Transport Committee on Nov. 27th, 2014

[Sylvain Lachance]

Among others, it depends on the price of oil.

[Hoang Mai, NDP, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

I agree. Thank you.

I have a question for the Canadian Coast Guard representatives.

We have heard in the media that, when an oil spill occurs, only 5% to 20% of the oil can be recovered. Can you confirm that? When a spill takes place, how much could be recovered and how much would end up in nature?

[Mario Pelletier, Assistant Commissioner, Quebec Region, Canadian Coast Guard, Department of Fisheries and Oceans]

Each spill is different.

I don't remember where the information you provided came from. We work with response organizations that recover oil, on the ship owner's behalf. The percentage recovered can depend on the location, the current and environmental factors.

[Hoang Mai, NDP, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Have any oil spills occurred in the St. Lawrence? If so, what percentage of the oil would you say was recovered?

If only 5% to 20% can be recovered and the number of oil tankers in the St. Lawrence increases, the situation in case of spills becomes worrisome. As you probably know, the St. Lawrence is very important for Canadians, who want to be sure that all of the oil can be recovered. Given that it cannot all be recovered, what could be done to ensure that it does not end up in the environment?

[Mario Pelletier]

We are working with response organizations. Given the new initiative concerning tanker safety, we have to carry out a more in-depth analysis of risks at specific locations.

[Hoang Mai, NDP, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Does that mean there are no more risks? The number of oil tankers in the St. Lawrence has not been assessed, and we don't know what can be done in that area.

[Mario Pelletier]

There are risks inherent to navigation. That is why the Canadian Coast Guard has a highly effective navigation system. The St. Lawrence is very well marked out. There are vessel traffic zones, so that the traffic can be controlled. Some crossings are allowed or refused according to the tide. That's a way to mitigate risks.

According to the statistics, there have been very few pollution incidents in the St. Lawrence over the years thanks to our navigation system's effectiveness.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Thank you, Mr. Pelletier.

We now move to Mr. McGuinty for seven minutes.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Good morning.

Thank you very much for being here today.

I want to go right to the Transportation Safety Board report released yesterday.

According to the Transportation Safety Board in its final report, some progress on transportation safety issues has been made, but “actions taken to date are insufficient”. It said:

An SMS on its own is not enough. That's why we are also calling on TC to regularly oversee all safety management systems and processes to ensure they are effective.

It went on to single out that not all marine and air transportation operators are currently required to have formal SMS.

The watch list that TSB puts out identifies the transportation safety issues that pose the greatest risk to Canadians. That's the context within which Canadians are hearing this testimony today and following the work of this committee. The overarching context is that the Transportation Safety Board says it's not good enough. In fact, it goes out of its way to cite the rail disaster in Lac-Mégantic as an example of insufficient government oversight.

I want to turn to the numbers. My colleagues really appreciate it when I raise the numbers. I like to follow the money because the money tells us where government's priorities really are.

Bruce Cheadle from the Canadian Press published a story recently and came out and said the following:

The Harper government has made dramatic cuts in spending on aviation, marine and rail transport over the past five years...actual spending by Transport Canada on marine safety has plunged 27 per cent since 2009-10, while aviation and rail safety spending are both down 20 per cent or more.

I want to ask a direct question if I could of Madame Girard.

Madame Girard, the Parliamentary Budget Officer has been trying to get information from Transport Canada for a long time now to evaluate the government's claim that the cuts that have been made have had no bearing on core services, including safety. Are you in a position to release to this committee the information that the Parliamentary Budget Officer is calling for, so that we can evaluate it for ourselves?

[Nicole Girard]

I can only speak on behalf of the transportation of dangerous goods directorate. Certainly, what we've had to emphasize, especially since Mégantic, is looking at emphasizing the importance of our oversight program and making sure that we are paying attention to where the highest risks are.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Can you help? Can you provide for us a list of how the cuts were made and where they were made over the last five years, say, on marine safety?

[Nicole Girard]

I could not speak on behalf of marine safety. I would have to turn to my colleague for that information.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

We have a point of order from Mr. Watson.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Yes, Chair, just briefly, the study is related to safety management systems and the transportation of dangerous goods regime and our ability to find improvements to those regulatory frameworks.

While this is not unimportant information to talk about, it's not germane to the actual topic that we're called to study today. We can save that for estimates or something else, if he wants to.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

Yes, I agree, and I think Mr. McGuinty also realizes that certain questions, certain topics, department staff, anyone in there....

I think you understand the rules and what they can answer and don't have to answer.

Anyway, I'll turn it back to you. You still have a little over three—

Point of order, Mr. Mai?

[Hoang Mai, NDP, Brossard—La Prairie, QC]

Yes, on that point of order, I think the questions that Mr. McGuinty is raising are important for us in order to understand where we are at regarding the safety regime. The coast guard is here to tell us whether or not we're prepared, and Transport Canada is here to tell us what we're doing and what our resources are, so I don't understand why we can't ask this.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

I think, Mr. Mai, that there wasn't a question about if we're prepared or are we prepared.... That wasn't what the question was about, not from what I heard. It was about financial numbers, and Mr. Watson is correct on that point, which is that when the estimates are here, if you want to ask those questions....

Anyway, you have a little over three minutes left, Mr. McGuinty.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

I take it, then, from the answers, Mr. Chair, and Mr. Watson's intervention, that we're not going to be receiving the details of the cuts that have a direct bearing on the safety management systems, inspections, audits, etc., so let me move on to another line of questioning, if I may.

The government is saying in another venue that all is okay with the world on safety. It even has public servants, Mr. Chair, repeating the mantra of something about a global safety system that's the best in the universe. I forget what the slogan is, but even public servants are being asked to use the slogan now, which is unfortunate. But I want to go to these cuts again, because they do have a direct bearing on the ability to improve our safety system.

We can't get any information as to where the resources have been managed. We don't know whether there have been cuts for inspectors, etc., but one thing we do know is that Canadians are watching television and seeing hundreds of advertisements on television—hundreds—that are put on by the government and are talking about “responsible resource development”.

Last year, the government spent $16.5 million on advertising—$16.5 million—in this very sector, including marine safety. Do I have that right? Is there a pronounced advertising program in place to help condition Canadians' belief that things are safe and better?

[Nicole Girard]

I don't have that information to confirm....

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Nobody knows about the government's...? Surely somebody on marine safety is involved in the advertising campaign being run by the government to drive up the belief in Canadian society that things are safer in the marine sector.

[Sylvain Lachance]

Sir, I can answer part of your question, which is about where cuts were made. No cuts were made to the inspectorate workforce, none whatsoever. The cuts—

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Can you give us the details of all the cuts that have been made?

[Sylvain Lachance]

I can give you some on where the cuts were made. There were some cuts made at the management level. Some management functions were combined. We—

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

If I may, Monsieur Lachance, given the time, instead of enumerating them now, can you provide a document that would give us all the cuts over the last, say, five years?

[Sylvain Lachance]

I'm not sure if that's been made public or what, but I can certainly inquire if I can do that.

But I can give you more examples. For example, in those cuts of 27% or the figure that you quoted, sir, some programs were moved within Transport; so it used to show within marine safety, but they were moved within Transport to other places.