Evidence of meeting #53 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 c-52.
A recording is available from Parliament.
5:10 p.m.
NDP
Peggy Nash NDP Parkdale—High Park, ON
I don't know that, but I can tell you that what has changed, Mr. Chair, is the substances that are being carried and the volume of substances—
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
I think you got that out. I'm only trying to figure out which was first.
5:10 p.m.
NDP
Peggy Nash NDP Parkdale—High Park, ON
Yes, I think people thought it was things like grain, milk and things being carried in the tank cars.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
That's fine.
Mr. McGuinty, you have until the bells start ringing.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Before I go to questions, I do want to thank Ms. Lai for her presentation. It was very helpful, very thoughtful. Thank you very much for your contribution, and thank you for all the work you put into this. It has been very helpful, so thank you for your comments. I may come back to you in a second.
Ms. Frid, perhaps I could turn to you for a second. You were very forthright and honest in your assessment of the CTA's new challenge. You alluded to the fact that the agency currently has a quasi-judicial tribunal role to play. Is that correct? In that tribunal work you're doing now, to what extent are you dealing with pecuniary or financial applications for settlements, for costs and so on? Are you dealing with those now?
5:15 p.m.
Director General, Dispute Resolution Branch, Canadian Transportation Agency
No, Mr. McGuinty, we are not dealing with claims for damages. We have not done that. We are experts in railway costing. When I mentioned that we produce interswitching rates, they are cost-based. We establish a maximum revenue entitlement that is also very much tied to the railway costs, so we are experts in costing. We also do cost apportionment on crossing applications, but we have never done this type of consideration of claims, which up until now have been dealt with through the courts.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
This is basically an assignment of a form of tort law in litigation from the independent judiciary to a regulatory agency. Is that right? Most people haven't seen this before in Canada. We are trying to figure out why this is a positive step. Do you have the resources to deal with this? Do you have the financial, legal, and expertise resources to deal with these claims?
5:15 p.m.
Director General, Dispute Resolution Branch, Canadian Transportation Agency
On the question of tort law, I'd better refer to our general counsel. She is a lawyer, and she has a legal branch under her command.
5:15 p.m.
Liz Barker General Counsel, Legal Services Branch, Canadian Transportation Agency
Yes, I would agree with Mr. McGuinty's characterization of this.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
David McGuinty Liberal Ottawa South, ON
It's holus-bolus. It is not just an amendment but a whole new form of mandate being assigned to the CTA, which is very different from the four corners of the statute within which you now operate. You are going to be basically fielding claims from municipalities and provinces, which are going to go to you with quantum. The City of Toronto or Montreal might say, “We have evaluated that the damage is half a billion dollars.” How are you going to handle that? You are not judges. The [Inaudible—Editor] of evidence don't apply.
5:15 p.m.
General Counsel, Legal Services Branch, Canadian Transportation Agency
We are assessing costs. We are determining whether the fires are as a result of railway operations, and then it's an assessment of costs. It is on a much grander scale. The agency currently has the power to assess costs in its proceedings, and it does that on an exceptional basis a couple of times a year. Obviously, this is on a different scale. It is not determining the reasonableness of the costs. It is determining the eligibility of the costs, which will be as a result of a consideration of whether the costs were incurred in responding to the fire. I think there are some legal issues there that the agency will work out in the early days of its consideration of these cases.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
The bells are ringing, believe it not.
Ms. Lai, thank you for joining us by video conference. Ms. Barker, Ms. Frid, Mr. Ballantyne, thank you very much for being here and participating in our study. Thank you very much.
The meeting is adjourned.