Hoang Mai

[Transportation, April 2nd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, there have been fatalities. Millions of cars have been recalled, and while the U.S. Congress has launched a full investigation, the minister is refusing to answer questions about a problem that has been going on for 13 years.

GM is required to report these problems to Transport Canada as soon as they are identified, so why have Canadians been kept in the dark about this defect for so long? Who is keeping Canadians safe?

[Transportation, April 2nd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, last June, a 23-year-old Quebecker from Granby was killed in an accident while driving his GM vehicle. GM had been aware of the problems related to its faulty ignition switch since 2001, but the Minister of Transport says she was not made aware of the defect until February. Canadians should have been informed much sooner.

Has the minister ordered GM to explain?

[Wearing Turbans on Soccer Fields, April 2nd, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I was honoured to give members of FC Brossard U15 AA and the Brossard soccer association certificates to congratulate them on their exceptional gesture.

In 2013, the Quebec soccer federation banned turbans for safety reasons. In a show of solidarity, and even though there were no Sikh players on the team, FC Brossard players decided to play a match wearing orange turbans.

Just a few days later, FIFA issued the following statement: “(FIFA) authorizes the [Canadian Soccer Association] to permit all players to wear head covers...in all areas and on all levels of the Canadian football community”.

I would like to thank Ihab Laheta, the coach, Bruno Scarsini, the assistant coach, Éric Giguère, the manager, the parents and all of the players for taking a stand against injustice.

You stood up for human rights. Thanks to you, our society is more just and tolerant. Thank you.

[Rail Transportation, April 1st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the budget implementation bill also deals with railway safety.

The Conservatives have given themselves the power to amend safety rules without notifying the public. The three months' notice will now go down to one month. That is not nearly enough. Experts will no longer have enough time to provide their opinion. We need stricter railway safety rules, not looser ones.

Will the Minister of Transport ask that those dangerous provisions be removed from the omnibus bill?

[Infrastructure, March 31st, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives once again tried to pull a fast one with Friday's budget bill.

They put the replacement of the Champlain Bridge in the bill and precluded any kind of consultation on their toll system. It is obvious that the Conservatives are afraid to meet with the people of the south shore.

Why did the minister put in place a system that allows the Conservatives to impose a toll without any consultation?

[Offshore Health and Safety Act, March 27th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Gatineau for her question and for all the work she has done. I have worked with her, and it is quite amazing.

Her question is accurate and relevant. I can say that we have suggested that the situation be reviewed in a few years.

My colleague from Nickel Belt sits on the committee. He explained that the members of the Conservative Party who sit on the committee were not even interested in discussing the issue. As I understand it, it is not really very interesting to them. It comes back to what I was saying in my statement: every time the opposition wants to make an amendment, the Conservative government is not interested, even though the amendment is supported by experts who say that it would be an improvement. I have seen this clearly because I have sat on a number of committees. I think this is pure partisan politics, simply because if an amendment comes from the opposition the Conservatives think it is a bad idea. This is unfortunately an old, worn-out government. I think we are going to replace it in 2015.

[Offshore Health and Safety Act, March 27th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for his question. I think it is interesting that he is asking me this question, even though the Liberal government of the day did not do anything. Now it is the opposition that is being blamed. When blame falls on the Conservative government, the Conservatives blame the Liberals, and the Liberals are now blaming us as the opposition party. This is interesting.

I am going to answer this question, which is not entirely related to the issue before us today—but I appreciate it anyway. The Minister of Transport says that 10 years is too long. The idea of 10 years came from the United States, who said they were going to try to replace the cars in 10 years. CN told us yesterday said it was going to replace the old DOT-111 cars within four years. Irving Oil told us they would do it within a year. Today we heard in committee from a manufacturer of DOT-111 cars who thought that the number of cars that needed to be replaced was around 80,000.

Unlike the Minister of Transport, I do not have any information about the discussions the government has with all the parties involved. However, what I am asking is that the minister give us some kind of timeframe, in light of all the information and authority she has. In fact, despite having held discussions, having commissioned a report on the DOT-111 railway cars and having received TSB recommendations, we still do not have a timeframe. It is necessary to take action. The time has come to put a figure to the timeframe.

[Offshore Health and Safety Act, March 27th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to give my opinion on Bill C-5, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland Atlantic Accord Implementation Act, the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and other Acts and to provide for certain other measures. The title is a bit long, but the purpose of this bill is to correct certain long-standing deficiencies in order to protect offshore workers who work specifically in the oil and gas field. This is a matter of health and safety.

The reason why I say this matter has dragged on and that these are long-standing deficiencies is that we have known about these problems for more than 12 years. They came to light more particularly following an accident. I lament the fact that this has taken so long. Why did the governments of the time, both Liberal and Conservative, wait so long to take action to protect the health and safety of workers? That is the least we can do.

On the other hand, I do want to acknowledge that this is indeed a step in the right direction, since such recognition is deserved.

This issue is of course somewhat complex in that there had to be a lot of co-operation between the federal and provincial governments. Once again, I admit, the government has managed to speak and work with the provinces. I will come back to what could have been done better later, but I want to say that this is a step in the right direction. Unfortunately, that is not the case often enough.

As an aside, in the case of the Champlain Bridge, a matter that concerns me directly, the government clearly does not want to co-operate with the provincial government or the municipalities. It has decided that if there are no tolls, there will be no bridge. However, when we talk to the provincial government and a number of municipalities, we see that they are opposed to the government’s plan. The NDP is also opposed to the government’s plan to charge a toll to replace the Champlain Bridge. Now I will get back to the subject at hand. I wanted to point out that sometimes the government can work with the provinces. It has managed to do so on this bill, and I do not understand why it does not do so all the time, why it insists on working behind closed doors and not co-operating to advance matters for the public good. In this case, this is a step in the right direction.

However, as my colleagues mentioned in committee, the NDP wanted to move amendments. One of the main points pertains to recommendation 29 of the Wells report. In fact, an inquiry was conducted following a rather tragic accident that caused a number of deaths off the coast of St. John’s. The report of the investigator, Mr. Wells, contains recommendations, one of the main ones being that an independent organization be made responsible for conducting follow-up. I am going to quote the report for greater clarity: “I believe that the recommendation which follows this explanatory note will be the most important in this entire Report.” Recommendation 29 calls for a new, independent and stand-alone organization to be established to regulate safety in the offshore. That recommendation is very important and was made following the inquiry. It really stated how important it was to establish such an organization.

The idea of creating a safety regulator is not a new one. We did not come up with it. We see it elsewhere. By comparison, for example, such independent, stand-alone organizations have already been established in Norway, the United Kingdom and Australia. Even the United States has a virtual equivalent called the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement.

A solution was recommended following a very important inquiry. We do not understand why the government refuses to go that route, why it is rejecting an amendment that might have been positive and practical and might have helped to improve health and safety.

The government often says that it will conduct studies and consider recommendations. However, it has been doing nothing for at least 20 years, even though the Transportation Safety Board says that DOT-111 tanker cars are unsafe and even dangerous. A Liberal government was in power 20 years ago. Today, we have the Conservative government and it is still doing nothing. It has no timeline to replace the old DOT-111 cars. That is what troubles me.

Bill C-5 comes in the wake of the helicopter crash in St. John’s, and the Transportation Safety Board’s recommendations were made in response to the Lac-Mégantic tragedy, which caused 47 deaths. The Transportation Safety Board recently released a report stating that the problem with the DOT-111 tanker cars was linked to that tragedy. Despite that fact, the government is taking no action.

There is still a parallel with this case. It has taken 12 years to act. In the case of the DOT-111 tanker cars, it has been 20 years and the government still has not done anything.

Yesterday I asked the minister when he would have a timeline, and I got no answer. In fact, I got a vague, meaningless answer. There is still no timeline even though we know it can be done in a few years. However, the government has to be willing to take action. It has to show that this is what it wants. That takes a little trust and political leadership on the government’s part. That would be very much appreciated on this side of the House.

Bill C-5 is a step in the right direction. That is why we are supporting it at this stage. However, having been a member of several committees, I regret the fact that the government, which also has a majority in committee, rejects virtually all amendments whether they are moved by the official opposition or by the third party. It does not listen to the other parties.

That is unfortunate because the current situation is very real. The official opposition did not create it. This comes from an inquiry report. Experts have studied the problem. I am not an expert, but I trust the opinion of the people who went into the field and examined the situation. Those people made a recommendation to us, saying, moreover, that it was definitely the most important one, but the government set it aside. Why? That is hard to understand on this side of the House.

We want to establish an independent, stand-alone agency because we want to improve safety regulations. That is very important. I apologize for constantly drawing a parallel with Transport Canada because this relates directly to the file I am working on, but it reveals the same attitude on the government’s part. It receives recommendations, but it does nothing.

Once again, in committee today, we heard from experts who told us about the problems. Unfortunately, I can anticipate the government’s attitude. It will say that it has heard some good recommendations but that it is going to shelve them and do what it wants.

With regard to the railway safety example, I find that situation unacceptable. The Transportation Safety Board made three recommendations in its report on the Lac-Mégantic tragedy, which caused 47 deaths. That report is not yet complete because the investigation is still under way. Unfortunately, the government is doing nothing to move this matter forward. That is deplorable because we are talking about saving lives, about helping people by improving health and safety. The government has turned a deaf ear despite the experts’ recommendations.

I am going to conclude by congratulating the government for doing something quite positive after procrastinating for 12 years. There has been some co-operation with the provincial government. However, the government can and should do better.

[Offshore Health and Safety Act, March 27th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague on her excellent speech about a danger that she clearly takes personally. It is important to talk about this issue.

Why does she think it took 12 years to introduce this bill? Since this all started 12 years ago, the Liberal government of the day is just as responsible for it as today's Conservative government.

Can my colleague tell us why it took so long, considering that it involves important worker health and safety rights?

[Rail Transportation, March 26th, 2014]

Mr. Speaker, again we hear empty words. All we are asking is to make our communities safer. That is all we ask.

We have known for 20 years that DOT-111s are ticking time bombs. Since the government has no timeline, could the minister tell us when will DOT-111s stop going through populated areas?