Transport Committee on March 3rd, 2022

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all of the witnesses for making the time today. I know you're busy.

I'm going to start with Mr. Gagner.

Thank you for joining us.

I look at your opening remarks, and your experience, and I want you to talk a bit more and take a little more time on what's lacking from your perspective for the government to ensure rail safety. I'm not sure we got there in your remarks, but I would like to hear your view on it, given where you are in the country.

[Vince Gagner]

Sure.

I'd start with the strengths of what I see here in Sarnia. You can use that as a baseline to compare. Here, if there was a noise or some kind of a nuisance complaint with the system we have set up now, our member companies would share that information with the newspaper. They share that with the public, and anyone like you who wants to subscribe will get those notifications coming across.

That model was based on consultations with first nations. They had a system already set up in their community to do that, and we followed their example and set that up for all of our member companies, including obviously here in Sarnia. There are lots of different things that we have going on here in terms of risk, and definitely rail operations are right in the middle of a lot of our sites and our operations. That connection with the community is really important.

The management systems piece is key, you're right, in terms of due diligence and non-prescriptive law, but it's also important in terms of its risk piece. Sarnia was the birthplace of responsible care. It started here in the 1980s. The big piece with responsible care and management systems is understanding that the more you understand risk, the better you can control it.

There are different ways to assess risk, and there are very technical ways to do that. Sometimes the best way is to go and listen to a worker and go and listen to the community. You get a lot of information there, and that continuous improvement loop that happens over time is the due diligence. It is the polish, over time, of the improvement.

I would say here in Sarnia we do that deliberately, and we have third party auditors who come in and verify that in our companies. It's just the general culture here. There's a lot of practice here; there are lots of different risks, and our community is very in tune with that. We have to be, because the people who work at our sites, including rail operations, also live here. When we talk to the mayors, the warden, the chief of the Aamjiwnaang, and we connect, we're all working together to manage risk.

I think if you start with that foundation, it's a key point. How you write that in the law is a tough one, but it's simply just listening and responding when people give you feedback.

I hope that helps.

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Yes, it is helpful.

I wanted to ask you about this. Given your experience in the area, can you give us your assessment on the different risks related to rail versus pipeline and dangerous goods, and how that interacts with some of what you've seen or with your system?

[Vince Gagner]

Sure. If you look at the portfolio of Sarnia, you see that we have refining, petrochemicals and different manufacturing. There are transport trucks going in and out of these and rail operations going all around them. When you look at these fundamentals about listening to the public and controlling risk, you see that it's all pretty much the same.

Like I said, we're rolling out an incident that we have, again, by design, in the region on May 2, and you're welcome to come down and see it. We're going to have a tank fire that's going to be responded to by the refinery, and then it's going to evolve into a cloud that goes over and affects the rail operation, and then it extends beyond into the community. We're all working together and developing and injecting these scenarios to test.

I guess the important part is that that can happen just as a matter of fact with industry, but we are directly engaging the public in this. We're actively getting their feedback, but what's important is that we don't just get their feedback.... By the way, in terms of organized labour, the president of the Sarnia-Lambton construction and building trades is participating directly in the drill, because there could be workers at the site. We want to make sure he sees what we're doing and his members understand that we care. We want their feedback on this, not only on the prevention side, but also to minimize any impact if there is some kind of an incident.

It's really quite a holistic look at risk, keeping the tolerance for it very low and keeping the culture open so that we all listen to and respect each other.

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Gagner.

I have a quick question. Do you know of anywhere else where this exists across the country?

[Vince Gagner]

No, I don't.

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Is this unique to Sarnia? Is there anywhere else, perhaps, given your location, on the other side of the border?

[Vince Gagner]

No. I've been in this game for a long time and have worked in the States, out west and out east, and I'm very proud of what we have set up. This level of transparency that we've built here is definitely worth a look from this group, and I would be happy to help in any way I can.

[Melissa Lantsman, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Thank you very much for making the time for us today.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Gagner and Ms. Lantsman.

Next, we have Ms. Koutrakis for five minutes.

The floor is yours.

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank the witnesses for their testimony and for being with us this afternoon.

My question is for the representatives of the Railway Association of Canada, but the other witnesses can comment if they wish.

Could you describe some of the measures taken by railway operators to restore our supply chain after the weather disasters that occurred on the west coast last year?

I'm thinking in particular of the uncharacteristic cooperation between companies that are normally competitors.

Had these measures not been acted upon so quickly, what impact might there have been on safety?

[Marc Brazeau]

Thank you for your question, Ms. Koutrakis.

I'll answer your question in English, because honestly, my recollection of everything that happened out west is in English.

The supply chain disruptions in British Columbia and, in fact, in western Canada this past summer, as a result of raging forest fires and then the atmospheric rivers that we saw, really tested the railways. However, I think everybody read in the news and saw the Herculean efforts put forward by the railways to, first of all, work together to ensure that essential supplies were able to get in and out of the port of Vancouver. That speaks volumes about the fact that we have two class I railways that, yes, compete with each other, but also work with each other. That's not just during times of need like that, but also, in their normal working times, there's co-operation between the two railways.

In terms of the ability of railways to respond as quickly as they did, their ability to repair their infrastructure as quickly as they did, they did that in concert with the British Columbia government and in concert with the municipalities. We worked with a number of other key supporters and contractors who obviously worked very closely with the railways. It really was an impressive feat.

It does, however, speak to the need for us to have a more robust climate change action plan, because we have to protect our infrastructure. We have to protect our supply chains. That is something on which we've started having some conversations with Minister Alghabra and other jurisdictions.

It's incumbent upon all of us, whether it be in the private sector or the public sector, to work together with all members of the supply chain, including our customers, to ensure that the integrity of Canada's supply chain is maintained, because we are a trading nation. We depend on our national trade corridor and we have to make sure that the infrastructure investments and the build-out will be able to withstand some of the challenges that we'll continue to see on a climate change front.

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Mr. Chair, do I have time for one more question?

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

You do.

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

I now have a question for Mayor Bourdeau.

Mr. Bourdeau, last year, we heard testimony from representatives of the Canadian Transportation Agency, the CTA. In some instances, the CTA ordered the railway operators to suspend activities at night. I would like to see the CTA use this power more often.

As the mayor of a small municipality, what do you think about this?

[Michel Bourdeau]

At night, there is less noise and people can sleep better. And if there is an accident at home, they know that the ambulance will be able to come quickly and won't have to stop to wait for a train to go by. Of course in daytime, many people are not at home because they have gone off to work.

There are also fewer train horns being sounded when the trains go by. No more horn noise. That's good and people have commented on it.

It would be nice if there were fewer trains going through at night. It's not easy to do that, but other methods could be considered. At peak hours, It might open up some areas of the municipalities, particularly in the morning or at dinner time, around five p.m.

And CN and CP are renting their tracks to passenger train companies. It's not always easy to manage both at the same time.

[Annie Koutrakis, Liberal, Vimy, QC]

Thank you very much, Mayor Bourdeau.

Mr. Chair, I don't have any further questions. If one of my colleagues would like some of my time, I cede the floor to them.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Ms. Koutrakis. I'll take the time if you would like to cede it to me.

Thank you. I appreciate that.

My question is for both Mr. Brazeau and Mr. Kolz.

I did some research. It looks like the industry is doing quite well. Many of your members have record profits, which I think is a great thing. It shows that more people are using rail. It's an environmentally sustainable way of shipping goods, which is something that is near and dear to my heart.

However, given that there are record profits for many of your members, why is it that mayors like Monsieur Bourdeau and others across the country aren't given the support they need to build the kinds of overpasses and underpasses that would help ensure that citizens are safer? In Mr. Bourdeau's case, in Terrasse-Vaudreuil, he said it's been over 30 years that the city has been trying to get this overpass and underpass.

Why is it they're not getting that kind of support, if financing is not an issue? What do you propose, on behalf of your members moving forward, to ensure they're given expedited support to provide that kind of infrastructure and to keep our respective citizens safe?

Thank you.

[Marc Brazeau]

I'll begin, and then I'll turn it over to my colleague.

First of all, I think Greg, in his opening remarks, pointed out that there are billions spent by the railways. In fact, if you go back to, I think, 1999, there's been 33 billion dollars' worth of investments put back into the rail infrastructure directly by CN and CP. This is a significant capital investment made year over year by the railways back into their infrastructure, rolling stock and equipment. It's all with the aim of ensuring the safety, efficiency and fluidity of the network.

All these investments have certainly paid dividends, but there's more that could be done. That's why we've advocated for the federal government to provide more support to municipalities and private landowners when it comes to the new grade crossings regulations that are going to come into effect. Those are significant investments. We believe the rail safety improvement program, RSIP, is one way there could be additional funds—

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

I appreciate that, Mr. Brazeau, but directly to my question, why is it mayors are waiting 30 years in some cases to get the kind of infrastructure they need to keep their citizens safe? That's a direct question that I would like answered, as well as the second question with regard to what you propose to do moving forward to provide more of the support that is necessary to these kinds of communities that need it badly.

[Marc Brazeau]

I'm going to try to be as direct as I can. Firstly, there needs to be more public funding made available to municipalities. The Federation of Canadian Municipalities has asked for the same. We have asked for the same. Safety is a shared responsibility. The railways certainly have made that commitment, but we're also looking for governments to make additional commitments to support those initiatives.

Secondly, the railways, again, if we look at the grade crossings regulations—and I think that's really what the issue is for Mayor Bourdeau, that grade crossing—there are new regulations coming into place, but those new regulations are going to require more investments. I think that's really what it comes down to, as well, is that there needs to be more public funding made available—

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you, Mr. Brazeau. On the record, you're stating that the tens of billions of dollars amassed in profits by the companies you represent over the last three decades isn't enough, and that the taxpayers need to do more.

Thank you very much.

Mr. Xavier Barsalou-Duval, the floor is now yours for two and a half minutes.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

My next question is for Mr. Bourdeau.

Mr. Bourdeau, there was a brief discussion of problems tied to the railways in your municipality. After the accident in Lac-Mégantic, a decision was made to build a railway bypass. It has not yet been completed, however. People in other towns would also like to have government assistance.

The location of the railway tracks is problematic in other cities too. Some have asked for alternatives to determine whether it would be possible to move them. However, it does not seem that these towns are likely to receive funding for this.

Your municipality does not necessarily want to move the railway tracks, but if federal organizations like Transport Canada offered assistance to assess the costs, would that be of interest to you?

[Michel Bourdeau]

Any options that would bring the entire municipality together again would certainly be an asset.

About five years ago, there was discussion about building an overpass or underpass within the following 10 years. Then a traffic light was installed at that location. Drivers stop at the railway crossing when there is a train and are now required to stop whenever there's a red light. That's how they decided to make the crossing safe.

Our municipality was identified as one of the most dangerous locations in Canada, but Transport Canada chose to have a traffic light installed to solve the problem. Before that, if there were no trains, you could drive through without a problem, but now there's a traffic light. In other words, even when there's no train, drivers have to wait for the red light to change.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

So according to you, it would be appropriate to fund railway development studies through federal programs. Is that right?