Evidence of meeting #24 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was rail.
A recording is available from Parliament.
7:30 p.m.
NDP
Taylor Bachrach NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC
Like my colleague, Mr. Barsalou-Duval, I was struck by your comment that over 14 years and multiple reports recommending that Transport Canada conduct assessments of effectiveness, you still haven't seen the progress that you want to see on that front.
I know one individual said it was like Groundhog Day. We keep having these reports that call for the assessment of effectiveness. Transport Canada agrees with the reports, and then years go by and they haven't addressed the recommendations.
What leads you to believe that this time will be any different?
7:30 p.m.
Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General
That's an excellent question.
I'm not the only party who told Transport Canada it needed to measure effectiveness. This committee has done it. The Transportation Safety Board has done it. The Treasury Board directives expect every organization to measure its effectiveness. I would even draw an analogy to some of the reports that I just tabled related to the government's response to COVID-19. The importance of acting on known issues, I think, has just been highlighted. We see it in rail safety, and we saw it in pandemic preparedness. I really do hope that the entire government recognizes the importance to take action on measures, and rail safety is a crucial area where it should.
I encourage the committee to hold Transport Canada to account in addition to our audit work. If you call them as a witness and you make recommendations, follow up on those recommendations. The more pressure that we can all put on them to take action around safety, I believe is the best thing that we can do for Canadians.
7:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Vance Badawey
Thank you, Ms. Hogan. Thank you, Mr. Bachrach.
We're now going to move on to our next line of questions.
On behalf of the Conservatives for five minutes, Mr. Shipley, you have the floor.
7:35 p.m.
Conservative
Doug Shipley Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to the witnesses for being here tonight.
Attorney General, in your report you mentioned that Transport Canada collected more information from railway companies but that the information was often late, incomplete and varying in quality. Why is it important for rail safety that this information be reported on time and be of high quality?
7:35 p.m.
Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General
Your question is about data quality. I think that I could generalize it and apply it to any program, but we'll apply it to rail safety here.
Not only do you need to gather the right data and in a timely way, but you need to be able use it to inform good decision-making. Therefore, it's really important that Transport Canada clearly communicate to the railway companies the data that they need and in the timeline in which they need it so that they have a comprehensive, well-informed system that then will take a risk-based approach to knowing where they use their limited resources to focus in on inspections and safety management system audits. It's a fundamental question about how good-quality data allows you to make better-informed decisions.
7:35 p.m.
Conservative
Doug Shipley Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON
Thank you.
You also mentioned that Transport Canada didn't receive necessary information to plan inspections for high-risk areas, according to your report. Why is it important for Transport Canada to tailor inspections to the high-risk areas?
7:35 p.m.
Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General
Again, that goes to, I think, the use of limited resources. There aren't unlimited inspectors, and there isn't unlimited time, so you want to make sure that you're targeting a part of your inspection population to higher-risk areas. That is why you want to make sure that in a risk-based approach, you look at the higher-risk areas. Then you do random inspections. You don't always want the same people to know you're coming to see them, so you do need to have random inspections. You also add to that reactive inspections based on findings from, perhaps, safety management system audits or complaints.
When you put those three types of inspections together, that allows you to have a real, comprehensive view of what's going on in the industry. However, it fundamentally starts with good risk assessments that allow you to target your limited resources to the bigger, most important areas.
7:35 p.m.
Conservative
Doug Shipley Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON
Also in your audit you mention that Transport Canada doesn't set time frames for companies to correct safety deficiencies. If that is the case, how does Transport Canada ensure that railways comply and eventually correct these safety deficiencies?
7:35 p.m.
Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General
I might ask Dawn to add on to that, but what I would say is that not all safety concerns are the same.
You do need to make sure that you have a standard in place in order to ensure that you're following up on a regular basis, but you have to have that standard consider the severity or the complexity of the deficiency that you found to make sure that corrective measures can be taken. It's not just about one standard. It's about having standards based on certain severities and complexities and making sure that you follow up in a timely way. Otherwise, we'll all be sitting here again in a few years saying that we're still not measuring effectiveness. You do really need to have a deadline for inspectors to follow up.
I'm seeing from Dawn that it looks like I gave a good answer, so we're good.
7:35 p.m.
Conservative
Doug Shipley Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON
Thank you for that.
Definitely we don't want to be sitting here spinning our wheels over and over and discussing this again down the road.
Would you say there were any significant numbers of safety deficiencies still outlying?
7:35 p.m.
Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General
For specific safety deficiencies, I'm not sure. When we looked at the file sampling we did, we saw that there was good follow-up in, I believe, over 90% of the cases where people were following up. There were still some corrective measures that hadn't been taken, but that's an improvement from what we saw in our 2013 audit. I don't think I could list off safety concerns at this time.
7:40 p.m.
Conservative
Doug Shipley Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON
I have nothing quick, so thank you, Chair.
7:40 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Vance Badawey
Thank you, Mr. Shipley, and thank you, Ms. Hogan.
We're now going to move on to our next set of questions.
We have Mr. El-Khoury from the Liberals for five minutes.
April 13th, 2021 / 7:40 p.m.
Liberal
Fayçal El-Khoury Liberal Laval—Les Îles, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Welcome to our guests.
I would like Ms. Hogan to be able to take a break, since she has talked at length, so I will direct my first question to Ms. Campbell or Ms. Marsolais.
Since the Lac-Mégantic accident, has Transport Canada increased the number of inspectors checking to make sure that safety requirements are being met? If so, what are the consequences?
7:40 p.m.
Principal, Office of the Auditor General
Okay.
Thank you very much.
Since the number of inspectors was not within the scope of our report, we cannot answer that question.
7:40 p.m.
Liberal
Fayçal El-Khoury Liberal Laval—Les Îles, QC
After the tragedy in Lac-Mégantic, Transport Canada has required thicker steel on cars carrying flammable liquids. Can you comment on that? How do these requirements contribute to safety?
7:40 p.m.
Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General
I will answer that question.
This question is more related to the audit of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development who looked at the transportation of dangerous goods.
As I mentioned earlier, accidents can happen regardless of the mode of transportation. When dangerous goods are transported, it is even more important to have stringent requirements and criteria to ensure safety.
I have no more information on this, but perhaps Ms. Marsolais or Ms. Campbell do. In the audit, we looked at the oversight of safety, not the transportation of dangerous goods.
7:40 p.m.
Liberal
Fayçal El-Khoury Liberal Laval—Les Îles, QC
Do you have anything to add, Ms. Marsolais or Ms. Campbell?
7:40 p.m.
Liberal
Fayçal El-Khoury Liberal Laval—Les Îles, QC
Okay.
What do you think of the new regulations passed by Transport Canada requiring the installation of video recorders in locomotives? Do you think this requirement will improve safety? If so, how will it do so?
7:40 p.m.
Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General
I must admit that I was not aware of this requirement.
You can have systems and policies and provide training. It is fine to have good safety systems, but there is always a human factor in everything. Sometimes human error is the cause of accidents. If the videos can tell us more about why the accident happened, that's a good thing. I am not aware of why video cameras have been installed in the locomotives.
Unfortunately, I don't have a more precise answer to give you. I can only give you my impressions.