Transport Committee on March 26th, 2015

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Sometimes, when work is being done, an adjacent landowner may have a complaint about that. They may then file a particular complaint, and maybe they have a consideration about legitimate safety or maybe they just don't want the work to happen adjacent to their property. In a conflict like that, I understand that this would allow the minister to resolve those types of complaints, and if they're vexatious, to be able to dismiss a complaint that in fact isn't about legitimate safety concerns of a property owner or is not somehow in the public interest, and that the work should proceed.

Is there support for a measure like that or is there an objection to a measure like that?

[Phil Benson]

It's a matter we would support. Of course, this bill does not preclude judicial review, but I think it's important that, if it's a true rail safety issue or something that has to be done, it has to be done. For legitimate concerns, exactly, but for purely vexatious complaints, it certainly would help eliminate those few complaints that do happen.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Now, from the government's perspective, obviously, and we've heard some of this today at the table, we have a private member who has seen an issue and has tried to address it with Bill C-627. Obviously, the government, from its own perspective, has brought forward a bill, Bill C-52, that takes a number of issues but has recognized what the private member has done and is looking for a way, I think, if it were to pass first, to dovetail that into the legislation.

We don't know which bill will pass, or both, or whatever. We're coming to the end of a parliament, so this committee is tasked with dealing with this specific bill and this specific language. Given that and Bill C-52 aside, do the stakeholders here support the measures of Bill C-627 moving forward? That's what this committee has to decide.

[Phil Benson]

Pass the bill.

[Daniel Rubinstein]

Yes, from FCM's perspective, as I mentioned before, I think the key trend, both with this bill and Bill C-52, is the expansion of the scope in which the minister and inspectors can act when there's a threat. We know the development of the grade crossing regulations dealing with walk-crossing issues is prescribed right now for immediate threats. That's very narrow, so “significant threat” in this bill and then even the broader interpretation in Bill C-52 are welcome.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Mr. Chair, with that I will just thank MP Bateman, who brought forward the bill, and I look forward to clause-by-clause at a subsequent meeting.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Hoang Mai]

I'd like to thank the witnesses for being here today.

Thank you for sharing your expertise with us. Your recommendations and advice will help the members of this committee examine this bill more thoroughly.

I'll just remind members that the time limit for amendments is this Friday around 2 p.m. Thank you.

The meeting is adjourned.