Transport Committee on June 17th, 2021

[Bruce Campbell]

Exactly. As I said, I agree with you, but I just want to make one point, please.

[Soraya Martinez Ferrada, Liberal, Hochelaga, QC]

I'd like to ask you another question, Mr. Campbell.

According to you, DOT‑111 tank cars are still transporting crude oil. Do you have any suggestions for how hazardous materials should be transported in this country?

What other means of transportation do we have?

[Bruce Campbell]

I think that's true. That's one way of transporting dangerous goods, and if it's done properly and the risk is minimized, then I'm supportive.

What I'm trying to convey to you is that the actions have not been taken to minimize safety risks. The TSB chair has noted that it wanted the phase-out of these old cars to be accelerated, and she hasn't had a good answer to that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Mr. Campbell.

Thank you, Ms. Martinez Ferrada.

We're now going to move on to the third round, starting off with the Conservative Party and Mrs. Kusie.

Mr. Bellefleur, I see your hand up. I will ask that the next speaker recognize you. I can't. I have to allow the floor to go to the next speaker, and then hopefully that speaker will then recognize you.

The next speaker will be, on behalf of the Conservative Party, Mrs. Kusie.

Mrs. Kusie, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

I'll be passing my time back to MP Berthold.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Mrs. Kusie.

Monsieur Berthold, you have the floor for five minutes. Could you keep in mind, with all due respect to Mr. Bellefleur, that he has his hand up?

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

Thank you.

Mr. Bellefleur, I would ask that you present your comments in 30 seconds. I have a lot of respect for you, but I have a lot of questions too.

[Robert Bellefleur]

I wanted to come back to the issue of the DOT‑111 tank cars, which I studied a little bit. It's true that they haven't been carrying oil for a few years, but they still carry sulfuric acid, which is much more dangerous than oil and can create a toxic cloud like the one in Bhopal. It did happen in Mississauga, where 234,000 people had to be evacuated.

The DOT‑111 tank cars had to be replaced with cars that went through many variations and had a new look. So...

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

Thank you, Mr. Bellefleur.

I really wanted to allow you to respond, and I apologize for interrupting. However, I do have two things that are still quite important that I would like to discuss.

Mr. McPherson, I am surprised when you talk about fatigue. Transport Canada has submitted a report to us on fatigue, and according to the department, the fatigue issue is resolved.

Are you aware of the opening and operation of a fatigue centre of expertise?

It appears that the situation has been resolved. However, you're telling me that it is not.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Mr. McPherson.

[Chad McPherson]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

No, I do not believe that is the case as it stands now. I know amendments have been made. Currently there are work/rest rules in place that have been amended, but they will not totally come into force for another two years, I believe. As it stands now, train lineup inaccuracy and fatigue are still major issues in the railways. I'm a legislative representative on the Saskatchewan provincial board, and those affect both CP and CN.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Mr. Berthold.

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

Thank you very much.

Mr. Badawey, you were there in 2016 when we produced the fatigue report. It was a priority issue at the time. Changes have been made since then, and Transport Canada tells us that the rules have been changed to help reduce fatigue. That includes reducing duty periods and increasing rest time between shifts, but I think there is still work to be done.

Mr. McPherson, the committee will take your suggestion, because it is indeed extremely concerning, especially when you think of all the damage and tragedies that could occur if conductors and train engineers are not at the top of their game when operating large locomotives, which are getting bigger and bigger.

Mr. Chair, as you know, I have a motion to put forward. I would like to do that now:

That, as part of its study on rail safety, the Transport Committee ask the Minister of Transport to submit to it by June 23 all documents relating to, and including, the agreement reached with the Canadian Pacific concerning the construction of the track bypassing the Lac‑Mégantic railway line, in order to reassure the members of the committee on the construction delays of this project aimed at ensuring the safety of the citizens of Lac Mégantic, following the rail tragedy of July 6, 2013, which claimed the lives of 47 people.

The motion had already been sent out to committee members. I only added “and including” after “all documents relating to”. That was the only change I made.

In English it is “by June 23 all documents relating to, and including, the agreement”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Mr. Berthold. The motion is in order due to the fact that we are discussing this. With that, I will ask members if they have any questions. I see two hands up.

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

Mr. Chair, I would like to speak very briefly about the motion to explain why we need to introduce this motion, and to give committee members some context.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Absolutely, Mr. Berthold. You can have all the time you need.

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

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I had the opportunity this week to speak with the mayor of Lac‑Mégantic. She would have liked to be here, but unfortunately she was already busy. A public information meeting is being held tonight for the people of Lac‑Mégantic, about the acquisition process and the bypass. On her behalf, I'm therefore giving you that information.

I have also had the opportunity to speak with officials from Canadian Pacific who made this deal. We asked them for a copy of the agreement, and while they had no objection to giving it to committee members, they told us that it was the government's decision.

We have been working with the Parliamentary Secretary and the newly appointed Minister of Transportation, who are handling the bypass and working to secure the commitments needed to get the project done on time. I applaud their work in that regard. However, the timelines are extremely tight and we want to see this commitment to complete the bypass by 2023. We believe that making this agreement between Canadian Pacific and Transport Canada public on the completion of this project would be as transparent as possible for the people of Lac‑Mégantic who suffered this tragedy.

I urge committee members to adopt this motion in support of transparency and to support the timely completion of the bypass as promised.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Mr. Berthold.

I'm now going to move to Ms. Martinez Ferrada.

Ms. Martinez Ferrada, the floor is yours.

[Soraya Martinez Ferrada, Liberal, Hochelaga, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I am very surprised. As I have said on a number of occasions, both publicly and to several individuals, there will be a public information session for landowners today. It is specifically to start the land acquisition process, which is an important phase in the planning for the bypass and in the construction of the bypass itself. I specifically told the mayors of Lac‑Mégantic, Nantes and Frontenac about it. We have met with them on a number of occasions and I met with them myself as recently as last week.

I am a little surprised by my colleague's action at the committee today, right in front of the witnesses with whom we must still have discussions and to whom we still want to put questions. We were not even given the chance to finish the third round of questions. These witnesses certainly still have a lot to tell us. As I have repeated on a number of occasions, the accelerated timeframe we have provided has steps that have been made public.

I feel that my colleague will understand that, in any agreement—and this is one of the difficulties—there is often commercial information that may be sensitive and that a company, in this case Canadian Pacific, CP, would prefer to keep confidential. I am really very surprised to hear my colleague speaking in CP's name. I might perhaps have asked CP itself to tell us that it has no problem with this agreement being made public. I'm not sure whether its shareholders, its employees or its suppliers would even agree with CP.

In negotiations that a government as responsible as ours is conducting with those involved, a rigorous process of confidentiality must be maintained with some aspects of the negotiations. The proposal that has been put to us makes me very uncomfortable. Instead, I would like to propose that he meet with Transport Canada, so that he can be reassured as to the plan, he can be shown exactly what the mayors and all the landowners have been shown, and that he can be given the public timeframe. I would also invite him to visit the Transport Canada website to see all the information and all the steps that have been made public, so that we can talk about the timeframe in more detail. Releasing an agreement like this to the public, without Transport Canada, for one, having vetted what can be made public, would be irresponsible on our part.

I see that other members want to speak, so I can come back to this issue if need be.

I propose that we first finish the evening with the guests we have with us. They surely have more to tell us. Let's all finish our questions. Afterwards, we can discuss the significance of my colleague's motion with him. I feel that we both can agree on the timeline that must be followed.

Let's see the results of the public information sessions that are being held. Mr. Chair, at 7:00 p.m. this evening, there is a meeting that I will be attending. I feel that my colleague would be much more inclined to work with us rather than to try a purely political move today, at this committee and in front of our witnesses. It is a move that really has nothing to do with the issue and the study we are conducting today.

I'll let my colleagues comment.

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

A point of order, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Thank you, Ms. Martinez Ferrada.

Go ahead, Mr. Berthold.

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

Since I am joining you from outside, you did not see my hand up. I put it up right after I spoke. Could you just add me to the list of those who want to speak?

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

I didn't see you. I'm sorry.

Thank you, Mr. Berthold.

Ms. Martinez Ferrada, was that an amendment you were putting forward, or just a suggestion?

[Soraya Martinez Ferrada, Liberal, Hochelaga, QC]

Mr. Chair, I think that some members want to comment. I will let them express their opinions on my colleague's motion and I will put my name on the list again.

[The Chair, Liberal, Vance Badawey]

Okay. Thank you, Ms. Martinez Ferrada.

Ms. Jaczek, you have the floor.