Transport Committee on Sept. 11th, 2017

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Okay.

Another question that was posed to me related to the prohibition to apply for a long-haul interswitching order if a shipper has any interchange within 30 kilometres. Again, clause 129 prohibits shippers from applying for an LHI order if the originating facility has an interchange within 30 kilometres of it. For many, this doesn't make sense if the interchange isn't “in the reasonable direction” of the traffic's ultimate destination. Again, in clauses 129 and 136.1, the legislation allows for the agency to make a rational judgment about the most appropriate nearest interchange given the reasonable direction of the traffic.

The question I was asked is, why wouldn't this also apply to facilities that have an interchange within 30 kilometres, and doesn't that measure put facilities with an interchange within 30 kilometres at a commercial disadvantage to those that do not?

[Scott Streiner]

Again, I want to be a little careful about interpreting legislation that I may need to interpret as an adjudicator. I think what I would say is that if the committee wishes the legislation to be clearer on this point, then of course the committee can suggest adjustments that would more clearly direct the CTA with respect to these kinds of assessments.

To the extent that we're left with discretion, we will always apply that discretion in light of section 5 of the Canada Transportation Act. That's the national transportation policy, as you know, which speaks about allowing competition and market forces to be the primary drivers for securing fairly priced and good transportation services and for regulatory intervention to be strategic and targeted. We always look at section 5 for the purposes of interpreting provisions that may otherwise be somewhat unclear.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you, Ms. Block.

Mr. Graham.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Streiner, first of all, do you have anything left from your opening remarks that you haven't had a chance to address yet?

[Scott Streiner]

The only points I would make, I will make extremely briefly, Madam Chair, and Mr. Emerson has already underscored one of the points. Since 2010, the CTA has suggested in its annual reports to Parliament that its own-motion power, its ability to initiate inquiries on its own motion, be tied less specifically to international air travel. Currently, that's really what it's tied to. We used that own-motion authority to launch the Air Transit tarmac delay inquiry. We believe, as Mr. Emerson has indicated in reviewing the results of his review, that within reasonable parameters, it may make sense for that authority to be available to us more broadly. That would bring our tool kit into line with that of other independent regulators, and it would allow us to respond with greater agility to challenges in the transportation system.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Thank you. That answers one of my other questions too, so thank you.

You mentioned that the act provides for a three-hour tarmac delay as the baseline. Is that an appropriate amount of time, in your view?

[Scott Streiner]

A three-hour limit with respect to when the tarmac-delay provisions come into play is, if my memory serves me correctly, consistent with the practice in some other jurisdictions. Whether that is the right limit, I think, is something that I would defer to the committee and to Parliament to make a decision on. But certainly, that threshold exists, as I recall, in other jurisdictions.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

You mentioned in your opening remarks that there have been about 230 complaints in the past week. What prompted that jump? Was it a specific incident that had a lot of complaints? Did one plane have a really hard landing, or what happened?

[Scott Streiner]

No, all of those complaints do not come from a single flight. We're entering a bit into the realm of speculation here, but I would suggest, as I did in my opening remarks, that in general the jump in air travel complaints reflects the public's increased awareness of the availability of recourse through the CTA. The Air Transat hearings may have raised public awareness. The committee's work on this bill may have raised public awareness. Media reports on air travel issues may have raised public awareness.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

We talked about this with Transport Canada earlier. Do you have enforcement mechanisms to ensure that companies that routinely violate standards or customer rights can be singled out publicly for doing so? Is there a public disclosure database of complaints so you can track which airlines are really not as good as others, for example?

[Scott Streiner]

We already have an obligation under the Canada Transportation Act to report annually to Parliament on trends that we see in air traveller complaints, including how many complaints have been filed with respect to service by different airlines. So that's already in the public domain. Bill C-49 would provide additional provisions with respect to the submission of performance information by airlines, and some of that information may well be available to travellers as they make assessments on the airlines with which they wish to book.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

You commented earlier that there are few performance metrics for the rail system. What metrics would you like to see improved? You mentioned a few, but is it a widespread problem that there are no metrics?

[Scott Streiner]

One of the things we've observed in our administration of the legislation—and I believe that both of my colleagues at the table have referenced this in some way—is that in the United States, the Surface Transportation Board posts a significant amount of information online on the performance of the freight-rail system. That information is of assistance to decision-makers, both shippers who are deciding whom to contract with and also policy-makers. That kind of information allows us collectively to see where the system is flowing smoothly and where there are pinch points or problems in the system. I think it's important that comparable information be posted online in Canada. That said, it's also important that we protect information that's commercially sensitive. So getting that balance right, I think, will be something that will be important for parliamentarians in finalizing the legislation and for the CTA in implementing it.

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

I have one last question for you before I go to Mr. Emerson. Can the CTA protect us from the ever-declining quality of airplane food?

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[David Graham, Liberal, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Mr. Emerson, you noted in your comments the looming consolidation of rail. In 1999 CN made a bid to buy BNSF and in 2015 CP tried to buy NS. Is rail consolidation a good thing, in your view?

[David Emerson]

I think it is a good thing that we have transcontinental railways, and I think some of the consolidation will be aimed at ensuring there are coast-to-coast high-speed, high-volume corridors. I think consolidation is probably in the interests of greater North American transportation efficiency.

However, I am concerned that, with the consolidation and the greater reliance on high-speed, high-volume corridors, the feeder lines are not being attended to appropriately. I think I would very much like to see the Government of Canada designate a national rail system, whether some of the railways are short-lines within provincial jurisdiction or not. If we do not take much more seriously and become more aggressive about the financial viability of short-lines, we've got literally hundreds of communities that are not very close to the high-speed, high-volume corridors, and they're dependent on truck or short-line. I don't think there's enough attention being paid to it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you, Mr. Emerson.

Go head, Mr. Shields.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Mr. Streiner, you described a process earlier in which you dealt with about 70 complaints a month, up to almost 1,000 a month now if you take the recent numbers, and you talked about resolving them one-on-one. That can't go on. I'm assuming you've alluded to that, and you probably listened to Mr. Emerson saying there's a different method of doing it. So I'm assuming you can't do that and you are looking for something else in the process as this is coming to light.

Do you want to respond to that?

[Scott Streiner]

Thank you.

I should clarify that while we've had a surge in the last week—230 complaints—we've actually been running at about 400 per month, not 1,000 per month, over the last year. That said, 400 per month is still four, five, or six times, more than we had been processing in the past, depending on the month.

I would reiterate the comments I made earlier. I think that if the CTA had own-motion authority and was able, where it has reasonable grounds to believe that there may be some sort of an issue in the transportation system, to deal with that proactively and on a more systemic basis, that might help to resolve some of the complaints.

It's also possible that when we pass the air passenger rights regulations and there's greater clarity in the system on what traveller's rights are, over time we may see a stabilization at lower levels. I am not certain that would happen at the outset. I think at the outset we might well see a surge. That's what happened in Europe after the new regulations were brought on stream, because these raise people's awareness. But it may be the case that over several years, as people get used to their rights and as the system stabilizes, there might be a levelling off.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

That is a significant cost factor to deal with them in the way you have been dealing.

[Scott Streiner]

There's no doubt about that. Dealing with complaints takes staff. We have introduced a number of efficiency measures. We've redirected resources to deal with this large number of complaints. We've also introduced a number of efficiency measures that have helped to improve our productivity, so that's good news. The use of facilitation, which I referenced earlier—this ombudsman-like approach in which complaints are resolved through a couple of phone calls, in many cases, a day or two days of a staff member's work—certainly helps to manage the demand. There is no doubt that this many complaints, this dramatic an increase, creates resource pressures on the organization.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Right. You'd be out of business if all that stuff kept coming back to you from dissatisfied customers and that's all you were doing. You'd be out of business, spending all your time on that end.

But going to Mr. Emerson, in the sense of your remarks about systemic issues, do you have a solution that you would suggest?

[David Emerson]

I think the own-motion power—with the premise that this power would require the agency to demonstrate there is reasonable and credible evidence that there is a problem that is not unique to one complainant, or that there are other systemic issues that are incipient or are about to develop—would enable the agency to get ahead of the issue and try to provide preventive guidance or measures or mitigating measures.

I do not believe, as many do, that somehow this could create a rogue agency and that we have to leave it to Parliament and the minister to do everything. I think that comes back to governance. If you haven't got a way of putting an administrative management team in at the agency and governing it properly so that they're doing things in a responsible way, then you'd better go back and look at the governance that you're using that would allow an agency or an agency head to become a rogue. To me it's a pretty straightforward thing, and if it were the corporate sector, I can tell you they'd figure it out pretty fast.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

In your 56 recommendations, I'm assuming that the airport authority is one that didn't get dealt with and might be something that you would like to see done.