Transport Committee on March 24th, 2015

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

That sounds like a great idea for your committee. There have been numerous studies done on this.

What is unsafe to one person might be slightly different to another. That's why I think it's very important for us to give the minister the teeth in the legislation, with the minister's ability to have an equal playing field right across Canada to make those determinations.

[David Yurdiga, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

When you were researching your bill did you find out whether there is a current grading system, whether a crossing is rated from one to 10, with 10 as the best. Is there anything of that nature currently in existence?

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I wasn't looking at that grading piece. I was looking at the safety piece, so I defer to the ministry of transport. I'm sure they will have a wealth of information on that.

We were so focused on the ability to actually fix something, so you focus and you get things done.

[David Yurdiga, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

That's good.

One of the clauses gives the Minister of Transport the authority to dismiss public objection to any railway project if the projects are deemed to be in the public interest. Can you expand on that?

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I'm sorry, I don't have it all by memory.

Did you say “public objection”, if it's in the public interest?

[David Yurdiga, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Yes.

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

The whole modus operandi of this private member's bill is in the public interest. I was trying to make sure that if people in your community come forward and say that there is a serious problem here, the minister would be able to address it. That's why it's in there.

[David Yurdiga, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Which stakeholders did you consult? Obviously you consulted with the municipalities. Were there any other groups that you had in-depth conversations with or requested feedback from?

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Well, I've spoken to a number of organizations, a number of people, and of course, the municipality, a previous mayor, a previous councillor, and the current councillor. I also spoke to some companies. Some companies have very good maintenance systems and some don't, but I spoke to a number of them.

There have been a number of irritants regarding rail safety over the time, which probably fed into this private member's bill. I consulted also with the teamsters and I was well supported.

I think the reality is that people might quibble about an “and” or an “or”, and I'm flexible on those things. But whether people are in a corporate organization, a municipal government, a federal government, or a collective of workers, a union, they want real safety because we all live in this country and in these communities. There was wonderful support.

[The Chair, Conservative, Larry Miller]

I'm going to have to cut you off there, Ms. Bateman.

I'll now turn it over to Ms. Morin for five minutes.

[Isabelle Morin, NDP, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Bateman, to begin, I have a rather technical question for you.

You always add the words “or the safety of persons or property”. My colleague asked you why you added that, but we don't really know.

You amend section 32 by adding the following words: “ [...] a significant threat to the safety of persons or property or to the environment [...]”. Why did you add the word “environment” there when you did not use it in the four other instances?

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

My answer is almost identical to the one I already gave your colleague. However, when you...

[Isabelle Morin, NDP, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

I understand that you were advised by certain persons. This is your bill and you understand it. Why is the word “environment” used in only one of the five sentences? In fact, it reads as follows:

“or to the safety of persons and property”. You mentioned it five times in your bill.

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Are you referring to section 32?

[Isabelle Morin, NDP, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Yes.

Why is the word “environment” used in section 32 and not in the other sections?

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

You are referring to the complete section?

[Isabelle Morin, NDP, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

It is:

3. (1) Section 32 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (3.1):

(3.2) If the Minister is of the opinion that a railway operation poses a significant threat to the safety of persons or property or to the environment, the Minister may, by notice sent to the person responsible for the railway operation, order the person to take the necessary corrective measures.

Why in that section do you mention the word “environment” and not in the previous one?

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I'm going from memory on this complete piece right now, but in truth, dangerous goods are being transported in trains and we are very foolish if we don't recognize that and accept that. For example—

[Isabelle Morin, NDP, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Yes, but why don't you mention environment in the other sections?

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

For example, there is a hue and cry about pipelines, but right now, if we were trying to approve rail development, it probably would be more difficult than for pipelines.

I will get back to the greffier of the committee with the exact citation, but I believe it was related to goods within the trains. We'll get back with exactly the reason.

[Isabelle Morin, NDP, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Is that why you did not include the word “environment” in the other clauses?

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

I'm sorry.

I'll have to get back to you with the exact reference, but I believe it's because of the dangerous goods, Madam.

[Isabelle Morin, NDP, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

Would you accept an amendment that would add the word “environment” to the other clauses?

[Joyce Bateman, Conservative, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

You would have to put that question to the committee.

[Isabelle Morin, NDP, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Lachine, QC]

What is your opinion?