Evidence of meeting #50 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was crossings.
A video is available from Parliament.
4 p.m.
Manager, Policy and Research, Policy and Government Relations, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
As I understand it, this bill deals with federal railways that are under the jurisdiction of the Railway Safety Act.
4 p.m.
NDP
Philip Toone NDP Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
Do you know what percentage of those railways are in Quebec?
You represent the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, so I will talk about Canada. What percentage of railways in Canada come under provincial jurisdiction? Do you know what that percentage might be?
4 p.m.
Co-Chair, National Municipal Rail Safety Working Group, Mayor, City of Bromont, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
Daniel may have information about that, but I believe the percentage is low. In Quebec, the railways under provincial jurisdiction account for a small percentage. Of course, major companies such as CN, CP or, in our case, Montreal, Maine & Atlantic Railway, are federally regulated. There are railways that come under provincial jurisdiction in some regions of Quebec, but I think they are few in number.
4 p.m.
NDP
Philip Toone NDP Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine, QC
Many changes have recently been made to rail safety regulations, especially since the Lac-Mégantic accident. I often hear that the relations between railway companies and municipalities are sometimes strained. Is enough focus being placed on providing workers with training and adequate support? You talked about first responders. Are they properly equipped to handle emergencies and disasters that sometimes occur?
4 p.m.
Co-Chair, National Municipal Rail Safety Working Group, Mayor, City of Bromont, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
I think that, since the disaster we are talking about and since we began working on the issue, communication between railway companies and municipalities has improved considerably. I think that large companies always have a more structured approach.
As for smaller companies, we have met with representatives of Central Maine & Quebec Railway, which is the new company now managing rail transportation in one part of Quebec. The company has shown a willingness to work with us.
I should still point out that our emergency workers could never respond locally. We need contribution, cooperation and the response plan the companies are responsible for, along with, of course, the information at our disposal and our local emergency response plans.
4:05 p.m.
NDP
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Adam Vaughan Liberal Trinity—Spadina, ON
My question, first and foremost, is for the railway companies. Are you aware of any federal programs that pay for the transformation of railway crossings to become grade separated?
4:05 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Railway Association of Canada
Federally, there is a grade crossing improvement program. That money is available to municipalities and railways to apply for an improvement, which could be grade separation.
There are two problems with the program. The biggest one is this problem, that I mentioned a moment ago, where the Canadian Transportation Agency has the right to open a crossing. They do so on an economic basis. They don't have a safety basis, and therefore, it is really not that difficult to open a new crossing. Transport Canada has the role of closing crossings on a safety basis.
Typically, if you're going to invest in an overpass and spend $25 million on an overpass. For the railway to be motivated to contribute to that, they would want to close crossings within the vicinity, so that there are fewer chances for accidents on the railway and the investment's made so that traffic goes over the overpass, or the underpass. However, because it's too easy, you might make that investment but then the municipality can apply for a crossing down the road. It's too easy to do that.
In my opinion, it's a machinery of government issue. It's a historical mistake where the agency has the role of opening new crossings. I don't think that previous policy-makers realized how many new crossings would be opened and did not appreciate the safety impact of that.
I think we need to make that change. We've actually suggested that to Mr. Emerson, who's conducting the review of the act right now.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Adam Vaughan Liberal Trinity—Spadina, ON
To Madam Quinlan, the program that was just identified, how many rail crossings are fixed as a result of this funding on an annual basis? Is the FCM tracking the number of rail crossings that are funded by federal dollars?
4:05 p.m.
Co-Chair, National Municipal Rail Safety Working Group, Mayor, City of Bromont, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
I will ask Mr. Rubinstein to answer, as he has more details on those issues.
4:05 p.m.
Manager, Policy and Research, Policy and Government Relations, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
Transport Canada is tracking the way that the program is used. It's a $10 million-a-year program. Now that we have new grade crossing regulations, it will set a standard for the kinds of safety improvements that need to happen. We know that kind of allocation over time is just not going to be enough to improve crossing safety.
4:05 p.m.
Manager, Policy and Research, Policy and Government Relations, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
Yes, $10 million a year.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Adam Vaughan Liberal Trinity—Spadina, ON
A grade crossing in Toronto, certainly the last one that was built in my riding was in the neighbourhood of about $80 million.
4:05 p.m.
Manager, Policy and Research, Policy and Government Relations, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
Again, there are crossing improvements at existing crossings that are required by the grade crossing regulations that we mentioned, and then there's a separate issue of grade separations, which, you're right, can have more significant financial implications. But under the new regulations all municipalities and railways will have to work together to make improvements. Within the next seven years we're talking about over 15,000 crossings, so it's a significant issue.
4:05 p.m.
Manager, Policy and Research, Policy and Government Relations, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
Fifteen thousand level crossings.
4:05 p.m.
Manager, Policy and Research, Policy and Government Relations, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
This is the point we're making. Over time we will likely need additional assistance to meet the impact of those regulations. As Madam Quinlan said in her opening remarks, that's something we're looking at with our members to fully understand what the cost impact is of these regulations going forward.
4:05 p.m.
Liberal
Adam Vaughan Liberal Trinity—Spadina, ON
When this issue is raised in the House quite often the Minister of Transport stands up and says that the FCM supports everything the federal government is doing and cites an FCM resolution that basically says it's satisfied and no further action is necessary. Is that in fact the FCM's position or does the FCM have a different position?
4:05 p.m.
Co-Chair, National Municipal Rail Safety Working Group, Mayor, City of Bromont, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
We have been very involved in the discussions with the minister and Transport Canada. We think that real progress has been made, but the FCM's position is that the work is not complete and that we have to continue trying to find even more solutions that ensure safety, of course, but that also allow railway transport to continue to contribute to the country's economy. That's the position we have adopted. We believe that some improvements have definitely come from working together, but we remain critical in that regard. We are holding discussions and asking our staff to take note of new proposals. So we are doing some collaborative work on this issue.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Adam Vaughan Liberal Trinity—Spadina, ON
But it's fair to say that the FCM is not satisfied that the work is complete, nor is it satisfied that all that can be done to make rail safety safe in communities has been accomplished by the current regulations that have been tabled.
4:10 p.m.
Co-Chair, National Municipal Rail Safety Working Group, Mayor, City of Bromont, Federation of Canadian Municipalities
It's a start, but I think we have to continue working on that.
Funding was also brought up earlier. The Federation of Canadian Municipalities will definitely continue to represent its members and to ask that any responsibilities to be assigned to municipalities be part of the calculations. Safety is of the utmost importance to us, but the ability to respond will also have to be looked at. As I am sure you know, municipalities do have limited means. That will also be covered in future discussions.
4:10 p.m.
NDP
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Komarnicki Conservative Souris—Moose Mountain, SK
Thank you, Chair. Certainly the discussion here has been far-ranging and wide with some big general areas of concern that have little to do with the bill. It was good to hear Mr. Ashley actually focus on the bill. I do know that there are obviously land development issues that need to be tackled by cities and rural municipalities, urban municipalities, and that's a fact. You see development taking place right next to railway, and railway crossings is an issue for sure. Certainly just grade crossings across the country, there are many of them.
The complaints I hear a lot of the time are that it takes the trains too long to cross, or they park, or they're not well seen especially at night and there needs to be improvements in the crossings to make the general public aware of the danger, and so on. There's a fund for that. But those are all things that municipalities apply for and over time some get upgraded, year by year. Generally it's made safer.
But this particular bill relates to a very specific enactment that talks primarily about improving public safety by providing authority to issue orders if railway work or a railway operation poses a threat to the safety of persons or property. It would suggest to me that this bill is dealing very specifically with something that is of apparent and immediate concern that needs attention.
When you look at that, it seems to suggest two things.
It suggests that if a railway safety inspector is of the opinion that the standard of construction or maintenance, so how it's constructed, how it's maintained, or where in the operation of a line work or railway equipment something there threatens the safety or security of the operations or of a person or property, some actions may be taken and an order issued. The minister here is specifically provided with the authority to require the person responsible for railway operations to order the person to take necessary corrective measures. That's really focusing in on what this is all about.
It's one thing to open and close a crossing, but this I think goes beyond that. It says that if you find an imminent concern or danger, you need to act. There needs to be the authority to compel someone to do something. Wouldn't you agree that's what this is all about and that in fact it's good to have the extra authority to order these kinds of things to be done?
Perhaps Mr. Benson or Mr. Bourque....
