Debates of June 7th, 2016

Health

[Bill Blair, Liberal, Scarborough Southwest, ON]

Madam Speaker, with respect to La Loche, I want to assure her that this government recognizes the urgency of the issue in that community and in many indigenous communities across the country. We are committed to continuing to coordinate our actions with other federal departments, provincial ministries, and key first nations partners. The framework for the Inuit people, for example, is very much under discussion, but we recognize its urgency and we have made a commitment to deliver on that framework in this fiscal year.

We are working with our first nations partners, including the Meadow Lake Tribal Council and the Clearwater River Dene Nation. In particular, government officials are working with those organizations to provide search capacity as well as looking at the long-term mental health needs of that community.

Long-term recovery response planning discussions have begun in the community with its leadership to develop a response plan and to link appropriate services. We are all mindful of the urgency and the need within that community, and we will work diligently together to address those concerns.

Railway Transportation

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, it is my honour today to rise in adjournment proceedings to pursue a question I asked in question period on March 9. It pertained to a new report. It was commissioned under the previous government, chaired by former cabinet minister David Emerson, and it focused on Canada's transportation system.

There is much that is good in this report, and there is much that is food for thought. However, in the absence of any national transportation policy or strategy, I found much of what was in this report quite alarming, particularly as it related to VIA Rail. What I asked the hon. Minister of Transport was whether the minister could confirm that the government would protect VIA Rail and restore and invest in our trans-Canada rail service. The response of the Minister of Transport was that other levels of government and stakeholders would have an opportunity to review this report and share their perspectives before the government addressed specific recommendations.

Let me just turn to the specific recommendations relating to VIA Rail, which are on page 182 of “Pathways: Connecting Canada’s Transportation System to the World”, a report, as I mentioned, by a commission on transportation established under the previous government and chaired by the Hon. David Emerson.

The report's recommendations are not entirely bad in relation to VIA Rail. Very significantly, the commission recommended that there be a legislative framework for our passenger rail service. That is in contrast to Amtrak in the United States, where there is a statute, a legislative framework, that says the purpose of Amtrak is to move people around and to provide efficient passenger rail service.

VIA Rail has been given a very disadvantageous position, created when CN and CP were rolled out and parts were privatized. VIA Rail was left without a legislative framework and without access to dedicated rail. A lot of Canadians will not know this, but passenger rail service depends on freight giving passengers the right of way because freight owns the rail lines, therefore it owns the traffic lights. That is why those members who have ever gone on VIA Rail might ask why they spent half an hour on the siding for a train that was coming so much later. Freight in Canada and the number of freight rail cars in a single train have become so long that the trains do not fit on any siding. However, passenger rail fits on sidings. Therefore, passenger rail gets shoved to the side so freight can go by.

I like the fact that this report says that there will be “...a legislative framework that articulates government policy on passenger rail,...”. What worries me, deeply, is this recommendation that the government should “[consider] the elimination of subsidies for the Toronto–Vancouver service...”. Note that word subsidies. We never hear any level of government talking about subsidies to our highways. We subsidize our highways for sure. Large trucking companies get a great subsidy because the people of Canada keep repairing the roads that their heavy vehicles wreck. They are subsidized. However, when we talk about highways, politicians always say that we invest.

We need to invest in VIA Rail. I am a frequent user. Believe it or not, at least once a year I go from Toronto to Vancouver. I would like to do it more often if it were faster. However, it is not just tourists on that run. There are families, and it is their main way of getting from Edmonton to Saskatoon, for example. That is a route where they can travel with their children for free. If they are reliant on air traffic, the whole family has to pay per ticket. VIA Rail offers something that flights do not and that privatized rail never will. We must protect it.

[Kate Young, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to have this chance to highlight our government's recognition of the important role intercity passenger rail plays in supporting Canada's overall economic prosperity and in the well-being of individuals.

Historically, intercity passenger rail networks have played an important role in linking communities in our country from coast to coast to coast. Today, Canadians continue to benefit from safe, efficient, and reliable passenger rail service for travelling between communities, whether for work, vacation, or visiting family.

VIA Rail carried more than 3.8 million passengers to various destinations throughout the country in 2015. While a majority of these passengers travelled between Canada's most populous cities in Ontario and Quebec, approximately 90,000 passengers travelled on VIA Rail's western Canada long-haul, the Canadian, which operates between Toronto and Vancouver.

Given the importance of passenger rail services, I am pleased that it has featured prominently in the final report of the Canada Transportation Act review, the Emerson report. Specifically, the review was mandated to consider how federally regulated passenger rail services can be delivered to meet travellers' needs while minimizing costs to the public purse.

As members know, our government tabled the review's final report on February 25. The final report provides important findings on a range of issues pertaining to Canada's transportation system, including intercity passenger rail services. Our government is carefully considering the report's findings and any actions required to further strengthen Canada's transportation system.

As well, we are looking forward to engaging further with Canadians on the report and its findings. On April 27, the Minister of Transport launched an engagement process with Canadians, stakeholders, and provinces and territories, to take place over the course of spring and summer 2016, in order to hear views and discuss ideas that will inform the development of a long-term agenda for transportation in Canada.

There is a range of recommendations relating to passenger rail services presented in the review's final report. At the same time, there are also important considerations relating to various options for the future of passenger rail in Canada. For example, VIA is putting forward a case for revitalizing services in the busy Quebec City–Windsor corridor.

On February 22, the government released budget 2016, which includes $3.3 million to support an in-depth assessment of VIA Rail's high-frequency rail proposal. In this context, the government will want to take the time necessary to determine the best approach to providing safe, efficient, and reliable passenger services in Canada that meet the current and future needs of Canadians.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, what a joy to participate in the debate in adjournment proceedings where the comments from a parliamentary secretary are relevant to the topic at hand and are actually responsive to my concerns. That is new in the 42nd Parliament, and I want to thank the parliamentary secretary. However, I would love to find out how we can do more.

I am very concerned that VIA Rail needs to have the full board of directors fully appointed. There are vacancies on the board of VIA Rail. There are qualified Canadians who care about passenger rail service who should fill those vacancies. As a result of Sir John A. Macdonald's national dream, we have a rail service from coast to coast. However, it should not resemble an antique or historical artifact. We need to modernize. We need to make sure we offer people an option that gets them off planes and out of their cars and enjoying Canada from tracks that are modern and efficient. This is a tall order, given the neglect of our rail service for so long. I welcome the interest of the current government.

[Kate Young, Liberal, London West, ON]

Madam Speaker, across Canada, passenger rail services link Canadians with other communities, allowing them to visit family and friends, pursue professional opportunities, and enjoy a range of cultural and tourist activities across the country.

Our government recognizes the importance of VIA Rail. We will want to take a carefully considered approach to ensuring that passenger rail services meet the needs of Canadians today and 30 years into the future. The government's decisions will be informed by the findings presented in the final report of the Canada Transportation Act review, which includes several recommendations that relate specifically to passenger rail services in Canada. Our government looks forward to considering the report, its findings, and possible actions to enhance Canada's transportation system. To that end, we are in the process of developing a forward-looking agenda for Canada's transportation system, including passenger rail services.

Transport

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Madam Speaker, I am here to hold the Liberal government accountable to one of the major promises that it made to Canadians during the election campaign. The Liberals promised to make environmental assessments credible again. In their platform they stated, “We will immediately review Canada's environmental assessment processes and introduce new, fair processes that will restore robust oversight and thorough environmental assessments.”

Seven months after the election we are still operating under the old Conservative environmental regime. Major projects such as Kinder Morgan are approved with the Conservatives' environmental processes. For the port, there is no difference.

Under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act of 2012, in conjunction with the powers and authorities granted to the Canada Port Authorities, Port Metro Vancouver can assess and approve its own projects. Surely this is not what the Liberal government envisions as robust oversight and a thorough environmental assessment process.

For the residents of East Vancouver, we are alarmed by Port Metro Vancouver's proposal to infill seven acres of the waterfront at CRAB Park. The Vancouver East community has fought long and hard for the establishment of the community's only public waterfront green space, CRAB Park beach, in 1987. This fight included staging a 75-day occupation of crown land in 1984 by the founder of CRAB Park for Life Society, Mr. Don Larson.

CRAB Park today is also a sacred place as it is home to the missing and murdered women and girls monument.

When community members began to learn about Port Metro Vancouver's proposed Centerm expansion project, many of the local residents shared their concerns with me. They feel that this major expansion poses a real threat to CRAB Park. They have also indicated their concerns that this expansion poses significant environmental risks to the area. In addition, they have raised the issue around increased levels of traffic on both land and sea along with concerns regarding the potential need to construct a fifth rail track.

With the proposed expansion, these are some of the questions we have for the minister and for the port: What is the size of the container ships currently, and will that change with the expansion? Where will the container ships waiting to load or unload be docked? Will the amount of hazardous materials entering and exiting the port area increase, should the expansion move forward? If yes, what hazardous materials and how much will be increasing in volume and frequency?

What is the projection in the increased traffic, both by sea and by land, in the area of expansion? What plans have been made or will be made regarding the expected increases to shipping, rail, and road traffic in the area?

As a result of concerns stemming from the March 2015 chemical fire at the port, what changes, if any, have been made with respect to the safety and emergency preparedness plans of the port? What additional measures will be taken to ensure that if approved, the safety and emergency plans of the port will be adequate for a larger port with increased traffic?

What plans are there for cleanup in case of spills and accidents in a crowded harbour, and how will traffic be coordinated? What measures will the port implement to mitigate the effects of expansion on climate action?

In addition, my constituents would like to know, what are the plans of the port to consider the input of community groups in the application process? How will impartiality be maintained? How will the issue of conflict, perceived or otherwise, with the port being both the proponent and regulator of the project, be addressed?

Aside from the Centerm proposal, we have also heard from a wide array of people who are concerned that successive governments have significantly increased the autonomy and authority of the Canada Port Authorities.

I have more to say about this with respect to the issue of accountability.

[Kate Young, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport]

Madam Speaker, Canada port authorities were established in 1998 by means of the Canada Marine Act. They are shared governance organizations designed to be commercially competitive. In fact, under the legislation that established Canada port authorities, the Canada Marine Act port activities have to be self-sufficient. Eighteen Canada port authorities exist today, established as such because they are deemed to be of national significance to Canada's economy.

It goes without saying that they are critical drivers of local economies and also are a wealth of well-paying jobs for residents. Approximately 35,000 people are employed at the Port of Vancouver.

We depend upon these ports for a large portion of Canada's trade with the world. In fact, according to the Association of Canadian Port Authorities, 310 million tonnes of goods went through this country's port authorities in 2015. They connect Canada to world markets.

The Canada port authorities fall within the portfolio of the Minister of Transport. However, under the current legislation and regulations that Canada port authorities must follow, it is the board of directors that is responsible for the day-to-day management activities of a port.

This governance system also requires Canada port authorities to hold public annual general meetings, make public their annual reports, and post quarterly financial statements. This system also prevents governments from interfering in and politicizing the operations of these entities.

The Port of Vancouver is Canada's largest port and is a key economic enabler. It is a gateway to Asia-Pacific markets and is our largest Canada port authority. The Port of Vancouver handles 26% of all maritime tonnage in Canada, including close to 54% of all marine container traffic.

Our system of port authorities has served our country well for nearly 20 years. The government is looking at ways to ensure that it will continue to serve the economy, the environment, and the country for the next 20 or 30 years.

The government is looking at how Canada port authorities balance their need to remain competitive in global markets with being responsive to local communities and protecting the environment.

I appreciate the member for Vancouver East's concerns about the activities of Canada's largest port and can assure her that the port is strongly encouraged to work with local communities. In fact, the port has a strong track record with respect to building habitat restoration areas and protecting the environment while responding to growing trade demands.

The port authority's habitat enhancement program was intended to create, restore, and enhance habitats that would benefit the region's fish and wildlife. There are currently five ongoing habitat enhancement projects proposed by the port authority, including the Point Grey tidal marsh project and the New Brighton Park shoreline habitat restoration project in Vancouver.

These are the kinds of activities that are central to the port's ability to both meet its mandate as a key economic and trade enabler for Canada and ensure that it protects the environment and meets local needs.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Madam Speaker, previous governments gave the ports sweeping powers, including the right to override land use decisions and the right to assess and approve their own projects. It is the opinion of many that we need to change the environmental assessment process to make it completely independent, transparent, inclusive, and consultative.

As well, we feel that the port needs to make consultation more meaningful in affected communities. The port's current process only affects a project in isolation and does not consider the cumulative impact of the many heavy industrial projects under review.

Many also believe that the federal government should put in place a completely independent, science-based, overriding assessment process to review the cumulative impacts, as these projects need to be dealt with on a collective basis. These views are shared by many, and we want public accountability for Port Metro Vancouver.

I am calling on the government to act. The government has the ability to do that, to take those authorities and put them back in the place--

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport.

[Kate Young, Liberal, London West, ON]

Madam Speaker, I can appreciate the member for Vancouver East's concerns about accountability and can assure her that Canada port authorities are encouraged to hold themselves to high standards of transparency and accountability.

It is my understanding that the proposed Centerm expansion project is currently in the preliminary design phase. As a federal authority under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, the Port of Vancouver is required by law to conduct an environmental review of any proposed project on federal lands to determine if potential adverse environmental effects would exist.

Notwithstanding that, we encourage the Port of Vancouver and local communities to continue to work together to find long-term solutions that address the needs of the port as well as those of local communities.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 2 p.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 7:13 p.m.)