Transport Committee on June 17th, 2021

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Good afternoon, everyone. It's a pleasure to welcome all of you here to meeting number 39 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the House order of January 25, 2021. The proceedings will be made available via the House of Commons website. The webcast will always show the person speaking rather than the entirety of the committee.

To ensure an orderly meeting, I would like to outline a few points to follow. First off, members and witnesses may speak in the official language of their choice. Interpretation services are available for this meeting. You have the choice, at the bottom of your screen, of either floor, English or French audio.

Members participating in person should proceed as they usually would when the whole committee is meeting in person in a committee room, and keep in mind the directives from the Board of Internal Economy regarding masking and health protocols.

Lastly, before speaking, please wait until I recognize you by name. If you are on the video conference, please click on the microphone icon to unmute yourself. For those in the room, your microphone will be controlled as usual by the proceedings and verification officer.

I will remind you that all comments by members and witnesses should be addressed through the chair. When you are not speaking, your mike should be on mute. With regard to a speaking list, the committee clerk and myself will do our very best to maintain the order of speaking for all members, whether they are participating virtually or in person.

Members, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on April 27, 2021, the committee will now continue its study of railway safety and the impacts of railway operations on neighbouring properties.

I would now like to introduce and welcome our witnesses. First off, we have, as an individual, Bruce Campbell, adjunct professor, faculty of environmental and urban change, York University. We have, from the city of Thorold, Mayor Terry Ugulini. We have, from the Coalition des citoyens et organismes engagés pour la sécurité ferroviaire de Lac-Mégantic, Robert Bellefleur, spokesperson. We have, joining us once again from the Comité ferroviaire de Boucherville, Isabelle Bleau, city councillor, city of Boucherville; and François Beaulne, subcommittee chair. Finally, we have the following members from the Port Robinson Proud group: Jonathan LePera, Cliff Penn and June Wolfrath. I want to add that Mr. Penn will be joining us a little later on in the meeting. We have on our list Mr. George Marks, also a member, but George has fallen ill and will not be attending this evening.

We also have, from the Teamsters Canada Rail Conference, Mr. Chad McPherson. Chad is a locomotive engineer.

Welcome, all. We're going to start off with Mr. Bruce Campbell for five minutes.

Mr. Campbell, you have the floor.

[Bruce Campbell, Adjunct Professor, Faculty of Environmental and Urban Change, York University, As an Individual]

Thank you, Chair, and thank you, honourable members, for inviting me to testify before this committee.

I want to make a few initial points at the outset about Lac-Mégantic. I presume that Mr. Bellefleur is going to focus his comments on that. I think it's important that we remember. It's easy to forget, with time, that the death and destruction that terrible night were without precedent on Canadian soil in over a century.

My second point is that I continue to be troubled that a commission of inquiry still has not been held.

Finally, CP Rail's continued denial of its role in the disaster is inexcusable, though not surprising.

My focus here is on the effectiveness of the safety oversight regime: safety management systems. SMS were a major shift from prescriptive regulation, leaving the railways much greater leeway to manage their operations. When they were introduced in 2002, officials insisted that they would constitute an additional safety layer. They still do.

However, no additional regulatory resources were provided. In fact, they continued to be squeezed. The number of unannounced on-site inspections dwindled. SMS has become a form of blame-shifting, providing cover for the government. After an accident, the language turns to blame: “We set the rules. They didn't follow the rules.” We saw this in Lac-Mégantic for sure.

Safety management systems have been on the Transportation Safety Board's watch-list since the list was created in 2010 to highlight “issues posing the greatest threat to Canada's transportation system”. They're still there.

I want to now address the status of a few SMS-related recommendations from your 2016 “Update on Rail Safety” report.

Recommendation 14 involved action to improve “fatigue management”. Since 1994, the TSB has identified sleep-related fatigue as a contributing or risk factor in 31 rail occurrences. It first made it onto the TSB watch-list in 2016. It's still there. Science-based fatigue management practices continue to be thwarted by the companies. It's a major safety risk that's still not dealt with.

The second recommendation involved re-examining the rules on “maximum wear of rails”. Since 2014, seven trains carrying crude oil have derailed and spilled their contents. Four resulted in fires, most recently in 2020. In each, a major cause was track infrastructure defects. A 2020 TSB advisory warned that the increased risks associated with the operation of key trains were still not being addressed by the current track safety rules. It also warned that compared to older models, the newest tank cars appear to be equally vulnerable to product releases when they derail at speeds of more than 55 kilometres per hour.

Finally, it was recommended that Transport Canada review whistle-blower protection provisions to determine if SMS is the appropriate framework. In 2021, two international bodies jointly ranked the effectiveness of whistle-blowing frameworks in 37 countries: Canada was tied for last place. It's clearly not an appropriate framework.

As you know, in 2019 there was a 25% jump from the previous 10-year average in accidents involving dangerous goods. The decline in 2020 correlates with a decrease in traffic volume. The 2021 AG report found that Transport Canada failed to assess the effectiveness of SMS. The AG called it “a big loophole”, not dissimilar to its 2013 finding. The environmental commissioner in the AG's office, in its report, stated bluntly that “the window for a recurrence of a Lac-Mégantic-type disaster is still open”.

The challenge, I believe, is to determine to what extent the current safety oversight regime is fulfilling its obligation to protect the public and what needs to be done to improve that.

I think I'm at my time limit. I make a number of recommendations. We could deal with them in the Q and A, or I could provide my list to the clerk for you.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Mr. Campbell. Well done.

We're now going to move to Mayor Terry Ugulini from the city of Thorold.

Mayor Ugulini, the floor is yours.

[Terry Ugulini, Mayor, City of Thorold]

Through you, Chair Badawey, good afternoon, everyone. It is truly an honour to have been asked to speak to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities this afternoon.

I must start my comments by stating that the city of Thorold is very fortunate to have excellent representation from MP Vance Badawey, a true champion of Niagara. I would also like to thank him as he continues to work for our city, the region and the private sector to create a new era in rail and marine transportation.

Thorold's new multimodal hub will help Niagara lead a sustainable industrial expansion in Ontario while promoting rail, road and marine transportation and creating a welcoming and sustainable environment for industry. The major regional facility will grow trade in a more sustainable way and contribute to Ontario's quality of life by reducing congestion while supporting key industries and creating new and innovative jobs.

Now more than ever, Canadians are realizing the importance of supply chains and transportation efficiency. These logistical assets within the city of Thorold and the Niagara region rely on access to efficient and safe rail systems. The implementation of new rail infrastructure and the refurbishment of aging rail lines will be a catalyst in supporting and expanding existing and future supply chain requirements while making safety paramount and bringing it to the forefront of every decision.

Transloading operations are becoming more commonplace along canal-fronting lands in our community, and they require attention to every conceivable detail through policy adaptation and development. These policies will ultimately protect those working on site as well as all citizens in the communities in which these rail assets and multimodal operations exist.

Successful communities are able to manage the impacts of growth, but I would like to take this opportunity to share some serious issues that have arisen because of increased railway activity in our community. These issues affect local residents on a daily basis and unnecessarily put our citizens at risk.

The community of Port Robinson East is situated between the Welland Canal and the CN rail line and has only two means of egress. When the rail crossings at Canby Street and Biggar Road are blocked due to slow-moving or stopped rail traffic, residents and businesses are blocked until the rail traffic has cleared. Recently, longer trains—those of more than 100 cars—have extended the response times for emergency services, disrupted delivery times for local businesses, and created a great deal of inconvenience for residents, tourists and cyclists wishing to access the Greater Niagara Circle Route. Our suggestion here as a solution is to restrict the total length of the cars travelling through this portion of the community to a maximum length of 945 metres. That will free up the distance between the two rail crossings so that they won't both be blocked at the same time.

Number two is shunting activities at the Port Robinson yard, which have increased measurably over the last five years. Blocked roadways, dust, noise and vibration from the coupling of railcars severely impact the quality of life and mobility of our residents in this community. Our solution is to move the shunting activity outside the residential area of this small village and/or to install noise barriers to reduce the impact of operating activities on the east side of the Port Robinson yard.

Number three is that empty tanker and railcar storage is occurring for extended periods of time on spur lines that criss-cross our city. In particular, the rail line currently leased by GIO Railway Incorporated from CN, just south of Lynden Street and close to our downtown business district, has created concerns for area residents by decreasing their enjoyment of their property and attracting undesirable activity. Our solution is to improve communication with the City of Thorold fire chief regarding the contents of the stored materials and to relocate long-term storage to outside of the city's urban area.

While we understand that the infrastructure that exists today was in many cases built years ago to support industry and goods movement of that time period, in many cases, that infrastructure no longer supports present and future safety needs. Citizens today and future generations expect more from us in that regard.

[Technical difficulty—Editor] rail systems will continue to connect us to the North American and ultimately global marketplace, and they will help fuel the economic recovery. However, [Technical difficulty—Editor] cannot come at the expense of families, friends and loved ones. We must remember that every decision we make affects the lives of those around us. We cannot be complacent in our efforts to ensure a safe and livable working environment.

Economies through time always bounce back. Those families who have suffered from disasters of the past now have only the memory. [Technical difficulty—Editor] makes safety paramount in that we do. There is a need to take every precaution, as this mindset ultimately contributes to a sustainable, resilient and safe way forward for all businesses and citizens.

Please know that you have a willing partner and champion in me and the City of Thorold as we work in partnership to implement better planning and policy [Technical difficulty—Editor]. Thank you for your time and consideration of the above and this opportunity to speak to you today.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Well done.

We're now moving on to Mr. Bellefleur.

You have the floor for five minutes.

[Robert Bellefleur, Spokesperson, Coalition des citoyens et organismes engagés pour la sécurité ferroviaire de Lac-Mégantic]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank the committee members.

I want to acknowledge Luc Berthold, the member of Parliament for our constituency, Mégantic—L'Érable, in the House of Commons.

My name is Robert Bellefleur. I'm the spokesperson for the Coalition des citoyens et organismes engagés pour la sécurité ferroviaire de Lac‑Mégantic.

My presentation will consist of two parts. The first part will focus on the specific situation in Lac‑Mégantic, while the second part will focus on rail safety in Canada.

The small community of Lac‑Mégantic experienced one of the worst rail disasters of the 21st century in Canada. We're still deeply affected by this tragedy. The town is barely 50% rebuilt now. Trains are running day and night through Lac‑Mégantic. Trains were back on the tracks only three months after the tragedy. Six months after the Central Maine & Quebec Railway, or CMQR, purchased the track, the transportation of dangerous goods started again. Propane gas, sulphuric acid, sodium chlorate, automobile gasoline and various products were being transported on the same slope and curve through the downtown area. In addition, for years, trains continued to be parked in Nantes, right on the hill where the train was parked on the night of July 5, 2013. This practice continued until the recent purchase of the CMQR by Canadian Pacific, or CP.

I want to thank CP for stopping this dangerous practice. However, a great deal of work remains to be done. The track in Lac‑Mégantic was outdated and falling apart. A 2019 report noted 53 faulty rails between Farnham and Lac‑Mégantic. A great deal of work remains to be done to make this track safe.

The people in Lac‑Mégantic are still living with the aftermath of this tragedy. In addition, an independent public inquiry has never been held, despite multiple requests to the government. No action has been taken regarding these requests. This has prevented people from coming to terms with the tragedy. They still don't know the real causes of the tragedy. The key players haven't been identified either. This is a big open wound. We hope that the government will reconsider its position.

We have two recommendations for the committee with respect to the Lac‑Mégantic situation. First, we would like the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities to make recommendations to the government. Lac‑Mégantic is a special case that requires specific action. We're asking for a permanent moratorium on the transportation of oil by rail through Lac‑Mégantic. I'm not talking about oil that we use at a local or regional level, but about oil that leaves Alberta or Dakota and goes to other countries. This oil poses several risks to people, who don't benefit from it.

We want the committee to recommend to the government that a permanent moratorium be placed on the transportation of oil given the specific situation in Lac‑Mégantic. Many dangerous goods already pass through our community. We need a bypass because trains must stop running on this slope and on curves. Lac‑Mégantic needs a bypass. We don't want to see any more oil unit trains. The public unanimously agrees with this.

We want to see an independent public inquiry commission that will look at the Lac‑Mégantic tragedy. In the case of Air India, it took over 10 years to set up a public inquiry. We've been waiting for eight years for an inquiry. Rest assured, we'll stay the course for a few more years.

This concludes the first part of my presentation, which focused on the Lac‑Mégantic situation.

I'll now begin the second part of my presentation, which concerns rail safety in Canada. My brief includes a list of statistics published by the Transportation Safety Board, or TSB, on the Internet and in the media since 2016. The number of rail accidents in Canada has been steadily increasing since 2016, and even since the Lac‑Mégantic tragedy, I believe. The issue is only getting worse. Hundreds of accidents involving the transportation of dangerous goods are occurring.

Fortunately, these accidents don't occur in urban areas. Fortunately, these disasters took place in areas where there's less of a direct impact on humans. However, the environment and nature suffer from the impact.

On July 10, 2020, Radio‑Canada reported that the number of rail accidents had increased by 42% in the past 10 years. These statistics come from the TSB. This phenomenon shouldn't be taken lightly. It's a strong trend.

I said that these accidents didn't take place in urban areas. However, we should remember the accident on November 10, 1979, in Mississauga, where a train containing 90 tons of chlorine derailed. This resulted in a precautionary evacuation of 284,000 people and the creation of a toxic cloud. Trains of this nature are currently passing through Lac‑Mégantic. Moreover, about ten derailments occurred between 2005 and 2015, which are included in the TSB statistics.

Oil transportation is a real issue because the rules have been changed.

I have here safety advisories issued by the TSB. For example, according to advisory 617‑03/20, the TSB found that our rails—

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Mr. Bellefleur, could you wrap it up please?

[Robert Bellefleur]

May I finish?

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

If you could just wrap it up with your closing comments, that would be great.

Thank you.

[Robert Bellefleur]

Okay.

In conclusion, our rails are maintained as they were 20 years ago, with a rail management system. Today, much longer, heavier and faster trains are running on the rails. This leads to the premature wear of the rails, resulting in constant derailments. The seven derailments that occurred, according to the TSB reports, are related to the increased rate of rail wear. The system must be reviewed.

I had other recommendations for the committee. We want the government to completely review the legislation and the regulations, and to reinstate Transport Canada as the true guardian of transportation safety.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Mr. Bellefleur.

If you could pass on those notes to the clerk, we'll make sure they get into the record for you. Anything else that you may want to add, you can add to some of the answers if members have questions for you. I want to thank you for your presentation; well done, great job.

[Robert Bellefleur]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you.

Ms. Bleau and Mr. Beaulne, you already made your presentation. I'm told that you're just going to be here to answer questions. Is that correct?

Thank you. It's great to have you back.

We're now going to move on to representatives from Port Robinson Proud. We have Mr. Jonathan LePera and Ms. June Wolfrath.

June, are you going to go first, and then Mr. LePera is going to go second?

[June Wolfrath, Member, Port Robinson Proud]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

You have the floor.

[June Wolfrath]

Hello. My name is June Wolfrath. I would like to thank you for the opportunity to speak today.

After the Lac-Mégantic tragedy, in which 47 people died when a parked train that was insufficiently secured ran down a hill, derailed and exploded, there have been calls for increased scrutiny of rail safety, including in the Auditor General’s report. The Transportation Safety Board made five recommendations after its probe of the Lac-Mégantic rail disaster.

I respectfully ask the CN representatives to address two recommendations in particular.

The first is that emergency response assistance plans must be created by Canadian railway companies when large volumes of liquid hydrocarbons or hazardous materials are shipped. Since the TSB made this recommendation in January 2014, what emergency response assistance plans, if any, have been developed for the Port Robinson community? What recent steps has CN taken to operationalize the plan with local first response agencies and other support organizations?

The second is that railway companies should conduct strategic route planning and enhanced train operations for all trains carrying dangerous goods. Since the TSB made this recommendation in June 2014, what measures, if any, has CN taken to choose its routes carefully when shipping dangerous goods, which could mean diverting some shipments around populated residential areas, namely Port Robinson?

Further, the argument that route planning is not a realistic solution and that moving such shipments around populated areas is logistically prohibitive and would be costly is no excuse. Shipping hazardous goods remains an unacceptable hazard to the community of Port Robinson.

Rail incidents will happen. The timing of such incidents and their impacts to the community are unknown. For example, the Transportation Safety Board incident occurrence database indicates a number of runaway train near-misses, such as when two CN cars full of corrosive anhydrous ammonia ran uncontrolled onto the main line from Port Robinson near Niagara Falls, Ontario until a citizen spotted the cars and reported them. That was August 19, 2001.

Personally, living in Port Robinson has destroyed my quality of life. It's a living nightmare. I have now bouts of depression and often am short-tempered. I was never like this. The first year here, I slept perhaps three hours a night for 99% of the time. I have pain and fullness in my ears from constant jet plane-like noise in my backyard from accelerating locomotives. Dynamite charge-like bangs go off day and night. CN trains block our main roads because of the small yard. I have seen an ambulance with flashing lights turn around because of this. Idling occurs for 12 hours and more. My 93-year-old mother and I experience constant anxiety waiting for the next train and the next full day of noise. During the CN strike, locomotives were parked directly behind our homes for at least five days, idling 24-7, non-stop.

Last year, I took part in mediation with the CTA and CN. My complaint was noise and vibration. I was obligated to sign an NDA. Therefore, unfortunately, I cannot discuss important facts and, to be honest, I am afraid I may suffer retribution from CN if I slip up by mentioning anything like that.

Thank you so much for listening.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Ms. Wolfrath. That was well done. You did a great job.

We're now going to move on to Mr. LePera.

Mr. LePera, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Jonathan LePera, Member, Port Robinson Proud]

Thank you, Chair Badawey.

Imagine being trapped beneath an insurmountable rock. That’s what life is like when you're at the mercy of the CTA and the wrath of CN Rail.

Port Robinson was once a quiet rural community when I moved there to start my family 17 years ago. It all changed four months later. Where did all this train activity come from? Why did CN move a successful, functioning shunting yard to Port Robinson, which is grossly undersized? How many complaints were documented at the previous location? What was the process?

I can feel the trains idling in my bones, almost like tinnitus pulsing through your ears. With COVID, your home is your castle...unless you live in Port Robinson, where it’s your prison. Our houses shake day and night. There's the pungent smell of diesel, the smell of rail ties, the constant vibration that rattles any two objects in your house that touch together. There's a film of diesel fuel on the windshields of our vehicles. Dust coats cars moments after they’re washed. Perhaps CN should volunteer a shovelful of dirt from their rail yard near their lines for content and chemical analysis. That dust is breathed in by my kids every day they want to play outside. What if I told you 90% of the pot lights in my basement are dead? They're a year old. There are cracks in our foundations. Beautiful concrete around our pools has heaved and our driveways have sunk.

Most people know the holidays based on the calendar. We know them by the trainyard. At Christmas, Easter and Thanksgiving, our houses shake violently. We don’t invite friends or family over. It’s too embarrassing. Then there's the volatile cargo that could kill on contact or upon explosion.

My wife and I are teachers. We have no margin for error. Suicide, abuse, depression and anxiety—we’re expected to psychoanalyze 20 to 30 kids with each interaction while delivering a curriculum. Now figure in minimal sleep due to trains shunting all night. We’re not talking a two cups of coffee fix. Nurses, paramedics, firefighters, police officers and other frontline workers who live in our subdivision have suffered at work due to the implications of COVID and at home due to CN’s operations.

I was invited to the mediation with the CTA and CN Rail in 2020. I refused to sign the NDA, which was a prerequisite for participation. In a democratic country under the guise of an arbitrary mediation, why hide the contents of the meetings? It's simple: Show us your info; we'll do nothing, and you will be muzzled. If you're looking for proof, we've had two meetings in mediation with not an ounce of resolve.

Why did CN idle its trains north, past the subdivision, last night? Is it a coincidence that we're testifying today? Wait a second; you can voluntarily move your operations north without complaints? Sadly, I still felt those trains in my bones as I sat in the chair in my basement.

On Tuesday evening, I learned that CN cannot block a crossing for more than five minutes while shunting. That's shocking. CN's safety record should have them on the CTA's speed dial, yet Tuesday night, the CTA admitted the best they can do is levy a fine to a company that earned record profits of $3.2 billion in 2020. CN has repeatedly said it can't afford to move its shunting yard from our community.

I’m curious what a CTA fine might be. How about legislation that holds rail companies legally responsible and fines that reflect their earnings? Bill Gates, a significant investor in CN Rail and proponent of the environment, says on his website, “We need to reward people who have the courage to take difficult steps.” That's why we are all here today.

The committee will be forced to investigate rail incidents on CN lines, CN's rail yard derailment reports and its cargo manifest. Is there federal compliance? Are there dangerous activities? For volatile chemicals, what do the warning labels say in the event of disaster? How long do they block rail crossings? What is their rate of compliance? How long does it take to separate a railcar in the event of an emergency? How often has that threshold been met?

The tail should not wag the dog. Legislation can be changed. Ethics are what allow you to sleep at night. This panel was elected to be leaders, not followers. It all starts with holding CN Rail and the CTA accountable right now.

My hope, once the final report is written and due diligence is served, is that their operations can no longer represent a function of neglect, complacency or entitlement. They have caused headaches probably for every elected official on this committee and their constituents. They will be shamed into changing their policies and procedures, which easily could have been made in good conscience and stewardship without this committee.

I thank you for the opportunity to speak.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Mr. LePera. That was well done.

We're now going to move on to Mr. Chad McPherson. Chad is a locomotive engineer.

Chad, welcome. You have the floor for five minutes.

[Chad McPherson, Locomotive Engineer, Teamsters Canada Rail Conference]

Good afternoon. Thank you, Mr. Chair, for the opportunity to appear before the committee today.

My name is Chad McPherson, and I represent the legislative position of the Teamsters Rail Conference Canada in our local division 510 of Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan, which also encompasses Regina, Saskatchewan. I work as a locomotive engineer for CP Rail and have been employed with the company for nearly 27 years. Today I would like to discuss some important issues that are affecting rail safety in our area.

As mentioned previously, blocking public crossings at grade is a continual issue that requires a resolve. With today’s rail carriers building trains well beyond 12,000 feet—I did some quick math, and that is approximately 3.6 kilometres—it is nearly impossible to stop a train without occupying a crossing at grade. A typical example of multiple blocked crossings happens in Regina, Saskatchewan, where a train at approximately 9,600 feet, or 2.9 kilometres, is required to stop and line manual switches. While doing this, the train is occupying 11 crossings. This is from Winnipeg Street and Ring Road all the way down to downtown Regina. Many of these crossings are major roadways with high vehicular traffic volumes. There's also a school playground with a pedestrian crossing in the area that is blocked for a significant amount of time while this process happens. The current practice that I see here in Moose Jaw is having a 10,000-foot train—3.4 kilometres—reduce its traffic from the tail end of the train, which is a slow and arduous task and results in public crossings being blocked in excess of 60 minutes at any given time.

A vital component of rail safety is emergency response procedures. Greater attention and stricter regulatory procedures are needed for rail carrier compliance. As it now stands, an emergency response plan is in place for individual areas within the southern Saskatchewan area. These procedures are often simply re-signed from the previous year, with little attention given to mock drills or practices to prepare employees and the public for an emergent situation that may involve evacuation.

This lack of practice was evident in a recent side-swipe in Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan, in which dangerous commodities and special dangerous commodities were being carried on a train that was struck by another train's movement. No activation of an emergency tone was initiated, and several other inactions were observed as a result. The incident also included a personal injury that occurred because of ineffective communications.

Another issue that affects rail safety in the Regina/Moose Jaw area exists with the training of new conductors. In the past, it has been felt by the unionized employees that the rail carrier’s priority was having additional manpower available rather than ensuring that these conductors were capable and qualified to perform the tasks required. In recent past, new hire employees were qualified simply through a phone call or through as little as applying a handbrake to a railcar and lining a hand-operated switch.

The duties of a conductor are vast, and I believe a more involved approach must be taken in the qualifying portion of conductor training. Advancing forward with this initiative would be a stricter regulation on minimum qualification standards. Currently, railway employee standard regulations require recertification at a minimum of every three years. I believe there is room for rail carriers to create, in conjunction with regulatory bodies and unionized representatives, practices that allow for better familiarization with rules and procedures.

Finally, I hope to find answers to some common questions regarding the duty and rest period rules for railway operating employees. There have been some significant changes in the existing work/rest rules, and some interpretation on how these changes will apply as the duty and rest period rules come in effect. Fatigue in the railway is an ongoing concern to railway employees. Although the TCRC has negotiated some great improvements to work/life conditions for employees, it is felt that greater improvements can be made through regulations. Today I hope to find some answers and to encourage some communication on the topic.

Thank you for your time.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Mr. McPherson. That was well done.

Members, there are a couple of things. First off, we started this meeting at 3:49, and we will be getting our full two hours in. I know Ms. Kusie was going to ask that question, so I'm going to answer it before she asks it. We will get the full two hours in, plus there was a request to extend the meeting 15 minutes past the two hours, and we're also going to be doing that as well. We're going to have 2 hours and 15 minutes, going to 5:49 plus the 15 minutes.

With that, we are going to start our first round of questions off with Mr. Luc Berthold from the Conservative Party. Before I go to Luc, I want to welcome him back. Luc was on our committee from 2015 to, I believe, 2019, and was a great member of the committee.

Luc, again, I want to welcome you back. I also want to welcome Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia. Francis is part of the Liberal Party and is subbing in for Mr. Rogers today.

Mr. Berthold, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It's a pleasure to be back at the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities. I enjoyed serving on this committee, where a great dynamic existed. I think that the dynamic is still there under your leadership, Mr. Badawey. By the way, I'm very happy to see you here.

I hesitate to call myself a witness or a member of Parliament today. However, given the situation and the importance of your study, I absolutely wanted to participate. I would like to thank my Conservative colleagues for making room for me today. I want to acknowledge the witnesses here today, especially Mr. Bellefleur, who is from Lac‑Mégantic. He cares about the safety of the people living in Lac‑Mégantic. He's always there to remind us of the importance of rail safety. Rail safety is the top priority in Lac‑Mégantic. We can't afford to relive the tragedy that we experienced in 2013. Our other priority is the construction of the bypass.

On that note, I want to ask Mr. Bellefleur to tell us how much the people living in Lac‑Mégantic want the promises made regarding the timeline for the construction and completion of the bypass to be kept.

[Robert Bellefleur]

Thank you, Mr. Berthold.

Indeed, the people living in Lac‑Mégantic find it very difficult to have to wait until 2023. Imagine that: 10 years after the tragedy, they hear the trains passing day and night. Personally, this wakes me up often at night. A train passes at 2 a.m. and another at 4 a.m. The trains meet in our area to go through customs. The conductors change. We know that the trains carry chlorine and propane gas, among other things. They always go downhill. It's horrible to put people through this and to make them wait for over 10 years. We won't even have it in 2023, given the delays accumulated since the last year.

Mr. Berthold is right to push the issue. I encourage him to keep hammering away at our request. We really need a bypass in Lac‑Mégantic because of the dangerous goods being transported there and the dangerous slopes and curves.

Last week, in downtown Lac‑Mégantic, a switch was discovered with a lower grade of iron than the main line. One rail was completely cracked where the train derailed on July 6, 2013. We aren't wondering whether we need a bypass in Lac‑Mégantic.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Bellefleur.

That's exactly the message that I want to send today. Since the start, we've been working with as many people as possible on this issue and with the political parties to make the bypass a reality.

As Mr. Bellefleur said, the timeline is very tight. There's some skepticism about whether the bypass can be built by 2023. However, the government has reiterated its commitment on several occasions. We expect the government to fulfill its commitment.

I also want to inform the committee members that another report on rail safety was released today in the House. This report is quite tough on Transport Canada. The report is from the Standing Committee on Public Accounts, which had meetings on this topic. Let me read an excerpt:

The department made important improvements to both its safety oversight planning and inspection follow‑up [we acknowledge this], but it did not assess whether its oversight activities improved rail safety. Also, the department did not measure the effectiveness of the railway companies' safety management systems or integrate the results of those audits into its rail safety oversight planning.

The report was tabled today in the House of Commons.

Mr. Campbell, you spoke a great deal about railway management systems. What do you think about the fact that the government still doesn't measure the effectiveness of these systems today, after all these years?

[Bruce Campbell]

Yes. I couldn't have said it better than the Auditor General herself, who said that it was "a big loophole". It was pretty much the same kind of critique that the AG's 2013 report made. It remains a risk, and what else can I say? It's pretty dismaying.