TRAN Committee Meeting
Notices of Meeting include information about the subject matter to be examined by the committee and date, time and place of the meeting, as well as a list of any witnesses scheduled to appear. The Evidence is the edited and revised transcript of what is said before a committee. The Minutes of Proceedings are the official record of the business conducted by the committee at a sitting.
For an advanced search, use Publication Search tool.
If you have any questions or comments regarding the accessibility of this publication, please contact us at accessible@parl.gc.ca.
Minutes of Proceedings
The Committee commenced its clause-by-clause study of the Bill.
Alain Langlois, Marie-France Taschereau and Kim Benjamin answered questions.
Pursuant to Standing Order 75(1), consideration of Clause 1, Short Title, was postponed.
The Chair called Clause 2.
After debate, Clause 2 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 0.
Clause 3 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 0.
Clause 4 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 0.
On Clause 5,
Kelly Block moved, — That Bill S-2, in Clause 5, be amended(a) by replacing line 39 on page 2 with the following:
“scribed to, if the Minister has evidence to suggest that there is a defect or non-compliance in the vehicle or equipment,”
(b) by replacing line 3 on page 3 with the following:
“the defects or non-compliance with this Act that the”
(c) by adding after line 6 on page 3 the following:
“(1.1) The Minister must, before issuing any order under subsection (1), consult with the company to determine if it has conducted, or intends to conduct, the necessary tests, analyses or studies relating to the defect or non-compliance of the vehicle or equipment.”
Debate arose thereon.
The question was put on the amendment of Kelly Block and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.
Clause 5 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 0.
On Clause 6,
Robert Aubin moved, — That Bill S-2, in Clause 6, be amended by replacing line 21 on page 3 with the following:“(b) new kinds of vehicles equipped with safety features that are equivalent to or superior to those that conform to prescribed standards, technologies, vehicle sys-”
Debate arose thereon.
The question was put on the amendment of Robert Aubin and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 2; NAYS: 5.
“(3) Within two days after the exemption order is granted, the Minister shall publish it on the Internet site of the Department of Transport and make it available by any other means that the Minister considers appropriate.”
Debate arose thereon.
At 3:58 p.m., the sitting was suspended.
At 4:00 p.m., the sitting resumed.
“(3) Within two days after the exemption order is granted, the Minister shall publish it on the Internet site of the Department of Transport and make it available by any other means that the Minister considers appropriate.”
The debate continued.
The question was put on the amendment of Robert Aubin and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.
Clause 6 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 0.
Clause 7 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 0.
On Clause 8,
Robert Aubin moved, — That Bill S-2, in Clause 8, be amended by adding after line 8 on page 4 the following:“(2) Section 10.1 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (7):
(7.1) Within two days after the order is issued, the Minister shall publish it on the Internet site of the Department of Transport and make it available by any other means that the Minister considers appropriate.”
Debate arose thereon.
The question was put on the amendment of Robert Aubin and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.
Clause 8 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 0.
On Clause 9,
Robert Aubin moved, — That Bill S-2, in Clause 9, be amended by adding after line 10 on page 5 the following:“(2) Within two days after the order is issued, the Minister shall publish it on the Internet site of the Department of Transport and make it available by any other means that the Minister considers appropriate.”
Debate arose thereon.
The question was put on the amendment of Robert Aubin and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.
“(2) The Minister shall publish any order made under subsection (1) on the Internet site of the Department of Transport and ensure that the published information is up to date.”
Debate arose thereon.
The question was put on the amendment of Robert Aubin and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.
“10.51 A company that is subject to an order made under section 10.5 may correct a defect or non-compliance by doing one of the following:
(a) repairing the vehicle or equipment, including by adding to, removing anything from or modifying the vehicle or equipment, as the circumstances require;
(b) replacing the vehicle or equipment with a reasonable equivalent;
(c) reimbursing
(i) the reasonable cost of repairs to the vehicle or equipment that have already been undertaken before a notice of defect or non-compliance has been given, or
(ii) the sale price of the vehicle or equipment, less reasonable depreciation in the case where the vehicle or equipment has been sold to the first retail purchaser, on return of the vehicle or equipment.”
Debate arose thereon.
The question was put on the amendment of Sean Fraser and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 1.
“10.52 For greater certainty, any person, including an automobile dealer, may benefit from any measure referred to in section 10.51 and any payment of costs under subsection 10.6(1).
10.53 For greater certainty, nothing prevents a company that is subject to an order under subsection 10.1(7) or 10.4(4), section 10.5 or subsection 10.6(1) from entering into an agreement with any person, including an automobile dealer, in respect of any matter related to the order — including, in the case of a vehicle or equipment that has not been sold to the first retail purchaser, in respect of the reimbursement of reasonable costs incurred — in addition to complying with any terms and conditions specified in the order.
10.54 For greater certainty, a correction to a vehicle or equipment in accordance with section 10.51 does not affect the right of any person, including an automobile dealer, to exercise any other right or remedy available at law, including a right or remedy to recover reasonable costs incurred as a result of an order under section 10.5.”
Debate arose thereon.
The question was put on the amendment of Sean Fraser and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 7; NAYS: 0.
“cle or equipment is corrected before the vehicle or equipment leaves the possession or control of the company, in accordance with”
Debate arose thereon.
The question was put on the amendment and the result of the vote was announced:
YEAS: Vance Badawey, Kelly Block, Michael D. Chong, Ben Lobb — 4;
NAYS: Sean Fraser, David de Burgh Graham, Ken Hardie, Angelo Iacono — 4.
Whereupon, the Chair voted in the negative.
Accordingly, the amendment was negatived.
“(4) Within two days after a final decision is made, the Minister shall publish it on the Internet site of the Department of Transport and make it available by any other”
Debate arose thereon.
The question was put on the amendment of Robert Aubin and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 2; NAYS: 5.
“(2) Within two days after an order is varied or revoked, the Minister shall publish the varied order or a notice of revocation of the order on the Internet site of the Department of Transport and make the order or notice available by any other means that the Minister considers appropriate.”
Debate arose thereon.
The question was put on the amendment of Robert Aubin and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 2; NAYS: 5.
Clause 9, as amended, carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 0.
Clause 10 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 0.
Clause 11 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 0.
Clause 12 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 0.
Clause 13 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 0.
On Clause 14,
Robert Aubin moved, — That Bill S-2, in Clause 14, be amended by replacing lines 18 and 19 on page 11 with the following:“(6) Within two days after the consent agreement is registered, the Minister shall publish each consent agreement on the Internet site of the Department of Transport and make it available by any”
Debate arose thereon.
The question was put on the amendment of Robert Aubin and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.
“(7) The Federal Court may rescind a consent agreement that it has registered, on application by the Minister or by any party to the consent agreement, if it finds that the circumstances that led to the making of the agreement have changed and, in the circumstances that exist at the time the application is made, the agreement would not have been made or would have been ineffective in achieving its intended purpose.”
Debate arose thereon.
The question was put on the amendment of Robert Aubin and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.
Clause 14 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 0.
On Clause 15,
Robert Aubin moved, — That Bill S-2, in Clause 15, be amended(a) by adding after line 4 on page 12 the following:
“(e) establish the form and content of notices of violation.”
(b) by deleting lines 19 and 20 on page 13.
Debate arose thereon.
The question was put on the amendment of Robert Aubin and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 2; NAYS: 5.
“(2) The purpose of the penalty is deterrence and the promotion of compliance with this Act.”
Debate arose thereon.
The question was put on the amendment of Robert Aubin and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 1; NAYS: 6.
“instituted later than five years after the time when the”
Debate arose thereon.
The question was put on the amendment of Robert Aubin and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 2; NAYS: 5.
Clause 15 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 0.
On Clause 16,
Robert Aubin moved, — That Bill S-2, in Clause 16, be amended by replacing line 19 on page 18 with the following:“16 (1) Paragraphs 17(a) and (b) of the Act are replaced by the following:
(a) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction and is liable to a fine of not more than $2 million; or
(b) is guilty of an indictable offence and is liable to a fine of not more than $100 million.
(1.1) Section 17 of the Act is amended by adding”
Debate arose thereon.
The question was put on the amendment of Robert Aubin and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 1; NAYS: 5.
Clause 16 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 0.
Clause 17 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 0.
On new Clause 17.1,
Robert Aubin moved, — That Bill S-2 be amended by adding after line 15 on page 19 the following new clause:“17.1 The Act is amended by adding the following after section 20:
Annual Report
21 (1) No later than December 31 next following the end of each fiscal year, the Minister shall prepare a report on the administration and enforcement of the provisions of this Act during the previous fiscal year and cause it to be tabled before each House of Parliament.
(2) The annual report must include:
(a) the number of consent agreements entered into by the Minister and information on the corporations, companies and individuals that are parties to those consent agreements;
(b) the total amount of monetary penalties imposed under this Act, broken down by violation; and
(c) the number of orders made under this Act with respect to a defect or non-compliance and statistics on road safety in Canada. ”
Debate arose thereon.
The question was put on the amendment of Robert Aubin and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.
Clause 18 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 0.
Clause 19 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 0.
Clause 1, Short Title, carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 0.
The Title carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 0.
The Bill, as amended, carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 0.
ORDERED, — That the Chair report the Bill, as amended, to the House.
The Chair presented the Second Report from the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure. The Report was concurred in and read as follows:
Your Subcommittee met on Thursday, October 5, 2017, to consider the business of the Committee and agreed to make the following recommendations:
1. That seven consecutive meetings of two hours be devoted to the study of Bill C-48, An Act respecting the regulation of vessels that transport crude oil or persistent oil to or from ports or marine installations located along British Columbia's north coast, including clause-by-clause consideration;
2. That the Clerk of the Committee invite the Minister of Transport and Department Officials to appear for the duration of two hours on Thursday, October 19, 2017, to launch the study of Bill C-48;
3. That members of the Committee submit their witness lists on Bill C-48, in order of priority, to the Clerk of the Committee before end of day Thursday, October 12, 2017;
4. That clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-48 be on Thursday, November 9, 2017;
5. That the meetings of Tuesday, November 21, 2017, and Thursday, November 23, 2017, be devoted to the water quality study as part of the four additional meetings on the study of infrastructure and smart communities that were agreed to on Thursday, June 1, 2017;
6. That the Clerk of the Committee invite representatives from the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM), l’Union des Municipalités du Québec (UMQ), Infrastructure Canada and provincial legislatures to appear on the water quality study;
7. That the meetings of Tuesday, November 28, 2017, and Thursday, November 30, 2017, be devoted to the study of infrastructure and smart communities;
8. That four meetings, starting Tuesday, December 5, 2017, be devoted to the study of the Canadian Transportation and Logistics Strategy with a special focus on short line railways and trade corridors. This study should address both the transportation of passengers and goods; and
9. That the Chair write a response letter to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts explaining that due to the Committee’s full agenda, it will not be possible to undertake a study on possible legislation enabling Via Rail Canada Inc. this fall.
Robert Aubin moved, — That the Committee conduct a study on Canada's requirements for passenger rail service.
After debate, the question was put on the motion and it was agreed to.
At 5:11 p.m., the Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.