Debates of May 7th, 2014

Transport—Main Estimates, 2014–15

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, the way in which we are dealing with the recommendations from the Transportation Safety Board includes strong action regarding the means of containment of crude oil, protective directions under the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, making sure that we have ERAPS in place, and ensuring that they are taking a look at some of the key operations.

Let us be very clear: in general, the system is safe. A terrible derailment happened in Lac-Mégantic, a terrible incident, but in general the system is safe, and 99.997% of the time dangerous goods make it to their destination. We want to strengthen railway safety and ensure that it continues in a positive way, and we want to make the system safer because we can always do better.

We should not be starting from the premise that the opposition is indicating, which is that this is unsafe, because it is not unsafe. I will come back and quote what his own members have said about the safety of this railway system, and it is completely irresponsible to say it is unsafe.

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

In fact, Mr. Chair, we have already established that accidents are increasing, so whether it is safe or not is moot, because 99.997% of 100,000 rail cars is still three rail cars exploding in somebody's backyard, and it is not something we wish to have happen.

The government has not ordered railways to actually reroute trains with dangerous goods outside of urban areas, and members of the public believe that should be done.

The railroads are also being asked by the government to conduct their own risk analysis of whether or not it is safe to transport such tremendous volumes of dangerous goods, particularly crude oil, through dense urban areas. Those volumes have increased by 400% in just three years.

In conducting the risk analysis for the regulatory changes, how much is a human life worth?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, with respect to the metrics the hon. member is attempting to lead me down, I can say that all of our efforts at Transport Canada with respect to the safety file are about ensuring that Canadians and communities are protected. In doing so, we are making sure that on the one hand we are not moving forward so quickly so that it cannot catch up, but on the other hand we are moving forward quickly enough so that we are protecting citizens.

A great example of that is taking the very principled and strong position that DOT-111 cars for ethanol and crude oil will be phased out over the next three years, something that is not happening in the United States.

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

Mr. Chair, in fact there have been more derailments of DOT-111s than just the one in Lac-Mégantic, and people in Canada are considerably worried about the volume of this stuff going through their communities.

Regarding fatigue management for railways, when will the process begin to work with companies and workers to create new safety management systems?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, with respect to safety management systems, they are already currently in place in four railways. These things are taken into consideration. That is something that the Teamsters or Unifor would be working on with their individual companies, depending upon which company it is.

The safety management system is not just one system. It is about taking a corporate culture and ensuring that we incorporate safety into every aspect of it. That is the route we have taken in Canada in safety management systems, because simply put, we have 46,000 kilometres of track in the country and we simply cannot have individual inspectors for every piece of track. That is why safety management systems are important, and they are clearly the more professional and the correct way to go.

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

Mr. Chair, how many rail safety incidents and accidents in Canada were found to be linked to fatigue? My question was about fatigue.

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

I understand your question was about fatigue and its role in safety management systems. I also indicated that it is a role that is taken very seriously by the Teamsters. I have met with the Teamsters on this issue of fatigue. I know they work with their companies on the matter as well.

With respect to the specific numbers of the Transportation Safety Board and how many are associated with fatigue, I would have to take a look at the full listing of them in order to give that specific information, but I am pretty sure you have an idea of what the number is and I am sure you will tell me it now.

[The Chair, NDP, Joe Comartin]

I would ask the minister to direct her comments toward the Chair, not toward the member asking the question.

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

Mr. Chair, is the minister concerned that workers with constantly changing schedules who work morning, afternoon, and night shifts on a five-day cycle may not have an opportunity for proper rest?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, as the former minister of labour and current Minister of Transport, I have had this discussion with the Teamsters.

I think it is a valid concern in fatigue management to ensure that science is utilized to make sure that we have appropriate systems in place and, as always, I encourage the Teamsters to work with their management to ensure that they are doing all that they can.

For our part, in terms of Transport Canada, we already have regulations in place for hours of duty.

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

Mr. Chair, why did the minister use the budget implementation act to reduce requirements for Transport Canada to notify the public about changes to rail regulations?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, it was not specifically to do with rail regulations. That portion of the act is there predominantly to deal with motor vehicle regulation changes.

The reality is that in terms of the United States and harmonization, sometimes the U.S. can move forward quickly in regulations while we cannot move forward as quickly.

This is one of the acts in which it is mandatory to go to Canada Gazette part I. All we are saying in this case is that instead of mandatorily going to the Gazette part I, we would seek permission from the Treasury Board, after giving analysis and reasoning, not to go through that process and to proceed directly to the Gazette part II. There would still be oversight on that decision.

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

Through you, Mr. Chair, what was the cause of the derailment of the Burlington VIA Rail train?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, we thank the Transportation Safety Board for its report on the tragedy that happened in the riding that is actually adjacent to mine.

Excessive speed was the cause of the accident.

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

Mr. Chair, does the minister agree that a form of automatic braking or positive train control would improve safety for passenger rail lines?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, this is an issue that has come up in both the United States and in Canada. Indeed, it is an issue in the U.K. as well.

It is an expensive process to implement that across 46,000 kilometres of track. It is something that Transport Canada is considering, and we continue to work on the matter. We are aware of what the Transportation Safety Board has indicated, and we are still analyzing all the issues around this.

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

Mr. Chair, that comes back to the price of a life. It is an expensive process, but lives are lost.

How many missed signals are there each year? How many would be avoided by a positive train control?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, I appreciate the question. I do not have that information.

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary for Infrastructure and Communities]

Mr. Chair, let me begin by saying how much I appreciate the opportunity not only to participate in this debate this evening, but how much we all appreciate the opportunity to celebrate the minister's birthday with her this evening.

This evening I would like to speak about Canadian ports, specifically the Port Metro Vancouver, and the benefits the port brings to the Canadian economy.

The 18 port authorities that comprise Canada's port system are central to Canada's economic activity. These port authorities handle a significant amount of Canadian trade, approximately 310 million tons of cargo valued at more than $162 billion annually. On the whole, Canadian port authorities contribute about $24.5 billion to the Canadian gross domestic product and provide almost 269,000 jobs for Canadians.

Port Metro Vancouver is the largest and most diversified port in Canada. It is also the fourth-largest tonnage port in North America. In short, the port is a major economic force that facilitates trade between Canada and more than 160 world economies, and handles 19% of Canada's total trade. The operation of Port Metro Vancouver is complex, and it is key to Canada's overall supply chain. The port's operations involve many different enterprises, including cargo terminals, cruise terminals, shipyards, railways, trucks, and shipping agents. In addition to facilitating trade, one of the most significant economic benefits the port provides is direct and indirect employment, not just for British Columbia but for other provinces as far away as our own home province of Ontario.

A recent study of the economic impact of Port Metro Vancouver showed that its ongoing operations support 38,200 direct jobs in British Columbia. The direct impact of this employment on British Columbia's economy is estimated at $3.5 billion in gross domestic product, $8.5 billion in economic output, and $2.3 billion in wages. The indirect impacts of the port's operations on businesses in British Columbia are even more impressive: 76,800 jobs; $6.7 billion in gross domestic product; $14.5 billion in economic output; and $4.6 billion in wages. These indirect impacts include tourism revenues related to cruise-ship passengers.

The majority of direct employment generated by the operations of Port Metro Vancouver is located within the Lower Mainland area. However, there are also close to 10,100 off-site jobs supported by the economic activity of Port Metro Vancouver. This off-site employment represents about 22% of total direct Port Metro Vancouver businesses' employment and reaches through western Canada and beyond. Outside of British Columbia, the largest direct employment impact is in Alberta, followed by Ontario. This includes supporting 2,700 direct jobs in Alberta and 1,600 direct jobs in Ontario. Members can see the vital role that Port Metro Vancouver plays in securing our country's long-term prosperity.

For those who do not know, Port Metro Vancouver operates across five business sectors: automobiles, breakbulk, bulk, containers, and cruise. Based on data from 2013, Port Metro Vancouver handled 135 million tons of cargo, a record for the port, with an overall increase of 9% over 2012. Import and export tonnage maintained balanced growth, each showing a 9% increase.

The port is leveraging the strong performance with significant capital investment intended to further increase its competitiveness. This investment will further contribute to the port's economic impact on the regional and national economies.

By 2022, Port Metro Vancouver has identified $1.4 billion in capital investment to further increase its performance. This additional economic activity is generated by expenditures associated with Port Metro Vancouver's current capital program and by the capital investments of Port Metro Vancouver's tenants. Together, in pursuing this capital investment plan, Port Metro Vancouver and Port Metro Vancouver tenants will create an estimated total of 2,800 direct person-years annually, with a potential total impact of 6,100 person-years of employment.

As others have noted in this place before, our government has worked to improve supply chain efficiency, reliability, and security so that Canada stays competitive in the continuously evolving world of global commerce. For example, we launched the Asia-Pacific gateway and corridor initiative and, to date, we have invested $1.4 billion in Asia-Pacific gateway projects in partnership with all four western provinces, municipalities, and the private sector. Many of these projects form a critical portion of a supply chain that also includes Port Metro Vancouver.

Furthermore, under the Prime Minister's leadership, our government is making unprecedented investments in infrastructure, solidifying a pivotal base in much of our transportation network through, of course, our new Building Canada plan. Key transportation assets, including port infrastructure, will be eligible for funding under the $4-billion national infrastructure component of the plan, which is earmarked for projects of national significance.

Given that efficient and reliable operations at Port Metro Vancouver are critical to Canada's Asia-Pacific gateway and the national economy, the Government of Canada recently took action to support the resumption of trucking operations at Port Metro Vancouver. The estimated economic losses to Canada during the recent work stoppage were estimated at $126,000 per day. We found this unacceptable and acted quickly to develop a joint action plan in conjunction with the Province of British Columbia and Port Metro Vancouver to bring stability to the container trucking industry. The plan contains 15 points for implementation and provides a framework for long-term stability in the container trucking industry. All parties are working together to implement the plan with input from key stakeholders.

Our government is committing to removing roadblocks to prosperity, which is why we acted quickly to bring stability to the industry, diminish wait times, and prevent disruptions in the future. For example, the Government of Canada brought in new regulations to increase the rates paid to truckers at Port Metro Vancouver.

As you know, Mr. Chair, our government's focus is to create jobs, growth, and long-term prosperity for all Canadians, but we cannot achieve these goals on our own. Port Metro Vancouver is Canada's largest and most diversified port, remains critical to our national transportation and trade system, and it could not be clearer that our government is committed to ensuring the reliability of Canada's Asia-Pacific gateway and the economic well-being of this great country.

As I conclude, I have an important question for the minister. Given the topic of much of my remarks, could the minister please update the House on our government's various actions with respect to the recent situation at Port Metro Vancouver?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, as the hon. member has indicated, Port Metro Vancouver is absolutely critical to Canada's Asia-Pacific gateway. We have invested heavily in the Asia-Pacific gateway and it has been a great success. As we open up more markets through our unprecedented free trade deals, as we continue to responsibly develop our vast resources, we need to have a way to move these resources to that market and the Asia-Pacific gateway has been a stellar success.

Port Metro Vancouver is an important part of it. The port handled $172 billion worth of cargo in 2013, a total number of jobs 100,000, with 38 million metric tonnes of coal or 40% of the total black cargo in 2013. These are all important things.

The specific question with respect to the trucks and the containers is one that is of great importance to us. It all commenced in February of this year with a protest that started on port property. We acted very quickly. We appointed Vince Ready to ensure that an independent review that was directed at resolving the concerns of truckers and stakeholders was undertaken.

We joined with the Province of British Columbia and Port Metro Vancouver soon after that to announce our action plan. An agreement on that action plan was reached between the governments of Canada and B.C., Port Metro Vancouver, and members of the United Truckers Association and Unifor in order to end that work disruption at Port Metro Vancouver in order to get to full operation. The port is at full operation.

Almost immediately the steering committee started meeting in order to ensure that the joint action plan was carried out. Meetings have been continuing on a weekly basis ever since. The obligations the federal government said it would undertake in this joint action plan have been carried out or are in the process of being carried out as we speak.

Most importantly, on May 2 of this year I announced with the Province of B.C. and Port Metro Vancouver joint funding for an expedited initiative to outfit the remainder of the container truck fleet approved to serve port terminals as part of Metro Vancouver's truck licensing system with GPS technology. This is the kind of implementation that is expedited and needed because it represents one point of the progress in the joint action plan.

We will continue to work. I will be meeting with Minister Stone on the topic. We have all hands on deck when it comes to ensuring that we have full service and full accessibility at Port Metro Vancouver. We will continue to be seized with the issue.

[Peter Braid, Conservative, Kitchener—Waterloo, ON]

Mr. Chair, I have an additional question for the minister.

We have spent a lot of time just in the last few moments talking about the importance of Port Metro Vancouver. Could the minister speak generally about the important role that all 18 ports and port authorities play in Canada's economic growth, job creation, and our long-term prosperity as a trading nation?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, an important decision was taken in terms of our transportation infrastructure and how we provide transportation in the country when we determined to go forward on a marketplace-based system. In doing so, a number of strong actions were taken. One of them was moving out of the Canadian ports corporation and into these free-standing, independent, self-financed, self-regulated port authorities, and it has been an incredible success when we look at what has been accomplished in moving to that model. We have seen an increase in productivity in the transportation sector of over 30%. Those are real and important gains to ensure efficiency in our transportation system that gives us that global competitive edge.

The ports are an integral part of our transportation sector, whether in St. John's, Newfoundland, Port Metro Vancouver, or Prince Rupert. They all listen to their local communities' needs and their wants in order to balance the economic and community benefits that they bring. Their focus, however, is on marine shipping and they continue to stay at the cutting edge of what is important.

Our world-class tanker safety system will work very well with what we are doing in ports. It is another step along the way to a modern marine system, one that is envied around the world.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Chair, I too would like to extend birthday wishes. It should have been happier circumstances. I too have spent birthdays in this place, so I wish the minister well after all of this is over.

I wish to advise that I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Acadie—Bathurst. I am hoping to take just seven and a half minutes of the 15 minutes, if you could let me know, Mr. Chair, when I am close to a minute left.

Given the potential magnitude of increased risk to human life and the environment from the massively expanded rail transport of petroleum products the government is allowing, why has the federal budget for rail safety remained stagnant?

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Halton, ON]

Mr. Chair, if we look over the past number of years what we will see is that there has been an increase in the spending on rail safety. Our government has put $100 million in since 2009, based upon an analysis and study that we undertook in 2007.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Chair, in fact it has been constant 2012 to 2015, so despite these incredibly awful incidents we have had, there has not been an increase in the allocation.

The recent thousandfold increase in shipping of oil by rail has become known as the pipeline on rails, yet no environmental assessments are required for this activity, unlike pipelines. The government has said it considers rail shipping of petroleum more risky than pipelines. Why does the minister not require open, public, environmental assessments of these activities?