Transport Committee on Sept. 14th, 2017

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

I believe very firmly that having the presence of a video and voice recorder on board locomotives will definitely contribute to improved safety. As you know, the Transportation Safety Board has been arguing with Transport Canada and the Government of Canada for a number of years on the absolute necessity of putting such recorders in so that at the very least they have available critical information when they decide that they are going to investigate an incident or an accident.

The Transportation Safety Board doesn't always investigate every accident or incident, so it is important for us at Transport Canada to have information as well when we decide to do it. But we're also arguing proactively for the use, under very controlled, random conditions, of data from these video recorders to improve safety in general. If we have concerns about practices that could jeopardize safety, we want to stay on top of those.

I can't tell you to what point I consider railway safety to be important. When we're talking, in some cases, about trains that can approach two miles in length, with thousands of tonnes moving on our railway lines, the potential for something dangerous or catastrophic to happen is there, so we need to take every single measure possible to do it, but we will do it whilst ensuring that privacy rights are respected.

[Gagan Sikand, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Just to follow up on that last point, do you think privacy concerns were adequately considered?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

Yes. In the bill, we point out how we need to address those, but as you know, the bill will trigger a process to make the regulations concerning LVVRs and will specify the specific privacy considerations that need to be taken into account. For example, only certain people will have access to the data and there will be a recorded log of all access to the data. Measures of that nature will ensure that privacy is respected.

[Gagan Sikand, Liberal, Mississauga—Streetsville, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Mr. Godin.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Minister, thank you for being here this morning and for participating in this exercise.

We all have the will to create laws that will improve the lives of Canadians. I think that is your intent with Bill C-49.

I will repeat the expression used earlier by my NDP colleague and say that, as far as I understand, the bill has a philosophical intention. I would like us to go further and implement more concrete measures.

You want to bring into force legislation whereby the Canadian Transportation Agency would draft the charter of passenger rights. I find that, by doing so, you are just delaying. The situation could already be described in the legislation. I think that the bill is very broad. I'm under the impression that the government is stalling.

If the House of Commons passes this bill, I would like Canadians to feel that their quality of life has finally been improved. But that is not how I see this bill.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

I will not belabour the fact that your government did nothing about this for 10 years.

Perhaps you did not understand that we chose this approach to give us the flexibility we will need in the future to amend the charter as needed. If this charter comes into force through regulations, we will avoid having to come back to the House to amend a piece of legislation, since that process is much more expensive, as you know. So the goal is to give us that flexibility.

I would also like to add that Canadian Transportation Agency employees are used to dealing with passenger complaints. That is the agency's mandate. Those people know that environment. The agency is in the best position to establish the charter of passenger rights.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Minister, if you feel that the Canadian Transportation Agency is in the best position to take on that responsibility, why should we keep you as minister?

I know that the current Minister of Transportation—in this case the Honourable Marc Garneau—has good intentions. However, in the bill, you grant the Minister of Transportation a discretionary power that will enable him to avoid returning before the House of Commons to validate potential amendments.

How should Canadians interpret that?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

They should interpret it as their Minister of Transportation assuming his responsibilities.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

You are doing that now. However, Minister, you will understand that laws are above individuals. This is a general framework whose guidelines help apply rules on a daily basis so that there would be no privileges, so that the process would be very impartial and so that the intent of the legislation in force would always be honoured. What can reassure me in that respect?

I told you earlier that I trusted the current minister, but as you know, ministers change.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

I can't say this with complete certainty, but I think that Transport Canada is the department with the most responsibility when it comes to implementing regulations. Our department is very technical. Transportation regulations are complex. At Transport Canada, we are used to those processes.

I think that Bill C-49 expresses what we want to do, while mandating the Canadian Transportation Agency to do what I mentioned. Next year, when we present this charter of passenger rights, I believe that most Canadians will agree that it reflects the intent of Bill C-49. I am confident about that and will make sure to do what is necessary, since our department will have the last word in terms of what will be proposed.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Minister, from what I understand, Bill C-49 does not have enough teeth and is just so much window dressing. I will quickly go over three elements I would remove from this bill.

First, the Canadian Transportation Agency will establish rules about the charter of passenger rights. A bill is drafted and action is urgently needed, but the agency will be given the responsibility to write the regulations.

Second, guidelines are included for joint ventures by increasing foreign ownership to 49%, but the minister will have the power to oversee and authorize that. So what will be the point of the legislation once it has been adopted?

Third, railway companies will have to provide on the Internet information on those of their lines that are operational and those they no longer use. What is the benefit of that for Canadians?

With all due respect, Minister, I feel that this bill is empty; it is just window dressing.

What do you have to say to that?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

This bill will do many things that should have been done a long time ago.

As for the very broad question of whether everything should be set out in the bill and whether there should never be any ministerial discretion for certain decisions, I say that many ministers have such discretion in some cases. There is a reason for this and it's something that has been established for a very long time. Canadians accept the fact that it is necessary to have acts and regulations, but that ministerial discretion is acceptable in some cases. That applies to some of the measures we have included in the bill.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Minister, you said that not much has been done in this area in 10 years. That said, the current government's discretion makes me a bit reluctant and nervous.

Could you quickly tell me what this bill contains, in a concrete sense?

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Mr. Godin, for this question you have only 15 seconds left, and there will be no opportunity for a response.

[Joël Godin, Conservative, Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC]

Minister, thank you for participating in this exercise. You should know that this process is constructive and that it is always in the interest of Canadians. We have to rise above partisan politics. Thank you very much.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Ms. Moore.

[Christine Moore, NDP, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Mr. Garneau, you visited Rouyn-Noranda recently and made an announcement about the airport. The airport expansion should sort things out, but right now Air Canada is the only carrier with flights to Montreal, meaning that there is no competition and the fares are very high. It could easily cost me $1,200 to fly from Ottawa to Rouyn-Noranda return, even though the distance between the two cities is less than 500 km as the crow flies. This shows that the lack of competition has a huge impact on prices.

In Bill C-49, however, you are giving yourself the power to approve joint ventures between air carriers even if the Commissioner of Competition is of the opinion that the agreement will weaken competition and increase costs for passengers.

Once again, Air Canada's profits seem to take precedence over consumers' rights. After introducing a bill that cost 2,600 workers in Quebec their jobs, you are at it again with a bill that removes powers from the Commissioner of Competition.

Moreover, the register of the Office of the Commissioner of Lobbying of Canada shows that Air Canada has been in contact with your government numerous times to discuss the legislative framework for international air carrier joint ventures.

In short, it looks like Air Canada is pressuring your government to weaken the powers of the Commissioner of Competition and passenger rights. Air Canada's lobbyists must be proud to have your support.

I would like to know how diminishing the powers of the Commissioner of Competition will serve air passengers.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

Thank you for your question.

You talked about competition on the route between Montreal and Rouyn-Noranda. Our decision to increase foreign ownership from 25% to 49% will, I hope, actually benefit competition and lead to the establishment of new airlines that will offer flights in areas that are not as well served. That benefits competition.

As to your question about joint ventures, your comments suggested that this is limited to Air Canada. You also gave the impression that we are disregarding the Office of the Commissioner of Competition, which is certainly not the case. It is clearly stated that we will consider the public interest, what is good for consumers, by the way. That is the main reason we are doing this.

Furthermore, the Minister of Transport will in the future always work closely with the Commissioner of Competition to ensure there is no significant impact on competition. This is clearly laid out in the bill and that is what we intend to do. We would like Canadian airlines to be prosperous and competitive with those of other countries. This mechanism actually exists in a number of countries. So we are simply catching up in this regard, because it will benefit Canada. That said, competition will not be neglected.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, Mr. Garneau. Sorry, Ms. Moore, it's only a three-minute round.

We'll go to Ms. Raitt.

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Milton, ON]

Thank you very much.

Minister, as I said, I want to talk a bit about short-line rail, and I'm glad that my colleague, Mr. Badawey, brought it up as well. What I want to do was quote something from David Emerson's testimony on Monday, which I think is important, since he chaired the commission that took a look at everything. He said, in response to a question from Mr. Brassard, that “it's a very serious problem”, meaning short-line rail funding, “and if we don't deal with it, it's either going to force everybody onto the roads in trucks or we're going to have to fix the problem, probably when it's very late in the day and it's maybe ineffective.

Mr. Murad Al-Katib, who also sat on the committee, weighed in on it as well. What he said, with respect to short-line rail, is that it's “a very essential element of interconnectivity. The rail lines, with consolidation, will go to the main lines, and the densification of short-lines is essential for rural economic development in this country.”

The question was whether there will be something forthcoming on short-line rail. I note that you said at the beginning that C-49 is a first step. I'm wondering if you can give us some comfort about whether we're going to see a package of reforms from you that focus on the undercapitalization of short-line rail or on a national rail plan in the coming years.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

Thank you for the question. I won't repeat what I said. I was specifically asked about short-line rail, and I gave my explanation with respect to that. Yes indeed, we're looking at the situation, and there the challenge is with respect to infrastructure. They do not have the deep pockets that the class I railways have, yet they are an important part of the railway system, 12% by my calculations, and some of them are federally regulated.

I have an enormous amount of respect for David Emerson. I can tell you that I used to work for David Emerson in life before politics. I have a huge amount of respect. He spent a great deal of time with four other members coming up with a first-rate document, which is the review of the Canada Transportation Act. Again, thank you for making that happen.

Having said that, that document carries with it 60 recommendations that cover the vast field of the Canada Transportation Act. It is there as a document to advise us and for our consideration. It is not policy in itself. We, as the government, have to make the decisions with respect to what we implement as policy. I can tell you that it's been very important input, and yes, I'm aware of what David said with respect to short-lines. We are looking at that issue at the moment. We'll see what comes out of that.

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Milton, ON]

Another topic that Mr. Emerson talked about was governance at airports and ports. I found that to be an interesting part of his report as well.

In response to a question that Mr. Fraser had put to another witness, he weighed in on whether ports and airports should have access to this infrastructure bank. What he said I thought was important. He said, “there is inadequate governance when it comes to port or airport authorities entering into business in competition with their own tenants, and so frankly I wouldn't give them any more access to money until you clean that up”.

Do you have any plans on cleaning up the governance at airports and ports, and do we have a problem?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

I would not characterize it as “cleaning up”. I would say that as part of our transportation 2030 policy strategy, we are looking at all aspects related to transportation.

I do not rule out the concept of examining certain parts of the governance of our airports and ports. Having said that, by and large our ports and airports work very well in this country. There's always the possibility to make improvements, and we're open to considering other ways of improving that.