow up on a recent announcement that was made with regard to transportation of dangerous goods. I know that you indicated earlier that transportation of dangerous goods does not have an SMS in place, that there are other regulations, but—

[Gerard McDonald]

To clarify, transportation of dangerous goods is a somewhat different program in that we regulate the shippers and the product being shipped, so it doesn't lend itself to the SMS process. That being said, any transportation company that is transporting dangerous goods is subject to an SMS and they have a transportation of danger goods component to their SMS system.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Your time has expired. We'll be back to you.

Mr. McGuinty, you have seven minutes.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Witnesses, thank you very much for being here today. Thanks for your testimony so far.

I want to go back and recap something I brought up with the minister when she appeared recently, just to remind Canadians of what has been happening at Transport Canada.

Using fiscal years 2011-12 and 2012-13, aviation safety has been cut 11%, from $222 million to $198.6 million. Marine safety has been cut 25%, from $75.6 million to $56.5 million. Road safety has been cut 5.5%, from $23.8 million to $22.5 million. I acknowledge that there has been a paltry and nominal increase of $1.5 million a year for rail safety.

I think that's important for us to remember as we continue our discussion about SMS writ large.

It's also important for Canadians to remember that at the very least, the conservative estimates—the small c conservative estimates—for the costs for the cleanup and decontamination around Lac-Mégantic are a minimum of probably $250 million.

On top of that, we're seeing massive increases in the shipping of oil by rail, longer trains, more cars, heavier weight, and more risk. We're seeing our railway companies invest heavily in this regard, of course, because by 2025, even if every pipeline project in this country is approved, we're still going to see a million barrels a day of surplus oil that's going to have to be shipped somehow.

When I looked at these SMS plans, picking up on what my colleague from the NDP asked about public access to the information inherent in an SMS, I wanted to find out more about who is consulted. In your briefing you say, “We are working closely with employees, industry, labour unions and key interested parties...”, so let me ask you this. When you come to ground on an SMS that is being implemented, are urban governments, municipal governments, which are most at risk, according to Mayor Nenshi.... He doesn't even agree with the government's recent announcement about releasing “yearly aggregate information, presented by quarter, on the nature and volume of dangerous goods” that the company is transporting through municipalities.

I can't for the life of me figure out why we're not revealing this prospectively, as opposed to retrospectively. I don't know why fire and first responders don't want to know in advance what's coming through their city, as opposed to six months ago.

I want to find out who's consulted. Are municipal governments consulted? Are environmental NGOs consulted? For the river in play in Lac-Mégantic, we have no idea of what that's going to cost in terms of its cleanup, and we have no idea of what the long-term cost will be.

Who in fact is called in to help craft these SMS?

[Gerard McDonald]

Anyone who wishes to participate, we're more than happy to hear from.

As a general matter, of course, as I indicated, when we're developing regulations, we'll consult with the railways, with the short-line railways, and with their associations, such as the Railway Association of Canada. We'll consult with the municipalities, either individually or through their representative organization, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. We consult with the unions: the Teamsters, the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen, and what have you. We make the proposals well known enough such that if there's anyone else who wishes to come forward, we're more than happy to listen to what they have to say and to take their considerations into account when developing a new SMS regulation.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Forty years ago, the Belgians, the Germans, and the Dutch realized that the Rhine was dying, so they actually figured out a new way of doing business. They started negotiating and implementing, and rendering fully public, eco-covenants.

Shippers of chemical products, chemical factories, chemical companies, environmental NGOs, labour groups, and governments all sit down together at one table in one process. They don't get what I describe as flash-card consultation: now you see it, now you don't. They actually sit down and negotiate. Apparently, German chemical companies have no problem with revealing some of their so-called trade secrets, because these eco-covenants are signed off on by environmental groups. They're made public. They're five-year plans.

Any citizen can find out exactly what's going to happen on the Rhine with respect to the transport of chemical products and risky products. They can find out about pollution levels. They can find out about spills, etc. It's all negotiated in advance. Why can't we work towards something like that in Canada, or can we?