Transport Committee on Feb. 21st, 2019

[Kathleen Fox]

As I said at the beginning of my presentation, when companies transport large quantities of flammable liquids, the measures have to do with considerations such as the risk management system, inspections, maintenance and risk analysis.

Companies are required to maintain higher standards, especially for key trains or routes. So a measure was implemented to reduce speed for trains transporting oil. However, as we have seen in the accidents that occurred in northern Ontario, speed is not the only factor in derailment. That is why we have asked Transport Canada to carry out a more in-depth study on other risk factors that could lead to new requirements for their reduction and that railway companies will have to comply with.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Are departments aware of all the data related to those measures? Has the data been provided to departments?

[Kathleen Fox]

Yes, in the sense that the information entered into railway companies' safety management systems must be transmitted to Transport Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Liepert.

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you all for being here today.

I represent a Calgary riding. I have a fair bit of interest in the transportation of petroleum products, and I've got a couple of questions that I hope you can answer.

It is clear that the transportation of oil liquids and condensates is much safer by pipeline than by rail. If we didn't have to ship our oil on rail or our liquids and condensates headed to petrochemical manufacturing facilities in Quebec creating thousands of jobs in Quebec, but could ship it on pipelines the way it is supposed to be shipped....

We don't have pipelines to ship it because of special interest groups that are impeding it—including political parties who are seated to my left—with falsehoods and rhetoric about the safety of pipelines. If it weren't for them, we wouldn't even be doing this study today.

Is that fair to say?

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

That's kind of a loaded question.

[Kathleen Fox]

I really can't answer that question.

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

I will take that as a yes, madam. Thank you.

[Kathleen Fox]

[Inaudible—Editor] answer that question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Ms. Fox has indicated that she's not comfortable answering that question.

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

All right. Then I'll ask you a second question.

I want to go back to this Fraser Institute report. One of the statistics that came out of the Fraser Institute report was that over 70% of pipeline occurrences resulted in a spill of one cubic metre or less, which probably would be the equivalent to what is spilled on a daily basis at gas stations at the pump.

Is that statistic still relevant three years later?

[Kathleen Fox]

I can't comment on the statistics in the report. What I can say is that many of the reports that we get are of minor spills or minor releases of product. We do about one or two pipeline investigations a year, when we believe that there's enough to be gained from doing a full investigation in terms of advancing transportation safety. Yes, the vast majority of releases of product that are reported to us are minor.

I just want to qualify that by saying that the risk—as I mentioned earlier, when we were talking about pipelines—is that, if there is a significant spill of product of either oil or gas, the consequences could be quite significant. We saw that with the Prince George occurrence, which we're currently investigating, which involved a rupture and fire involving natural gas.

There are fewer occurrences. Consequences could be potentially more significant. It depends on what's being carried, how much is spilled, how quickly it's stopped and where it happened.

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Maybe I'll come back to my first question and try to phrase it another way.

Can you confirm that there are liquids and condensates and oil that is being transported into the province of Quebec on a daily basis that are going to refineries and manufacturing facilities in Quebec, creating thousands of jobs?

[Kathleen Fox]

I don't have the answers of how much product is being shipped specifically where. I'm sorry I can't—

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

But product is being shipped, is that fair to say?

[Kathleen Fox]

As far as we know.

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Can anybody else shed any light on that?

[Jean Laporte, Chief Operating Officer, Canadian Transportation Accident Investigation and Safety Board]

We typically don't have activity data broken down by province, region or facilities. The National Energy Board and Statistics Canada would capture that type of information. We typically capture information about what was shipped and what was spilled, associated with incidents or occurrences.

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

We do know refineries in the province of Quebec are refining oil products for use by Quebeckers. That's fair to say, right?

[Jean Laporte]

Yes.

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

And a lot of that oil is coming by rail.

[Jean Laporte]

We don't have accurate and specific data. A lot of the oil that's being refined in Quebec is coming by ship.

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

Yes, that's foreign oil, isn't it? Now we're getting somewhere.

Do I have any more time?

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Yes, you have a minute.

[Ron Liepert, Conservative, Calgary Signal Hill, AB]

What would you suggest we do to try to change the narrative to convince people across the country that shipping oil by pipeline is much safer than by rail? We wouldn't need to be spending taxpayers' money doing studies like this if we had the pipelines to ship it.