Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 1-15 of 173
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Transport committee  According to the act, currently there is no notification required. The bill was proposing that the railway be required to provide notification, and that the notification stay up for 60 days. In all the consultations we had with shippers, that was the complaint we heard the most, that there wasn't any notification.

October 3rd, 2017Committee meeting

Helena Borges

Transport committee  We had originally included a year. This 180 days would be six months. I think that can be workable. Part of it is going to be making sure that we're very clear on the data required, and we'll do that through the regulations. It's making sure that it's very clear to the railways what the data is that they need to file, when they need to file, and how they need to file it.

October 3rd, 2017Committee meeting

Helena Borges

Transport committee  That would be pretty difficult. Two months is hard to get.... They have to go back and get data, because the requirement is also backdated. We're getting data from the previous year. With regard to getting all of that data organized—this is for the whole of their operations in Canada—for all of the commodity groups, two months would be very, very tight.

October 3rd, 2017Committee meeting

Helena Borges

Transport committee  It will be difficult, given the volume of data we're going to receive. If it's a very small volume, we may be able to do it within 30 to 60 days, but at present it will be very difficult. Therefore, we want the data to be ready for public disclosure as soon as possible. We will have to make changes to the computer systems, and that's what we're concerned about.

October 3rd, 2017Committee meeting

Helena Borges

Transport committee  The data provisions were set up so we make sure we have sufficient time for the railways to submit the information to us, and then after we get that information to make sure there is sufficient time in the case of the performance data for the agency to post that data. Also, as part of the coming into force, we're providing the railways with one year to submit that data, simply because this is new data that they haven't been submitting.

October 3rd, 2017Committee meeting

Helena Borges

Transport committee  Ms. Diogo, you may answer.

October 3rd, 2017Committee meeting

Helena Borges

Transport committee  That's exactly it, as well as how it will be protected. For example, how the data has to be stored, who can access the data in the company, how the data has to be signed, I'll say in and out, so to speak, when the data has to be deleted, all of that will be included in that.

October 3rd, 2017Committee meeting

Helena Borges

Transport committee  Totally. We deal with the unions, the railways, and other parties. We also deal, for example, with the commuter operators and the transit operators with VIA Rail as well, so there are various parties that we would be consulting with.

October 3rd, 2017Committee meeting

Helena Borges

Transport committee  Maybe I'll ask Brigitte, who's been dealing with this and with the privacy element of it, if she can elaborate on the privacy controls that will be put in place as part of the regulations.

October 3rd, 2017Committee meeting

Helena Borges

Transport committee  You're correct. In fact, I would point to page 43 in the bill, where it speaks about the information that can be accessed by the railway company. It's proposed subsection 17.91(2), which is in clause 62. It indicates that the information can only be randomly selected. That precludes the day-to-day watching of an employee for how they're performing, so that they can't do that.

October 3rd, 2017Committee meeting

Helena Borges

Transport committee  Yes, perhaps just to address the point of why we're making the LVVR data available to the company as well as Transport Canada, and not just to the safety board. Really, this comes from the recommendations the Transportation Safety Board made, those being that safety is paramount, and that in the rail system there are three parties that have a big role in safety.

October 3rd, 2017Committee meeting

Helena Borges

Transport committee  If there were to be a review, as I think Ms. Block said, every three years, that would be a pretty short time period, because by the time these amendments would take effect.... Some of them are taking effect six months or a year after the provisions are passed. Would that provide sufficient time for evidence to demonstrate the working of the act?

October 3rd, 2017Committee meeting

Helena Borges

Transport committee  Maybe in response to looking at specific provisions of the act, I believe section 49 of the act gives the minister the power to review anything, any issue, any specific part, any part that you want to look at. We've used that power in the past to review, for example, level of service.

October 3rd, 2017Committee meeting

Helena Borges

Transport committee  I haven't, but I understand that the amendment is for a review of the legislation. The minister can at any time review the legislation. In fact, I think the previous minister demonstrated, with the recent review by Mr. Emerson, that that was moved up in time. The provisions of the act were also reviewed in 2013 and 2014.

October 3rd, 2017Committee meeting

Helena Borges

Transport committee  This relates back to the provision on reciprocal penalties and balance. If the penalties are balanced, that's going to incent efficiency. If they are sided in one direction or the other, they are not going to incent efficiency in the way that a decision made on reciprocal penalties would.

October 3rd, 2017Committee meeting

Helena Borges