Evidence of meeting #67 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was c-49.
A video is available from Parliament.
6:45 p.m.
Liberal
6:45 p.m.
Vice-President, Safety and Security, Metrolinx
No, our trains, our locomotives, run a lot.
6:45 p.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
You mentioned that you have 61 train systems and 62 locomotives, and you have one out of service at any given time, which is fairly impressive.
6:45 p.m.
Vice-President, Safety and Security, Metrolinx
There are certainly sometimes more than one out of service at a time, but that's how we run.
6:45 p.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Fair enough. Thank you for that.
I'm going to move to Ms. Southwood briefly. I'm going to focus quickly on only one thing.
I'm trying to understand what your suggestion is in the first recommendation. Are engineers not currently involved in the process of rail? Your suggestion is that the law needs to be changed to say that professional engineers, rather than engineering principles, have to be used. Are you suggesting that engineers are not currently used in the maintenance of railways?
6:45 p.m.
Vice-President, Strategy and Partnerships, Engineers Canada
Engineers are currently used in the maintenance of railways but not consistently. What we are offering is that we're happy to work collaboratively with the federal government to be able to identify and further define what is meant by “engineering principles” so it reduces the current ambiguity.
6:45 p.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Thank you.
In the case of the Churchill line, if that ambiguity had not been there, would anything had been different?
6:45 p.m.
Vice-President, Strategy and Partnerships, Engineers Canada
The case of the Churchill line is an example of the need for climate vulnerability assessment.
In the case of the Churchill line, there was no climate vulnerability assessment undertaken. Therefore, there was not the understanding that with the change in climate, more extreme weather, and a change in weather patterns, that was a very vulnerable area.
If the assessment had been done, it would have been much more clear just exactly how vulnerable the railway was and what kinds of practices—as well as what kinds of mitigation measures—needed to be put into place.
6:45 p.m.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Thank you.
I have one final question for you, Mr. Bell, in my remaining few seconds.
On a number of occasions, you've mentioned the proactive use of data. What would that look like? I'm just trying to imagine somebody sitting in a room watching hours and hours of videotape of the trains operating. That doesn't seem like a very efficient way of doing it. How do you do proactive use of data?
6:45 p.m.
Vice-President, Safety and Security, Metrolinx
What we would do is look at operating anomalies. We understand very well how our trains run, what our schedules are like, what incidents we may see, and in particular what we may call “near misses”. In all of those cases, we would want to gain that data and look at what is happening inside the cab of that locomotive to see if there's an interaction there that we might act upon to make this a safer railway.
6:50 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS
Thank you very much.
I'll start with you, Mr. Orb. On the data issue you mentioned, you described how the railway “should be required” to disclose its plans to address the demand. Then, in response to a question by one of my colleagues, you said there should be day-by-day reporting. Is it your view that each day the railways should be disclosing what their plans are to deal with demand? Or did I misinterpret something?
6:50 p.m.
President, Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities
You may have misinterpreted it.
The point I'm trying to make is that it needs to be reported more expeditiously. Right now, it's reported monthly, at the end of every month, but it's a weekly report. I think that in certain delivery points, we need to have the information a lot faster. The reporting is done, and for the minimum amounts that were moved under the order in council of the previous government, it's based on corridoring. The problem with it is that there are some delivery points in western Canada in particular that are being missed, and the corridors are getting the grain but not necessarily the delivery points. We need more refined data.
6:50 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS
On the issue of reciprocal penalties, I need another point of clarification. You expressed I think some general support for some of the items in Bill C-49, but on this issue you think it comes up short. I'm looking at clause 23 of the proposed bill. It seems to me that this is addressing the reciprocal penalties portion, where it empowers the agency to order a company “to compensate any person adversely affected for any expenses that they incurred as a result of the company's failure to fulfil its service obligations”.
Is it that this doesn't apply as a reciprocal penalty or that it doesn't go far enough? Or is it that you think there should be some further guidelines?
6:50 p.m.
President, Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities
I think that provision was in the previous legislation, but as was mentioned, I don't think it was ever enacted, because of the fact that if there's a dispute about what the penalty should be, the smaller shippers are not able to undertake such an endeavour. I really believe that it needs to be mentioned specifically. There needs to be more mention of what a penalty actually is.
6:50 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS
Okay. Just for the sake of clarity, that language I'm looking at is meant to replace paragraph 116(4)(c.1), but I am hypersensitive to your point about dispute resolution, particularly for smaller shippers. I was a litigator in a previous life and saw too many cases end when someone couldn't afford to go to court.
Is it your view that the dispute resolution mechanism will be more efficient, in that it will allow more shippers to have their disputes fairly resolved in an expeditious way?
6:50 p.m.
President, Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities
I think it will be more palatable to the shippers, especially the smaller ones, so we believe it's a step in the right direction.
6:50 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS
That's excellent.
With respect to the MRE, you mentioned that it protects producers. One of the things I want you to elaborate on a little as well is the importance of continued investment in railway infrastructure, particularly from a rural perspective.
I come from a very rural community, and we sometimes get complaints about the quality of rail transportation infrastructure. Can you elaborate a little on how this approach is going to allow investment in these important rural networks?
6:50 p.m.
President, Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities
Are you talking in particular about railroads purchasing the hopper cars?
6:50 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS
If you want to take it broader, feel free, but please describe it in your own words.
6:50 p.m.
President, Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities
Well, we believe that the MRE, the entitlement right now, compensates railroads fairly, not only for the costs but also a profit margin and for them to actually be able to service the railcars. I believe that the purchase of the railcars in legislation is actually outside of the MRE, and we're a bit concerned about that because of the fact that it may drive up freight rates and, ultimately, farmers or producers will inherit those costs.
6:50 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS
I will shift gears.
Madam Chair, how much time do I have remaining?
6:50 p.m.
Liberal
Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS
Oh, great. I'll shift to Mr. Bell, please.
You mentioned, I think quite appropriately, that prevention is probably a better way to go than merely reacting to incidents and accidents as they may occur. I completely agree. I'm wondering if you think that the prevention mechanism being considered in Bill C-49 is okay. Is it okay to allow a random snapshot in time to see how things are going? Do you need to be able to have the full body of video? Do you think the proposed mechanism is an appropriate way?
