44th Parl. 1st Sess.
June 8, 2023 10:00AM
- Jun/8/23 8:59:31 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as my colleague from Joliette pointed out in his speech earlier, the Mégantic tragedy happened in part because there was only one train conductor.
I am sure the committee will do that work. It will have to hear from workers' representatives too. That awareness is important. I quite agree with my colleague.
56 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 9:00:03 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my intrepid colleague for yet another excellent speech.
I would like to hear more from him about the importance of logistics and access to railcars for the forestry sector. He talked about Chantiers Chibougamau, for example, which is doing excellent work. Of course, our thoughts are with them.
When railcars are not available and they have to get materials out—by truck, I suppose—is there not a better, cheaper way to do it that is also better for the environment?
87 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 9:00:39 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, that is such a relevant question.
Indeed, if members can recall, there was the announcement in Montreal concerning work to be done in the tunnel. We expected there would be massive congestion in the years to come. It is in this context that the people from Chantiers Chibougamau informed me that since they would not have access to those railcars, they would add between 35 and 60 trucks per day to Montreal's highway system.
Besides the fairly large logistical problem for these businesses, there is also the environmental cost to pay for putting more trucks on the road because of failed logistics. There is a fairly large economic cost for Quebec's businesses.
From what I have heard, this problem would be unique to Quebec because in Ontario a railcar shortage would not be felt in the same way.
142 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 9:01:47 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I first want to begin by asking for unanimous consent to split my time.
16 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 9:02:02 p.m.
- Watch
I have received notice from all recognized parties that they are in agreement with this request.
The hon. member for Churchill—Keewatinook Aski.
24 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with my colleague, the member for Timmins—James Bay.
I rise in the House to share the NDP's support at this time for this bill at second reading, with the clear understanding that there are some major shortcomings with Bill C-33 and that there have to be substantive amendments made going forward.
One of the key concerns that we have had is that the Liberal government's approach to Canada's supply chain issues is heavily driven by commercial interests, the commercial interests of big corporations that dominate the marine and rail transportation sectors. This, of course, has been the history of Canada in many ways, particularly when it comes to our railways.
We have seen the way in which profit has been put ahead of the lives of workers, of people and of communities, time and time again. Canada has a dark history when it comes to the development of the railways: the occupation of indigenous lands; the forcible removal of indigenous communities; the exploitation, early on, of Chinese workers and the many workers who lost their lives in very dangerous conditions to build the railways; the ongoing exploitation of workers over decades; and the bitter labour disputes, where workers working on the railways were doing nothing more than fighting for health and safety, safe conditions and the ability to keep our country moving.
We know that in Canada, over the past 20 years, 60 railway workers have lost their lives on the job. Due to archaic rules and regulations, and a lack of clarity on jurisdiction, there has been no criminal investigation into their deaths. Their deaths were investigated by private, corporate police and corporate risk management bodies. Justice has never been served.
I want to reflect on a few of those tragedies that have touched many of us through this work, and me personally. First of all, as other colleagues have said, is the Lac-Mégantic rail disaster that occurred on July 6, 2013, where 47 people died. It was the deadliest rail accident since Canada's Confederation in 1867, a rail disaster that was entirely preventable but rooted in the push to move product, and in that case crude oil, in very dangerous conditions. Forty-seven people died. A community has been forever changed as well as our country in many ways.
Here in northern Manitoba, Kevin Anderson, who was 38 years old, died after he and a coworker were trapped for several hours following a train derailment in September 2018, just an hour away from my hometown of Thompson.
Kevin Anderson's family, from The Pas, Manitoba, has, for years now, fought for justice for their son. They fought for an inquest, an inquest that finally began some months ago. Unfortunately, just a few weeks into its beginning, it was already ruled that the scope of the proceedings had to change, and there would be no discussion of the preventability of this train conductor's death, of Kevin's death, as part of this inquest.
One of the most impactful cases that I have worked on as a member of Parliament was working with the families of Andrew Dockrell, Dylan Paradis and Daniel Waldenberger-Bulmer, three workers who were killed in the train derailment by Field, B.C., in 2019. These three workers worked for CP Rail, and their deaths, the tragedy and the injustice dealt to them and their families was documented in The Fifth Estate's work, “Runaway Train: Investigating a CP Rail Crash”.
In their case, the CP private police investigated and, not surprisingly, found that the company was not at fault. Fortunately, as a result of their steadfast advocacy, these families were able to get an investigation into their loved ones' deaths. We all hope that they will receive justice.
The reality is that as members of Parliament, we have the responsibility to stand up for the well-being of Canadians. We have the responsibility to stand up for the well-being of Canadian workers. In this case, we have seen the Liberal government and previous Conservative governments, when it comes to railway safety and regulating the railways, use kid gloves, if at all, and have always done it ensuring their profitability.
Bill C-33 was an opportunity to change that. The reality is that while there is some good in it, there is much more that needs to be done. There are significant shortcomings in this legislation. While the act would create, for example, indigenous engagement committees for port authorities, there is no mention of creating these committees or otherwise engaging indigenous communities when it comes to rail transport.
Another shortcoming is about the standing committee on transport's report on rail safety. It recommended the removal of the jurisdiction of private railway police in investigations involving their companies. It is our view, as the NDP, that private railway police should be dissolved entirely due to the lack of public accountability. This bill not only does not take up the recommendations made by committee, but in fact would strengthen the authority of private railway police. Proposed section 26.4 of the bill explicitly prohibits unruly behaviour at stations or on board railway equipment, which would be handled by these private corporate police services.
We have also been clear that the bill lacks legislative guidance on the required content of emergency response assistance plans for emergencies involving dangerous goods. Current emergency response assistance plans rely on municipal fire departments and have no requirement for maximum response times. This was an issue that came up in the Ponton tragedy that killed Kevin Anderson.
The standing committee on transport recommended, in its report on railway safety, that “Transport Canada mandate maximum response times as part of rail companies' Emergency Response Assistance Plans for the transportation of dangerous goods” and that “Transport Canada work to finalize timely approval to emergency response assistance plans for the transportation of dangerous goods.” These recommendations are not reflected in Bill C-33.
Another shortcoming is the lack of public regional risk assessments associated with increases in rail transport of dangerous goods, a key issue in the Lac-Mégantic disaster. The standing committee on transport recommended, in its railway safety report, that “Transport Canada undertake public regional risk assessments to assess the impact of increased rail activity on communities, First Nations and the environment in regions that have seen significant increase in the transportation of dangerous goods.” The amendments to the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act do not act on this recommendation.
Another shortcoming is about the safety of workers. This has not been properly accounted for in this bill. In fact, the safety of workers is not explicitly mentioned at all. The national supply chain task force's 2022 report included six recommendations to address the worker shortage in our supply chains. Not a single recommendation was implemented. Also, the standing committee on transport's rail safety report included four recommendations to address fatigue management for rail workers. None of these have been implemented.
In conclusion, Bill C-33 ought to be an opportunity to change our Railway Safety Act and our port authorities act in order to make sure these important sectors of our economy and these workplaces respect workers and make a difference in a positive sense for communities. Unfortunately, when it comes to the railway industry that has not been the case.
Tonight, as we discuss this bill, I think of the families that are still grieving for those they lost on the job working the railways. I am thankful for their advocacy and their strength in pushing for justice and pushing all of us to do better. I hope the Liberal government will work with the NDP and other parties to make the necessary changes to Bill C-33 to ensure it is the strongest possible legislation and to make a difference for Canadian workers and Canadian communities going forward.
1339 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 9:11:58 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as I am sure the member can recall, it was not that long ago, just a few weeks back, that Winnipeg had a derailment of 12 cars, which ultimately shut down McPhillips Street. McPhillips goes right through the heart of Winnipeg North, so we have very recent first-hand experience of the impact this has on a community, with community members feeling concerned about their safety. Not knowing what was in the derailed cars initially caused a great deal of concern. There was even an economic impact on some of the small businesses.
I am wondering if she can provide her thoughts on the importance of getting this type of legislation through, because it will have a positive impact.
121 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 9:13:01 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the member raising the derailment that took place in Winnipeg not long ago. It was obviously big news here in our province, and it speaks to the domino effect of these kinds of incidents.
Obviously we are very thankful and fortunate that what was being transported was not dangerous goods and that there were adequate services to respond to the situation. Nonetheless, people were impacted negatively as a result. It is a clear reminder of the work we need to do to make sure that the legislation in front of us is made stronger than what it is at this time.
I will acknowledge that while a derailment in Winnipeg is very serious and big news, the reality is that derailments happen all the time and have been happening much more frequently, particularly in rural and northern Canada. The results have been much worse. The sense of urgency that needs to follow our work here is something we cannot ignore—
165 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 9:14:17 p.m.
- Watch
I have to take another question.
The hon. member for Brandon—Souris.
13 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 9:14:21 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, my colleague mentioned a number of the derailments we have had in Canada. She referred to Lac-Mégantic.
I know she comes from the riding that has Churchill. From my farm leadership days and provincial legislature days, I understand there were a number of derailments there, with grain mainly, which is fortunate, I guess we could say, as it is not explosive. There have been some derailments in what used to be the Hudson Bay route, the route to Churchill that runs right through her riding.
I know a number of things have been done. As a farm leader, I have watched a number of developments in the industry with regard to low-slung cars and aluminum cars to make the cars lighter. It is not so they can haul more, but so they can travel through the tenuous conditions in some of the more muskeggy areas of that particular track at slow speeds. She has referred to a number of areas with worker labour issues as well, and I appreciate that.
I wonder if she can expand on what she thinks are the most important things needed to secure the line that runs through her constituency to Churchill.
203 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 9:15:50 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would need a whole other speech to talk about what the Port of Churchill needs to survive and thrive.
I am proud to have been an advocate in support of Churchill getting rid of the American billionaire railway company that took over the rail line when the Liberals privatized it and ran it into the ground. Churchill paid the price. The communities on the Bay line paid the price. Thankfully, we were able to get them out of there.
We now have a very innovative and unique ownership model for the port. However, the reality is that we need sustained federal investment to make sure that Churchill survives and thrives. It is a gem when it comes to Canada. We talk about being a proud northern Arctic nation, and Churchill has the only deepwater Arctic seaport. We need to see sustained investment from the Liberal government and future federal governments.
153 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am certainly pleased to speak to Bill C-33. As I speak here from northern Ontario, where we have one of the most beautiful sunsets, there is a very disturbing sunset, a surreal and unreal sunset, because we are watching our lands up here burn.
I mention that because I live right beside the railway tracks of the Ontario Northland Railway, at mileage 104 of the rail line. In the middle of the night and sometimes in the morning, the house shakes as the railcars go by. They are carrying sulfuric acid tanker cars from the smelter at Noranda.
The issue of rail safety is fundamental to the communities I represent. If one of those trains goes over, we are talking about an ecological disaster. We are talking about a disaster that could take the lives of many people.
The issue of rail safety is something that I have heard debated time and time again. I remember as a young MP, when I was first elected, Bill Blaikie standing in the House and warning the Liberal government at that time that if it allowed rail companies like CP and CN to self-police for safety, it would cost lives. We have lost over 60 workers in 20 years on the rail lines.
Forty-seven people were incinerated in Lac-Mégantic in one of the most horrific tragedies in memory. We would think that would make for a serious overhaul of the transportation system in the country. When I look at Bill C-33, I say, okay, we are ready to take it to committee to look at it to improve it, but it falls short in so many key areas. It falls short on addressing the concerns of municipalities, indigenous communities and workers, and it does not implement the recommendations made by the national supply chain task force report, nor the standing committee on transport's recommendations on rail safety. Serious concerns remain with respect to rail safety, yet the Liberals chose not to act on a single recommendation from the transport committee's 2021 report on rail safety. We need to do better.
On the issue of the port authorities, we saw how the myth of globalization blew apart like dust in the pandemic and Canadians were left with serious supply chain issues. We have to address how supply chains work, and our ports play a huge role in that. The capacity has challenges, and container traffic is expected to grow. What is the plan for that? There is a total lack of data. It restricts collaboration and is creating inefficient supply chain decision-making in infrastructure investment.
The issue we see in terms of who sits on these port authorities is huge. They have been pork-barrel dumping grounds for political hacks and friends for decades. We need labour representation on the port authority and the board of directors.
The Canada Marine Act provides representation for other stakeholders, including the prairie provinces and local governments, but we feel strongly that subclause 101(2) of Bill C-33 should be amended to include labour representation in a similar way to make sure that we have more accountability for the people who work on the ports. That also includes the need to start addressing the reports on greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets. We have to start dealing with the climate crisis before us.
I would like to speak, from a more personal sense, of the connection of the railway to who we are in the north.
My mother's family were Cape Bretoners or they came out of the Ottawa Valley. Back in the day, there were two choices: They worked in the mines or they worked on the railways. My grandfather, Joe MacNeil, went underground at the McIntyre mine and broke his back. Many of his brothers, uncles and cousins went to work on the rail lines. They said the Ontario rail line back in the day was more wild than bar rooms, and I think those bar cars certainly were, but this was how we travelled.
I grew up on those rail lines. My great uncles were conductors on the Ontario Northland on the night train. We saw how Brian Mulroney attacked public trains and cut the Northlander night train.
Then we saw Kathleen Wynne's government go after it and shut the Northlander down, and it left people without access to public transportation in the north, leaving them on our highways, which have really become death traps for travellers. Anybody who has travelled Highway 11 or Highway 17 in the winter knows knows about the seriously dangerous conditions that are not being addressed at the federal or provincial levels, and there has been a huge push to ensure that we have proper rail service restored to the north. It is something I have fought for, for years, and I want to see it restored.
We have had promises of the Northlander coming back, and these trains are vital links to communities. I would certainly invite my colleagues to travel on the Polar Bear Express, which leaves out of Cochrane. Once in Cochrane, it will take them to beautiful Moosonee and Moose Factory.
It is not just the links we have in terms of family; these are economic links. How do we tell European tourists who come to Canada and say they want to visit James Bay that they have to drive nine or 10 hours on a highway before they can catch a train? It just does not make sense.
Having grown up on a rail line and having had family working on the rail lines, I am very partial to rail, but I also understand that we need to put in place the basic safety standards that will make sure we can move forward in terms of overall safety and overall efficiency while getting traffic off the highways. Particularly in a time of climate crisis, the rail lines can do that, but we need to have properly maintained rail services. We can no longer allow company police and corporate risk management to address safety or accidents. That has been a failure, and it is a continuing failure.
In terms of the port authority issues, we really need to look at different approaches for the small and large ports, and we are going to push for that as New Democrats. Small ports and large ports are fundamentally different bodies. Having three separate advisory committees in small ports is an excessive administrative burden, but in smaller port authorities we could establish a single community advisory committee. It would have to have representation from the first nations and from local communities, as well as from labour, to make sure that the small port authorities were empowered to do the work they are supposed to do.
We need to have, as well, clarification regarding labour disputes. Section 107.1(1) would give the minister the authority to take extraordinary measures related to ports when there is deemed to be a “risk” to “national economic security”, but this has been used by government and by the companies to hammer down on their obligation to do fair negotiations. Our workers on the rail lines deserve to be able to negotiate. They deserve to be able to have fair wages, and we need to make sure that labour disputes are handled in a proper manner and that the government is not just using a threat to national economic security to cut down the ability of rail workers to have proper representation when it comes to wages, safety and other rights they have.
I am more than willing to take questions. I will be here all week, as usual, and it is always an honour to speak.
1302 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 9:25:57 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, there is a primary purpose to the legislation, which has taken a while to come forward and get to this stage only because of all the consultations that were required, since several acts would be changed through this bill.
The member highlights the importance of the issue of safety, and that is a driving force in terms of the reason we have the legislation, along with the issue of economic development. The member also made reference to a family background, and I think if we take a look at our rail lines, we would see that there are a lot of families that have grown up within that industry.
I guess I would ask the member to what degree he feels the legislation is good to go, at least into the committee stage. Does the member have any specific thoughts in regard to amendments at this point?
149 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 9:27:08 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, we certainly believe that we need to move forward with this legislation. As I said from the get-go, we feel that we are still continuing to pay too much lip service to the corporate interests of the big rail lines and the port authorities. We need to address a number of issues.
For example, the issue of the regulation of greenhouse gas reduction targets for the port authorities is huge. We need to make sure that we have the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act as part of this.
That could be under clause 107(2), where we could make sure that for these huge centres where traffic and transportation are happening, where goods are being moved, we actually have a long-term plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. I think that would send a very positive message to Canadians.
143 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 9:28:13 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I have a question for my colleague.
There have been various train accidents in rural Canada. In one accident in particular, in St-Lazare, Manitoba, about five or six years ago, rail cars tipped over and there was a little bit of leakage and spillage. The one thing that was really apparent was that there was no connectivity.
It seems that when we hear about something that happens in, let us say, Winnipeg, everybody has cellphone connectivity and all the emergency services can actually cut in. I am wondering if the member could comment on that, and when it goes to committee, if we could keep an eye on that and see if we can get some language around that.
122 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 9:29:04 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, that is an excellent question. Our trains are running on the Ontario Northland route, coming through Temagami, running through some very rugged country. If they go over, it is an ecological disaster and we need a response immediately.
These issues of being able to get the word out, of being able to make contact, are very important, and I think that these are things that we need to look at in the legislation, because Canada is a very large, rugged, isolated country where trains are travelling through some very rough terrain, and we need to make sure that we have all of the proper protections in place at every level, especially if we are dealing with a potential derailment.
121 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 9:29:50 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to thank my hon. colleague from Timmins—James Bay for making a number of excellent points about this legislation. From my point of view, coming from another part of the country, one important part of this legislation that needs clarification is what it needs in terms of protecting the Salish Sea from the use of our area as free parking for freighters that are backed up out of the port of Vancouver.
I am also very concerned about rail safety, very concerned about the appalling record of the privatized large freight-moving trains in this country and the callous disregard for worker safety.
I would like to ask the hon. member to expand on that point.
121 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 9:30:36 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, again, I remember Bill Blaikie standing in the House and saying that if we allowed these corporations to self-police, workers would die. We have had 60 deaths over the last 20 years. That is appalling. Sixty deaths is absolutely unacceptable. In Lac-Mégantic, 47 people were incinerated, and nobody was ever really held accountable. That is not acceptable. We must do better. People's lives are worth more, and we have to stand up for them.
81 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 9:31:12 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, what a pleasure it is to talk on what I believe very much is progressive legislation, and it shows in a very clear fashion—
27 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Jun/8/23 9:31:31 p.m.
- Watch
The hon. member for Northumberland—Peterborough South is rising on a point of order.
15 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
