Debates of May 7th, 2014

Transport—Main Estimates, 2014–15

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague for his insightful remarks, once again, on Canada Post.

I would invite those who have not taken a look at it, incontrovertible facts that are located within the Canada Post Corporation's 2013 annual report about the status-quo approach. Its plan includes how they plan on dealing with some realities. I thought I would quote from Canada Post, since it is an arm's-length crown corporation that is responsible for its own operations, to give its perspective on why it came up with the five-point plan that we have accepted.

This is what it said:

…households and businesses have moved away from mail as a primary source of communication. They freely use electronic means to send and receive their mail. As a result, in the digital economy, Canada Post's exclusive privilege to deliver letters no longer adequately funds what’s called the universal service obligation.…

Transaction Mail volumes per address have dropped 30 per cent since 2007. Less mail equals less revenue, while the costs of providing postal service are largely fixed.

In 2013, we delivered 1.2 billion fewer pieces of Domestic Lettermail™ than we did in 2006, putting at risk a service to Canadians that has existed for longer than Canada has been independent.

Our challenge was to put forward a plan that balances the needs of all Canadians, while addressing the legacy costs of a system built mainly to process and deliver a large volume of mail. Reducing our cost of operations in many ways has helped, but we had to do much more to reshape the postal system and avoid chronic financial losses.

With that certainty, we announced our Five-Point Action Plan in late 2013 to build the foundation of a new postal system for Canadians. It reflects what we heard from people across the country as we talked about the future of the postal service in towns, cities and online. Canadians want a postal system they can count on to meet their changing needs, but they also expect it to avoid becoming a drain on their tax dollars.

It’s the result of two years of analyzing all options, including those at post offices around the world, to determine what would work best for Canadians. We’re streamlining our operations, addressing the cost of labour, adjusting our pricing to better reflect today's environment, expanding convenience through franchise post offices and moving the remaining five million door-to-door customers to community mail box delivery. This comprehensive five-year plan will return Canada Post to solid financial footing and provide a platform for growth fuelled by the changing needs of the people and businesses we serve.

Clearly, Canada Post has put a lot of thought, effort, study, and insight into what its five-point plan will be as we are dealing with the realities of the digital economy. I appreciate, as I said before, the hon. member bringing this issue to light.

[The Chair, NDP, Joe Comartin]

That concludes this segment. Resuming debate, the hon. member for York South—Weston.

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Chair, I wish the minister a happy birthday. I did not want to be left out.

Would the minister agree that her primary responsibility is to ensure that Canadians using or affected by the transportation system are kept as safe as possible?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, Transport Canada absolutely believes that the safety and security of Canadians in the transportation infrastructure and in the systems is of utmost importance. I always say that it is my top priority.

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Chair, the minister would then agree that it is not to protect the profitability of certain companies, not to work with lobbyists or issue press releases to protect the government, but to protect Canadians?

Can the minister tell us how many unsafe DOT-111 rail cars are used in Canada for transporting dangerous goods?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, I can tell the hon. member that the universe of DOT-111s for flammable service in North America is 67,000.

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Chair, can the member tell us how many of those rail cars are carrying explosive crude oil, like the type contributing to the tragedy at Lac-Mégantic?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, I do not have the specific numbers other than to indicate what the volumes have been. We know that they have been increasing in terms of the volumes of crude oil being shipped through these means.

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Chair, how is the government ensuring that the most volatile cargo is being transported in the safest cars? Can the minister confirm that the most unsafe cars will be phased out in less than or within the planned three years?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, in our response to the TSB recommendations, we indicated that the most unsafe cars, 5,000 of them specifically, will be phased out shorter than that, within 30 days. With respect to the balance of the DOT-111 cars for use in crude oil or ethanol, that they would be retrofitted or phased out in the next three years.

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Chair, how fast can the manufacturers in all of North America make new replacements for the DOT-111s?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, my officials have consulted with industry on the matter and they have brought back information. We considered these factors when we set out three years as the appropriate plan. We thought it was a good balance between what industry will be pushed to do and what we needed to do for the safety of Canadians.

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Chair, we were told in the committee that it was 14,000 per year, and so to replace 67,000 rail cars, it will take four and a half years.

Has the minister explored ways to speed up the manufacturing of new rail cars?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, absolutely. I think it is important to note that under current market conditions, of course without the regulatory piece that we put in place most recently in our announcement of three years, it probably was the amount that they could do.

I have great confidence that the market will respond to this issue, that they will find capacity, and that they will continue to want to do this work. As the parliamentary secretary mentioned, this is an opportunity for construction and jobs as well.

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Chair, actually we were told that if all of the capacity in North America was converted to building only DOT-111 replacements, it would be 14,000 per year.

The Transportation Safety Board has said that the DOT-111s can break and explode at speeds as low as 20 miles per hour.

What speed does the minister now allow DOT-111s to travel at in cities?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, in a Transportation Safety Board response, we indicated that we would order immediately that key trains carrying crude oil would be reduced to 50 miles per hour. However, risk analysis and assessments would have to be carried out in certain areas, taking into consideration certain factors to see whether that speed would be lowered to 40 miles per hour.

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

Then, Mr. Chair, the minister allows them to travel at 40 miles per hour in cities, which is still a speed at which the rail cars can break and explode.

How will the minister be able to enforce this, or any other speed, with continued cuts to inspections at Transport Canada?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, I completely reject the premise of that assertion at the tail end of the question. There is no evidence that we have cut safety inspectors in this country with respect to rail. In fact, we are the ones who increased the amount of funding in it.

With respect to the specific question, let me just say that there is a myriad of issues that come into play. We expect that railway companies will adhere and abide by regulations we put in place; otherwise, they would be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Chair, we understand that the minister is committing now to implementing the Transportation Safety Board's recommendations that key routes be inspected twice a year and sidelines once a year. Is that correct?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, I was very specific in the Transportation Safety Board response we gave on April 23, and I did not refer to any of those matters.

I did indicate that we were making some changes in the protective direction. We would make sure, going forward, in terms of the emergency directive, that we require railway companies to immediately implement key operating practices responding to the recommendation, including reducing the speed of trains transporting dangerous goods.

That is taking place with respect to elements that are already in place in the United States, in a circular regarding operating practices specifically, because they have signed a memorandum of co-operation between the U.S. DOT and the Association of American Railroads as well.

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Chair, she did not answer that question.

How frequently are Transport Canada officials currently inspecting key routes and side lines?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, I can say that there are approximately 30,000 inspections done per year. This year we are looking at 33,000 inspections, which is the highest number we have ever contemplated and produced.

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

Mr. Chair, she still did not answer my question.

Will the minister ensure that the new emergency response assistance plans are made public so that local officials and first responders can plan accordingly?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, one of the recommendations from the Transportation Safety Board was to require emergency response assistance plans. We are doing so for even a single tank car carrying crude oil, gasoline, diesel, aviation fuel, or ethanol.

In developing those, industry will be working together with first responders on these plans. They have 150 days to submit them to Transport Canada, but as well, there will be a key committee that will be working together on this specific matter. This information is for the purposes associated with first responders so that they can have the ability to get the information they need in a timely fashion. How it will be disseminated will be something that the committee will discuss.

[Mike Sullivan, NDP, York South—Weston, ON]

So we still do not know, Mr. Chair.

One of the issues that has been raised is the number of DOT-111s carrying crude oil travelling through dense metropolitan areas. The CP main line goes through the city of Toronto. It would be possible for CP to avoid running DOT-111s through Toronto by buying space on CN's lines north of Toronto. Why is this not being forced upon CP?