Transport Committee on Nov. 1st, 2023

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

I understand what you're saying. I have another question for you.

What received most opposition, from both labour and management, was the possibility that the government or the Minister of Transport, in particular, might be able to appoint the chairpersons of port authorities. They didn't like that at all. They were afraid that there would be political interference, that appointees wouldn't necessarily enjoy the trust of their peers and that they would work in the interest of the government, rather than that of the ports.

Do you intend to use that power to engage in political interference?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

No, not at all.

That actually goes back to what I was saying earlier. The ports have an economic role to play, but also a social and community role. Ultimately, they have to serve the public interest, don't they? So they must serve all Canadians. Port managements, which include their boards of directors, also have to align with the country's interests and be accountable. The chairperson is appointed from among the members of the board, upon consultation of those members. If a port official did anything today without complying with any recommendation—

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

You're saying that the appointment is made after the board members are consulted. However, you can already appoint members of the board of a port authority too. So you have the option of appointing someone as a member of the board and then quickly appointing that individual as chairperson of a port authority.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

However, in Quebec, Mr. Barsalou-Duval—

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

I wanted to address a more specific point with you. You say you don't intend to make political appointments, and I want to believe you. I hope that's not what you'll do if you're ever granted that power.

Now, I've done a little research and I'm going to cite some recent examples of appointments made to the Department of Transport, starting with Sandra Pupatello, who was appointed as director at the Toronto Port Authority in 2023 and who has donated $18,500 to the Liberal party of Canada. I could also cite the case of Craig Thomas Munroe, who was appointed as a director at the Vancouver Fraser Port Authority and who donated $16,000 to the Liberal Party of Canada. Then there's Jonathan Franklin Goldblum, who was appointed to the board of VIA Rail Canada and who donated $14,000 to the Liberal Party of Canada. I could also name someone who was appointed President and Chief Executive Officer of VIA Rail Canada in 2022 and who was to donate $1,000 to the Liberal Party of Canada the previous year, just before being nominated to his position.

And yet you tell me that you don't intend to make political appointments.

I also expanded my research and came up with some 60 individuals who have donated a total of $200,000 since you came to power. From 2021 to the present, approximately 10% of appointments are connected with the Liberal Party. I think that's a lot.

As I told you, I want to believe you, but I don't get the impression that the power you have in your hands has been used conscientiously to date.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

You also could have named a lot of people who have no connection to the Liberal Party and who have never donated a cent to it. You chose to present the situation in a different way.

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

Some 10% of nominees have donated to the Liberal Party, but I don't think that 10% of the population has done so. If I'm not mistaken, that would be less than 1%.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Your remarks have taken a bit of a partisan turn too, Mr. Barsalou-Duval.

How does donating to a party make a person incompetent? I'm sure that the total number of appointees includes people who have previously donated to the New Democratic Party, the Bloc Québécois or the Conservative Party.

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

I agree with you that there may be three good Liberal directors, Minister, but the preponderance of such donors nevertheless seems significant to me. Some 10% of appointments were associated with the Liberal Party, whereas less than 1% of the population belongs to your party. There is quite a major disparity here, on the one hand.

On the other hand, I'm not saying that all those people were appointed based solely on their politics because people who are competent and qualified to do the work may well have been appointed, but this gives me the impression that, if someone has donated to the Liberal Party, his or her file winds up on top of the pile not under it. Isn't that the case?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

No.

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

I'd like you to convince me of that.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

I said no. N-o; it's a word: no.

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

I nevertheless told you some facts, and they're quite eloquent.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

You chose to state certain names. You could have chosen to state names from among the 90% who don't donate to the Liberal Party, but you chose to state those other ones.

Some people donate to all the parties.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Barsalou-Duval.

Next we have Mr. Bachrach.

Mr. Bachrach, I'll turn the floor over to you. You have six minutes. Go ahead, please.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister, for joining us this evening.

I'll start fairly generally.

It does seem as though this bill is mostly based on the economic needs of the supply chain and on the need to address some of the challenges we saw during the pandemic. It's certainly understandable that it speaks to some of the recommendations from the fairly prescribed legislative reviews that took place many years ago. However, there have also been very strong concerns from communities and people who are affected by the supply chain as they look to your government for more protection and more accountability.

Part of that work was this committee's study on rail safety, in which we heard from communities, unions and rail workers about their concerns. The picture they painted, as well as the picture the Auditor General has painted and the chair of the Transportation Safety Board painted, is a pretty bleak one. It leaves us with a lot of concern about the state of rail safety the tenth anniversary of the Lac-Mégantic disaster. Yet of the 33 recommendations in this committee's report, Bill C-33 addresses none.

Maybe my question for you is this: How can this committee understand this as anything other than an insult to the work we've done? The recommendations in the committee's study came from the people who've been deeply impacted by the supply chain. They want changes. They want your government to have their backs. Yet the bill we see in front of us doesn't have any of that. Why is that?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

The bill does touch security and safety of railways, but you spoke about Lac Mégantic, and you raised something extremely important. What I'm wondering is how is it still possible that, 10 years afterwards, you have the same trains going there.

When the Prime Minister named me to this position, the first thing I thought about was Lac Mégantic because any Quebecker—ask Mr. Barsalou-Duval this—will remember exactly where they were at the moment of the tragedy and in the days that followed.

I went there recently, and I spoke with CP to make sure that we do everything that's necessary to go around. We have an agreement with CP. We made that a couple of weeks ago.

I made a deal with the city of Lac Mégantic. I made a deal with the Government of Québec, and this will happen now.

The people—sorry, I'm just finishing, and it's a bit emotional for me for many reasons—the people in Lac Mégantic are still waking up every day and listening and seeing that same train going down the same rail every day with dangerous goods, and that's one of the things—

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Yes, and I guess what we're asking you for, Minister, is not just to talk to the companies and ask them to do better. You're the Minister of Transport. We want legislative protections. We want you to reform a law that is archaic.

Why is it that these rail companies have their own private police forces, and when they have accidents that kill rail workers, they get to investigate themselves? Tell me that.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

First, it's the way it works in many countries, not only in Canada but in different countries—

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Not in the United Kingdom.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

In many countries, okay? The other thing is that they don't work in silos. They are what they call the "first line of defence" in safety and security related to the railway system, but they're not the only police force that can investigate matters, right? The RCMP and other police forces can and do investigate, depending on where they have jurisdiction.

For example, if something happens on a rail line on the island of Montreal, probably, the Montreal police will investigate. If it's between Montreal and Quebec City, then it will probably be the Sûreté du Québec, depending on where they have jurisdiction. They collaborate. Especially for complex investigations, they collaborate together.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

If we look at what happened in the wake of the disaster in Field, B.C., that killed three men, I don't think we would see collaboration. I don't think we would see a system that works for those rail families who lost their loved ones.

Would you agree?

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

They should have done better, but I don't know all the details.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Yes, so what we desperately need, Minister, and what I wish I saw in this bill, are reforms to an archaic 18th-century approach to rail policing. There's no reason that multi-billion dollar companies should get to police themselves. Air Canada doesn't have its own police.

We desperately need this, and I'm appealing to you, I'm urging you to bring forward at the very earliest opportunity a legislative reform that gets rid of private corporate rail police in Canada and brings in a proper, accountable police agency that is paid for by the industry and reports to a civilian oversight commission.

This is what they do in the United Kingdom. I think most Canadians are shocked to hear that rail companies get to police themselves. I'm going to turn to one more....

Do I have 30 more seconds, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

You have 40 more seconds—