The Order was read for the consideration at report stage and second reading of Bill C–14, An Act to continue the National Transportation Agency as the Canadian Transportation Agency, to consolidate and revise the National Transportation Act, 1987 and the Railway Act and to amend or repeal other Acts as a consequence, as reported by the Standing Committee on Transport with amendments.

Pursuant to Standing Order 76(5), the Speaker selected and grouped for debate the following motions:

Group No. 2 — Motions Nos. 1 and 69

Group No. 3 — Motions Nos. 2, 28 to 32 and 35 to 55

Group No. 4 — Motions Nos. 3 and 5

Group No. 5 — Motions Nos. 4, 9, 14, 15, 17, 27, 68, 72 and 73

Group No. 6 — Motions Nos. 6 to 8

Group No. 7 — Motions Nos. 10 to 13

Group No. 8 — Motions Nos. 18 and 19

Group No. 9 — Motions Nos. 22, 26, 71 and 74 to 82

Group No. 10 — Motions Nos. 23 and 24

Group No. 11 — Motion No. 25

Group No. 12 — Motions Nos. 56 and 70

Group No. 13 — Motions Nos. 57 to 66

Group No. 14 — Motion No. 67

Group No. 2 and, by unanimous consent, Group No. 11

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 1, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 5, be amended by replacing lines 17 and 18, on page 3, with the following:

“persons, including elderly persons and persons with disabilities,”.

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 69, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 170, be amended by replacing line 21, on page 81, with the following:

“bility of elderly persons and persons with disabilities, including”.

Mrs. Wayne (Saint John), seconded by Mr. Charest (Sherbrooke), moved Motion No. 25, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 129, be amended by adding after line 41, on page 58, the following:

 

“(3)

For the purposes of sections 129 to 136, the former Canadian Pacific line through Maine shall be deemed to be a route wholly within Canada, and any carrier serving any portion of the line between Saint John (New Brunswick) and Montreal (Quebec) shall be deemed to be a connecting carrier and any place where the line of a railway company connects with such connecting carrier shall be deemed to be an interchange.”

Debate arose on the motions in Groups Nos. 2 and 11.

The question was put on Motion No. 1 and, pursuant to Standing Order 76(8), the recorded division, which also applies to Motion No. 69, was deferred.

The question was put on Motion No. 25 and, pursuant to Standing Order 76(8), the recorded division was deferred.

Group No. 3

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 2, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 6, be amended by adding after line 3, on page 4, the following:

“‘main line’ means a railway line in Canada of a railway company under the legislative authority of Parliament that, relative to all other railway lines within the company’s railway system in Canada, provides the primary means of moving goods from one or more provinces to one or more provinces.”

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie) seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 28, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 139, be amended by replacing lines 7 to 15, on page 64, with the following:

“Council’s own initiative,

(b) after consultation with the minister of transportation in the provinces that will be affected, and;

(c) after any investigation that the Governor in Council considers necessary,

request two or more railway companies to consider the joint or common use of a right-of-way if the Governor in Council is of the opinion that its joint or common use may improve the efficiency and effectiveness of rail transport, of municipal land use or of road transportation and would not unduly impair the”.

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 29, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 140, be amended by replacing lines 36 and 37, on page 64, with the following:

“(a) a main line;

(b) a yard track, siding or spur; or

(c) other track auxiliary to a railway line”.

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 30, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 141, be amended by replacing lines 11 and 12, on page 65, with the following:

“of company located in the vicinity of each of the lines identified in the plan”.

Mr. Mercier (Blainville–Deux-Montagnes), seconded by Mr. Paré (Louis-Hébert), moved Motion No. 31, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 141, be amended by adding after line 17, on page 65, the following:

 

“(4)

A plan prepared by a railway company that does not indicate the company’s intention to discontinue operation of a line shall not be amended by the company for twelve months.”

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 32 — That Bill C–14, in Clause 142, be amended by adding after line 29, on page 65, the following:

 

“(3)

Where the Agency determines that a branch line or a segment thereof is economic or that, although a branch line or segment is uneconomic, there is a reasonable probability of its becoming economic in the foreseeable future, the Agency shall, within six months after the application for the abandonment is received by the Agency, order that the operation of the branch line or segment be abandoned, unless it determines that the operation of the branch line or segment is required in the public interest.

  (4)

In determining whether the operation of a branch line or a segment thereof is required in the public interest, the Agency shall consider all matters that in its opinion are relevant to the public interest, including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing:

(a)

the actual losses, if any, that are incurred by the railway company in the operation of the branch line or segment;

(b)

the alternative transportation facilities available or likely to be available in the area served by the branch line or segment, including those proposed to be made available by the applicant, and the ability of those facilities to meet the needs of shippers located in that area;

(c)

the extent to which the applicant would be prepared to provide and support alternative transportation facilities in lieu of operating the branch line or segment;

(d)

whether it would be more economic to use alternative transportation facilities in the area served by the branch line or segment;

(e)

the period of time reasonably required for the purpose of adjusting any facilities that are wholly or partly dependent on the services provided by the branch line or segment with the least disruption to the economy of the area served thereby;

(f)

the probable effect on other lines and other carriers and on the transportation system generally of the abandonment of the operation of the branch line or segment on different dates;

(g)

the economic effect of the abandonment of the operation of the branch line or segment on the communities and area served by the branch line;

(h)

the feasibility of maintaining the branch line or segment as an operating line by changes in the method of operation or by inter-connection with other lines of the company;

(i)

the feasibility of maintaining the branch line or segment as an operating line, either jointly with or as part of the system of another company, by the sale or lease of the line or segment to another company or by the exchange of operating or running rights between companies or otherwise, including, where necessary, the construction of connecting lines with the lines of other companies; and

(j)

the existing and potential resources of the area served by the branch line or segment, seasonal restrictions on other forms of transportation in the area and the probable future transportation needs of the area.”

Mr. Anderson (Minister of Transport), seconded by Mr. Mifflin (Minister of Fisheries and Oceans), moved Motion No. 35, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 145, be amended, by replacing lines 19 to 22, on page 67, with the following:

“Canada,

(ii) land that is or was a reserve, as defined in subsection 2(1) of the Indian Act, or

(iii) land that is the subject of an agreement entered into by the railway company and the Minister for the settlement of aboriginal land claims;”.

Mr. Gouk (Kootenay West–Revelstoke), seconded by Mr. Silye (Calgary Centre), moved Motion No. 36, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 146, be amended by adding after line 39, on page 68, the following:

 

“(3)

In any agreement, or amendment to an agreement, relating to the construvtion or maintenance of a utility or infrastructure crossing, the railway company shall not require the utility company or municipal, regional or provincial government to indemnify the railway company for the railway company’s own negligence.”

Mr. Gouk (Kootenay West–Revelstoke), seconded by Mr. Silye (Calgary Centre), moved Motion No. 37, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 146, be amended by adding after line 39, on page 68, the following:

 

“(3)

Where a railway company discontinues a line, it shall ensure that municipal governments, regional governments, provincial governments and gas, water, power, telephone and other utility companies continue to have full and unfettered access to existing right-of-way corridors, easements and servitudes, registered or unregistered, in, over, on or under the railway line for the maintenance of essential infrastructures.”

Mr. Gouk (Kootenay West–Revelstoke), seconded by Mr. Silye (Calgary Centre), moved Motion No. 38, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 146, be amended by adding after line 39, on page 68, the following:

 

“(3)

Notwithstanding any other provision of this or any other Act of Parliament, the operation of the main railway freight line operated by the Canadian National Rail Company between Montreal and Halifax shall not be abandoned or conveyed to a third party during the first five years following the coming into force of this Act.”

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 39, — That Bill C–14 be amended by adding after line 39, on page 68, the following new Clause:

“Division VI

Applications for Abandonment of Operation of Railway Lines

146.1.

(1)

No railway company shall abandon the operation of a main line, otherwise than pursuant to an order of the Agency made under this Division on the application of the company.

(2)

For greater certainty, subsection (1) does not apply in respect of a yard track, siding or spur, or other track auxiliary to a railway line.”

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 40, — That Bill C–14 be amended by adding after line 39, on page 68, the following new Clause:

“146.2.

(1)

Subject to subsection (3), a railway company shall, not less than ninety days before making an application to the Agency for the abandonment of the operation of a main line, give notice to the Agency that it intends to make the application.

(2)

A notice referred to in subsection (1) shall be given in the prescribed form and manner to the Agency and to the prescribed persons or classes of persons and shall be accompanied by

(a)

a statement of costs and revenues of the company attributable to the main line in each of the prescribed financial years of the company; and

(b)

a statement setting out the amount of traffic moving over the line in each of those years.

(3)

An application to abandon the operation of a main line shall be made in the prescribed form and manner and shall be accompanied by

(a)

a statement of costs and revenues of the company attributable, directly or indirectly, to the main line in each of the prescribed financial years of the company; and

(b)

a statement setting out the amount of traffic moving over the line in each of those years.

(4)

Notice of an application accompanied by the statements of costs, revenues and traffic referred to in subsection (3) shall be given by the railway company in the prescribed form and manner to the prescribed persons or classes of persons.

(5)

Notwithstanding subsections (2) to (4) the Agency may, in respect of a particular application, direct that notice of the proposed application or of the application be given

(a)

in a form or manner other than the prescribed form and manner;

(b)

only to such persons or classes as the Agency considers appropriate; or

(c)

to persons or classes of persons other than prescribed persons or classes of persons.”

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 41, — That Bill C–14 be amended by adding after line 39, on page 68, the following new Clause:

“146.3.

Any person may oppose an application to abandon the operation of a main line by filing with the Agency, not more than sixty days after the date of the notice given under subsection 146.2(4), a written statement setting forth the grounds, related to the statements referred to in paragraphs (3)(a) and (3)(b), on which that person opposes the application.”

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 42, — That Bill C–14 be amended by adding after line 39, on page 68, the following new Clause:

“146.4.

Where an application is not opposed under section 146.3, and no offer to purchase the main line is made within the period mentioned in that section, the Agency shall forthwith order that the operation of the main line be abandoned.”

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 43, — That Bill C–14 be amended by adding after line 39, on page 68, the following new Clause:

“146.5.

(1)

Where an application is opposed under section 149, the Agency shall

(a)

review the statement of costs and revenues accompanying the applications and all other documents, facts and figures that in its opinion are relevant in making the determination referred to in paragraph (b);

(b)

determine the amount of actual loss, if any, of the railway company attributable to the main line in each of the prescribed financial years; and

(c)

cause such public notice of the determination made under paragraph (b) and of the principal factors applied in making that determination to be given as the Agency considers appropriate.

(2)

In performing its duties under subsection (1), the Agency may refuse to give the company that made the application an opportunity to make further submissions with respect to the matters mentioned in that subsection.”

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 44, — That Bill C–14 be amended by adding after line 39, on page 68, the following new Clause:

“146.6.

The Agency shall, after publication of the notice referred to in subsection 146.2(1) and after holding such hearings, if any, as are required in its opinion to enable all persons who wish to do so to present their views on the abandonment of the operation of the main line, including, where applicable, their views respecting the matters to be considered under section 146.9 to determine

(a)

whether the main line and segment thereof, where the Agency considers that a separate determination ought to be made in respect of the segment are economic or uneconomic; and

(b)

whether there is a reasonable probability of the main line and any segment thereof in respect of which a separate determination is made under paragraph (a) becoming economic in the foreseeable future, if it is uneconomic, or

(c)

whether the continued operation of the main line or a segment is required in the public interest.”

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 45, — That Bill C–14 be amended by adding after line 39, on page 68, the following new Clause:

“146.7.

(1)

Where the Agency determines that (a) a main line or segment thereof is uneconomic and that there is no reasonable probability of its becoming economic; and (b) the main line is not required in the public interest, no later than six months after the application for the abandonment is received by the Agency, the Agency shall order that the operation of the main line or segment be abandoned.

(2)

The Governor in Council may, by order made on the application of a shipper, of municipal or provincial governemnt or an agent thereof, vary the date fixed in an order made under subsection (a) as varied by any previous order made under this subsection, before that date by fixing a later date, not later than the day that is five years after the date of the order made under subsection (1) or that of the last variation order made under this subsection, whichever day last occurs, where the Governor in Council considers that

(a)

the actual losses, if any, that have been incurred by the railway company in the operation of the main line or segment;

(b)

the abandonment of the operation of the line or segment would have a significant impact on a large region of Canada;

(c)

the abandonment of the operation of the line or segment would have a major impact on shippers; or

(d)

there is a lack of adequate alternative transportation facilities in the area served by the line or segment.”

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie) seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 46, — That Bill C–14 be amended by adding after line 39, on page 68, the following new Clause:

“146.8.

Notwithstanding that the Agency has determined that a main line or a segment thereof is economic or that there is a reasonable probability that the line or segment will become economic in the foreseeable future, it shall not order that the operation of a main line or segment be abandoned when it has determined that the operation of the line or segment is required in the public interest.”

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 47, — That Bill C–14 be amended by adding after line 39, on page 68, the following new Clause:

“146.9.

In determining whether the operation of a main line or a segment thereof is required in the public interest, the Agency shall consider all matters that in its opinion are relevant to the public interest, including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing.

(a)

the actual losses, if any, that have been incurred by the railway company in the operation of the main line or segment;

(b)

the alternative transportation facilities available or likely to be available in the area served by the main line or segment, including those proposed to be made available by the applicant, and the ability of those facilities to meet the needs of shippers located in that area;

(c)

the extent to which the applicant would be prepared to provide and support alternative transportation facilities in lieu of operating the main line or segment;

(d)

whether it would be more economical to use alternative transportation facilities in the area served by the main line or segment;

(e)

the period of time reasonably required for the purpose of adjusting any facilities that are wholly or partly dependent on the services provided by the main line or segment with the least disruption to the economy of the area served thereby;

(f)

the probable effect on other lines and other carriers and on the transportation system generally of the abandonment, on different dates, of the operation of the main line or segment;

(g)

the economic effect of the abandonment of the operation of the main line or segment on the communities and area served by the branch line;

(h)

the feasibility of maintaining the main line or segment as an operating line by changes in the method of operation through the interconnection with other lines of the company;

(i)

the feasibility of maintaining the main line or segment as an operating line, either jointly with or as part of the system of another company, by the sale or lease of the line or segment to another company or by the exchange of operating or running rights between companies or otherwise, including, where necessary, the construction of connecting lines with the lines of other companies;

(j)

the existing and potential resources of the area served by the main line or segment, seasonal restrictions on other forms of transportation in the area and the probable future transportation needs of the area.”

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 48, — That Bill C–14 be amended by adding after line 39, on page 68, the following new Clause:

“146.10.

(1)

In making an order under section 146.4, 146.7 or 146.8 for the abandonment of the operation of a main line or segment thereof, the Agency shall fix

(a)

a date that is one year after the date for the abandonment, where VIA Rail Canada Inc. operates a passenger service on the branch line or segment or the branch line or segment is identified in a plan of VIA Rail Canada Inc., approved by the Governor in Council, for the proposed development or expansion of its passenger service as being required for the implementation of the plan; or

(b)

in any other case, such date for the abandonment as it considers to be in the public interest.

(2)

A date fixed under paragraph (1)(b) shall not be less than thirty days or more than one year after the date of the order.

(3)

Where a date for the abandonment of the operation of a main line or segment has been fixed under paragraph (1)(a), VIA Rail Canada Inc. may, within six months after the date of the order, require the railway company that operates the main line or segment to transfer it to VIA Rail Canada Inc. on the date fixed, in return for the payment by VIA Rail Canada Inc. of such amount as is agreed on by VIA Rail Canada Inc. and the railway company or, where no such agreement is reached before that date, of an amount that represents no more than the net salvage value of the main line or segment.

(4)

VIA Rail Canada Inc. shall, forthwith after requiring the transfer of a main line or a segment under subsection (3), notify the Agency that it has done so.

(5)

Where VIA Rail Canada Inc. requires the transfer of a main line or a segment under subsection (3), the railway company that operates the main line or segment shall, on the date fixed under paragraph (1)(a), as varied under section 41 or subsection 146.7(2) or 146.12(2), transfer the main line or segment to VIA Rail Canada Inc.

(6)

Where VIA Rail Canada Inc. and the railway company do not agree (before the date fixed under paragraph (1)(a)) on the amount to be paid, the Agency shall within forty-five days after receiving a request by VIA Rail Canada Inc. or the railway company, determine the net salvage value of the main line or segment.

(7)

VIA Rail Canada Inc. shall, forthwith after the transfer of the main line or segment or the making of a determination under subsection (6), whichever is the later date, pay the amount agreed on or the amount determined to be the net salvage value of the line or segment, as the case may be.

(8)

Subsection (5) does not apply where the order for abandonment is rescinded under subsection 146.12(1).

(9)

Where a main line or segment is transferred by a railway company under subsection (5):

(a)

the railway company shall cease to have any obligations under this or any other Act of Parliament in respect of the operation of the line or segment;

(b)

VIA Rail Canada Inc. shall have no obligations under this or any other Act of Parliament in respect of the carriage of goods on the line or segment;

(c)

the line or segment shall be declared to be a work for the general advantage of Canada; and

(d)

VIA Rail Canada Inc. may, notwithstanding subsection 146.1(1), abandon the operation of the main line or segment, where operation of the passenger service is discontinued or the main line or segment is no longer identified in a plan described in paragraph (1)(a) as being required for the implementation of the plan.”

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 49, — That Bill C–14 be amended by adding after line 39, on page 68, the following new Clause:

“146.11.

(1)

Where the Agency determines that the operation of a main line or a segment thereof is required in the public interest, it shall, within six months after the application for the abandonment is received by the agency

(a)

where the main line or segment is economic, dismiss the application in whole or as to that segment, and

(b)

where the main line or segment is uneconomical but there is a reasonable probability of its becoming economical in the foreseeable future, order that the operation of the main line or segment be abandoned.

(2)

The dismissal under subsection (1) of an application by a railway company is without prejudice to the right of the company to make another application for the abandonment of the operation of a branch line or segment.”

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 50, — That Bill C–14 be amended by adding after line 39, on page 68, the following new Clause:

“146.12.

(1)

In making a determination under section 146.6 and in determining whether the operation of a main line or a segment thereof is required in the public interest, the Agency may

(a)

hear applications as a group, on dates fixed by the Agency, for the abandonment of the operation of railway lines that are situated in the same area or adjoining areas as determined by the Agency;

(b)

require any company, other than the company making the application, that operates one or more railway lines in an area, as determined by the Agency, in which at least one main line with respect to which an application has been made is located, to furnish to the Agency, for such of its lines in the area as the Agency may specify, figures, for such years and in such form as the Agency may specify, a statement setting out the amount of traffic moving over the lines; and

(c)

without limiting its power to consider applications in any order that the Agency considers appropriate, require a company that has made more than one application for abandonment to specify the order in which it desires the Agency to consider the applications.

(2)

The Agency shall treat as confidential all information provided to it pursuant to a requirement under paragraph (1)(b), other than information relating to the main line in respect of which an application for abandonment has been made.”

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 51, — That Bill C–14 be amended by adding after line 39, on page 68, the following new Clause:

“146.13.

(1)

At least once every five years after an application for the abandonment of the operation of a main line has been received by the Agency, it shall reconsider the application in accordance with this section, and shall determine the actual loss directly or indirectly attributable to the main line in accordance with subsection 146.5(1)

(a)

the operation of the main line has not been abandoned;

(b)

the application has not been dismissed under subsection 146.9;

(c)

the main line has not been transferred to VIA Rail Canada Inc. under subsection 146.10(5).

(2)

The Agency shall give notice of the reconsideration in the prescribed form and manner to the prescribed persons or classes of persons that it proposes.

(3)

Notwithstanding subsection (2) and any regulations made under section 146.17, the Agency may, in respect of a particular application, give notice that it proposes to reconsider an application

(a)

in a form or manner other than the prescribed form and manner;

(b)

only to such persons or classes of persons as the Agency considers appropriate; or

(c)

to persons or classes of persons other than prescribed persons or classes of persons.

(4)

Sections 146.3 to 146.10 and this section apply in respect of the reconsideration of every application in the same way that they apply in respect of an application made under section 146.2.”

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 52, — That Bill C–14 be amended by adding after line 39, on page 68, the following new Clause:

“146.14.

(1)

The Agency may rescind an order that the operation of a branch line or segment thereof be abandoned, only

(a)

before the date for abandonment fixed therein; and

(b)

with the concurrence of the railway company that operates the line or segment; and

(2)

The Agency may vary the date fixed in an order for the abandonment of the operation of a main line or segment thereof before that date only by fixing a later date that is within two years after the date of the order for the abandonment and is not later than one year after the later of the date of the order for the abandonment and the last variation order, if any.”

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 53, — That Bill C–14 be amended by adding after line 39, on page 68, the following new Clause:

“146.15.

(1)

An offer to purchase a main line or a segment thereof for a price, which shall not be more than the net salvage value of the line or segment, may be made to the railway company that operates the line or segment by any other railway company that is authorized to operate the line or segment, in order to continue to operate it, during the period beginning on the date on which the company that operates the line or segment gives notice under section 146.2 that it proposes to make an application for the abandonment of the operation of the line and ending where the application is not opposed under section 146.3, on the expiration of the period mentioned in section 146.3 and, where the application is so opposed, on the date of the order that the operation of the line be abandoned.

(2)

Every railway company that makes an offer under subsection (1) shall forthwith file a copy of the offer with the Agency.

(3)

Where an offer has been made under subsection (1) in respect of a main line or a segment thereof, the Agency may, after holding such hearings, if any, as are in its opinion required to enable all persons who wish to do so to present their views on the transfer of the line or segment, make an order to transfer.

(4)

An order under subsection (3) shall provide that the price to be paid by the company making the offer to the company operating the line for the line or segment will be

(a)

the amount that is agreed to by the companies; or

(b)

where there is no such agreement, no more than the net salvage value of the line or segment, as determined by the Agency.

(5)

If, pursuant to an order under subsection (3), a main line or segment operated by one railway company is transferred to another railway company

(a)

the railway company that operated the line or segment ceases to have any obligations under this or any other Act of Parliament in respect of the operation of the line or segment;

(b)

if the railway company to which the line or segment is transferred is within the legislative authority of Parliament,

(i)

that railway company shall be deemed to have assumed all the obligations under this or any other Act of Parliament in respect of the operation of the line or segment, and

(ii)

the line or segment shall continue to be a main line for the purposes of this Division, even though it is a subsidiary, secondary, local or feeder line of that railway company;

(c)

if there is, at the time of the transfer, an agreement between the railway company that operated the line or segment and VIA Rail Canada Inc. in respect of the operation of a rail passenger service on the line or segment,

(i)

the rights and obligations under the agreement of the railway company that operated the line or segment in respect of the operation of that service vest in the railway company to which the line or segment is transferred and continue, as amended by agreement between VIA Rail Canada Inc. and the company to which the line or segment is transferred, until the operation of the line or segment is abandoned or the operation of the service is discontinued, and

(ii)

the line or segment is hereby declared to be a work for the general advantage of Canada;

(d)

where the railway company to which the line or segment is transferred is not within the legislative authority of Parliament and there is not at the time of the transfer an agreement described in paragraph (c) in respect of the line or segment, any declaration that the line or segment is a work for the general advantage of Canada ceases to have effect; and

(e)

the application, if any, for the abandonment of the operation of the line or segment is thereby discontinued in whole or as to that segment.

(6)

The declaration referred to in subparagraph (5)(c)(ii) ceases to have effect in respect of a line or segment on the abandonment of the operation of the line or segment or on the discontinuance of the operation of the rail passenger service on the line or segment.

(7)

Where the Agency determines under subsection (3) that the transfer of the main line or a segment thereof to the company making the offer would not be in the public interest, the Agency shall give notice of that determination to that company and the company operating the line.”

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 54, — That Bill C–14 be amended by adding after line 39, on page 68, the following new Clause:

“146.16.

Every railway company shall abandon the operation of a branch line or a segment thereof on the date fixed in an order made under section 146.4 or 146.7, as varied under section 41 or subsection 146.7 (2) or section 146.14, unless the order is rescinded under section 41 or subsection 146.11.”

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 55, — That Bill C–14 be amended by adding after line 39, on page 68, the following new Clause:

“146.17.

The Agency may, with the approval of the Governor in Council, make regulations

(a)

modifying, to such extent as the Agency deems necessary, the provisions of any of sections 146.2 to 146.14 so as to make those provisions applicable to the abandonment of the operation of main lines of railway;

(b)

prescribing the form and manner of making applications for the abandonment of the operation of lines and the procedure to be followed in dealing with those applications;

(c)

prescribing financial years for the purposes of section 160 and the time with reference to which those years are to be determined;

(d)

prescribing the form and manner of giving notice for the purposes of sections 146.2 and 146.11;

(e)

prescribing persons or classes of persons for the purposes of sections 146.2 and 146.11;

(f)

generally for carrying out the purposes and provisions of this Division.”

Debate arose on the motions in Group No. 3.

Pursuant to Standing Order 31, Members made statements.

Pursuant to Standing Order 30(5), the House proceeded to Oral Questions.

Pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), Mr. Jackson (Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board) laid upon the Table, — Government responses, pursuant to Standing Order 36(8), to the following petitions:

1. Nos. 351-3903 and 351-3904 concerning employment. — Sessional Paper No. 8545-352-38.

Mr. Bevilacqua (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources Development), from the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development, presented the 2nd Report of the Committee (Bill C–3, An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code (nuclear undertakings) and to make a related amendment to another Act, without amendment). — Sessional Paper No. 8510-351-2.

A copy of the relevant Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence (Issue No. 1, which includes this Report) was tabled.

Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Dingwall (Minister of Health), seconded by Mr. Rock (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada), Bill C–24, An Act to amend the Tobacco Products Control Act, was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.

---

Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. Rock (Minister of Justice), seconded by Mr. Dingwall (Minister of Public Works and Government Services), Bill C–25, An Act respecting regulations and other documents, including the review, registration, publication and parliamentary scrutiny of regulations and other documents, and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts, was introduced, read the first time, ordered to be printed and ordered for a second reading at the next sitting of the House.

Recommendation
(Pursuant to Standing Order 79(2))

His Excellency the Governor General recommends to the House of Commons the appropriation of public revenue under the circumstances, in the manner and for the purposes set out in a measure entitled “An Act respecting regulations and other documents, including the review, registration, publication and parliamentary scrutiny of regulations and other documents, and to make consequential and related amendments to other Acts”.

Pursuant to Standing Orders 68(2) and 69(1), on motion of Mr. McClelland (Edmonton Southwest), seconded by Mr. Thompson (Wild Rose), Bill C–243, An Act to amend the Canada Elections Act (reimbursement of election expenses), was introduced, read the first time and ordered to be printed.

Pursuant to Order made Monday, March 4, 1996, the Bill (previously Bill C–319, 1st Session, 35th Parliament) was deemed to have been read the second time, considered by the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs and reported with an amendment.

Pursuant to Standing Order 36, petitions certified correct by the Clerk of Petitions were presented as follows:

• by Mr. Szabo (Mississauga South), one concerning the income tax system (No. 352-0204) and one concerning alcoholic beverages (No. 352-0205);
• by Mr. McKinnon (Brandon–Souris), one concerning Constitutional amendments (No. 352-0206);
• by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), two concerning the tax on gasoline (Nos. 352-0207 and 352-0208);
• by Mr. Gouk (Kootenay West–Revelstoke), one concerning the mining industry (No. 352-0209).

The House resumed consideration at report stage and second reading of Bill C–14, An Act to continue the National Transportation Agency as the Canadian Transportation Agency, to consolidate and revise the National Transportation Act, 1987 and the Railway Act and to amend or repeal other Acts as a consequence, as reported by the Standing Committee on Transport with amendments;

And of the motions in Group No. 3 (Motions Nos. 2, 28 to 32 and 35 to 55).

The debate continued.

The question was put on Motion No. 2 and, pursuant to Standing Order 76(8), the recorded division, which also applies to Motion No. 29, was deferred.

The question was put on Motion No. 28 and it was negatived on division.

The question was put on Motion No. 30 and it was negatived on division.

The question was put on Motion No. 31 and, pursuant to Standing Order 76(8), the recorded division was deferred.

The question was put on Motion No. 32 and it was negatived on division.

The question was put on Motion No. 35 and it was agreed to.

The question was put on Motion No. 36 and, pursuant to Standing Order 76(8), the recorded division was deferred.

The question was put on Motion No. 37 and, pursuant to Standing Order 76(8), the recorded division was deferred.

The question was put on Motion No. 38 and, pursuant to Standing Order 76(8), the recorded division was deferred.

The question was put on Motion No. 39 and it was negatived on division. Accordingly, Motions Nos. 40 to 55 were also negatived on division.

Group No. 4

Mr. Anderson (Minister of Transport), seconded by Mr. Axworthy (Winnipeg South Centre), moved Motion No. 3, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 7, be amended by replacing line 5, on page 5, with the following:

“(a) not more than seven members appointed”.

Recommendation
(Pursuant to Standing Order 76(3))

His Excellency the Governor General recommends to the House of Commons the appropriation of public revenue under the circumstances, in the manner and for the purposes set out in an amendment to Clause 7 of Bill C–14, An Act to continue the National Transportation Agency as the Canadian Transportation Agency, to consolidate and revise the National Transportation Act, 1987 and the Railway Act and to amend or repeal other Acts as a consequence.

Mr. Anderson (Minister of Transport), seconded by Mr. Axworthy (Winnipeg South Centre), moved Motion No. 5 — That Bill C–14, in Clause 8, be amended by replacing line 36, on page 5, with the following:

“pointment of up to seven members under para-”.

Recommendation
(Pursuant to Standing Order 76(3))

His Excellency the Governor General recommends to the House of Commons the appropriation of public revenue under the circumstances, in the manner and for the purposes set out in an amendment to Clause 8 of Bill C–14, An Act to continue the National Transportation Agency as the Canadian Transportation Agency, to consolidate and revise the National Transportation Act, 1987 and the Railway Act and to amend or repeal other Acts as a consequence.

The question was put on Motion No. 3 and it was agreed to.

Accordingly, Motion No. 5 was agreed to.

Group No. 5

Mr. Mercier (Blainville–Deux-Montagnes), seconded by Mr. Paré (Louis-Hébert), moved Motion No. 4, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 7, be amended by replacing line 13, on page 5, with the following:

 

“(3)

The Governor in Council shall, with the agreement of the lieutenant governors in council of Quebec and Ontario and with the consensus of the lieutenant governors in council of the four provinces in western Canada and the four provinces in eastern Canada, desig”.

Mr. Mercier (Blainville–Deux-Montagnes), seconded by Mr. Paré (Louis-Hébert), moved Motion No. 9 — That Bill C–14, in Clause 47, be amended by replacing line 18, on page 16, with the following:

“47.

(1)

Where the Governor in Council, after consultation with the committee of Parliament that normally considers matters relating to transportation and with the government of a province that is affected by an order of the Governor in Council made under this section, is”.

Mr. Mercier (Blainville–Deux-Montagnes), seconded by Mr. Paré (Louis-Hébert), moved Motion No. 14, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 53, be amended by replacing line 14, on page 20, with the following:

“force, appoint one or more persons, after consultation with the Agency and the government of each province, to carry”.

Mr. Mercier (Blainville–Deux-Montagnes), seconded by Mr. Paré (Louis-Hébert), moved Motion No. 15, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 53, be amended by replacing line 34, on page 20, with the following:

“transportation services, the government of each province and any other persons”.

Mr. Mercier (Blainville–Deux-Montagnes), seconded by Mr. Paré (Louis-Hébert), moved Motion No. 17, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 89, be amended by replacing line 11, on page 39, with the following:

“way is declared by an Act of Parliament, after obtaining the approval of the province concerned, to be”.

Mr. Mercier (Blainville–Deux-Montagnes), seconded by Mr. Paré (Louis-Hébert), moved Motion No. 27, — That Bill C–14 be amended by adding after line 2, on page 64, the following new Clause:

“138.1.

(1)

A railway company under the authority of a provincial legislature may apply to the Agency for the right to run and operate its trains over and on any portion of the railway of any other railway company in order to facilitate the interchange of traffic or to procure a competitive interswitching point with another railway.

(2)

Where the parties do not agree on the conditions or the amount of compensation to be paid, either party may apply to the Agency in writing to have the matter adjudicated by the Agency.”

Mr. Mercier (Blainville–Deux-Montagnes), seconded by Mr. Paré (Louis-Hébert), moved Motion No. 68, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 160, be amended by replacing line 26, on page 76, with the following:

“the government of a province or a railway company under the legislative authority of a province; or”.

Mr. Mercier (Blainville–Deux-Montagnes), seconded by Mr. Paré (Louis-Hébert), moved Motion No. 72, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 228, be amended by replacing line 26, on page 101, with the following:

“(b) the Governor in Council and the province affected consent to”.

Mr. Mercier (Blainville–Deux-Montagnes), seconded by Mr. Paré (Louis-Hébert), moved Motion No. 73, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 228, be amended by adding after line 27, on page 101, the following:

 

“(3)

The Minister of Transport shall not proceed with the expropriation of the interest in land under subsection (2) without the prior agreement of the province in which the land is located.”

Debate arose on the motions in Group No. 5.

The question was put on Motion No. 4 and, pursuant to Standing Order 76(8), the recorded division, which also applies to Motions Nos. 9, 14 and 15, was deferred.

The question was put on Motion No. 17 and, pursuant to Standing Order 76(8), the recorded division, which also applies to Motions Nos. 72 and 73, was deferred.

The question was put on Motion No. 27 and, pursuant to Standing Order 76(8), the recorded division was deferred.

The question was put on Motion No. 68 and, pursuant to Standing Order 76(8), the recorded division was deferred.

Group No. 6

Mr. Gouk (Kootenay West–Revelstoke), seconded by Mr. Stinson (Okanagan–Shuswap), moved Motion No. 6, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 27, be amended by deleting lines 34 to 42, on page 10.

Mr. Anderson (Minister of Transport), seconded by Mr. Axworthy (Minister of Foreign Affairs), moved Motion No. 7, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 27, be amended by replacing line 45, on page 10, with the following:

“section (2) may include but are not limited”.

Mr. Gouk (Kootenay West–Revelstoke), seconded by Mr. Stinson (Okanagan–Shuswap), moved Motion No. 8, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 27, be amended by replacing lines 9 and 10, on page 11, with the following:

“native means of transporting the goods;

(f) the nature of the goods being transported;

(g) the number of markets served by the applicant shipper;

(h) the number of other potential carriers available to the applicant shipper;

(i) the rate differential between potential carriers;

(j) the competitive effects of a rate increase on the destination market, whether domestic or export;

(k) whether a rate increase would impair the ability of the applicant shipper to penetrate or to expand into domestic and export markets;

(l) the financial and competitive impact of the rate increase upon the short-term and the long-term viability of the applicant shipper;

(m) any other matters that appear to the”.

Debate arose on the motions in Group No 6.

The question was put on Motion No. 6 and, pursuant to Standing Order 76(8), the recorded division was deferred.

The question was put on Motion No. 7 and it was agreed to.

The question was put on Motion No. 8 and, pursuant to Standing Order 76(8), the recorded division was deferred.

Group No. 7

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 10, — That Bill C–14 be amended by adding after line 6, on page 18, the following new Clause:

“49.1.

(1)

Where the government of a province requests information

(a)

relative to the costs of a railway company in respect of the transportation services and operations of that company, or

(b)

relative to the costs of the company in moving specified commodities generally or between specified points, the Minister may, in writing, request the company to furnish the Minister with the information in such manner and to such extent as the Minister may specify.

(2)

The Minister may, on receipt of the information requested by the Minister from the company, release the information to the government of the province that requested it, if that government has undertaken to treat the information as confidential.”

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 11, — That Bill C–14 be amended by adding after line 6, on page 18, the following new Clause:

“49.2.

Where the Minister considers it expedient to do so in the public interest, the Minister may, in writing, request a railway company to furnish the Minister with such information concerning its costs as the Minister may specify.”

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 12, — That Bill C–14 be amended by adding after line 6, on page 18, the following new Clause:

“49.3.

(1)

Subject to this section and subsection 49.1(2), no person shall knowingly publish or allow to be published, or communicate or allow to be communicated to any person, any information provided under section 49.1 or released under section 49.2.

(2)

Subsection (1) does not apply so as to prohibit the communication of information to

(a)

a minister of the Crown in right of Canada or any province, or

(b)

an officer or employee of Her Majesty in right of Canada or any province who is required in the course of his duties to receive the information referred to in that subsection.

(3)

Any information furnished under section 49.1 or 49.2 that is relevant to any proceedings under this Act may, for the purposes of those proceedings, be published or communicated by the government of the province to which it was released pursuant to section 49.1, or by the Minister.”

Mr. Althouse (Mackenzie), seconded by Mr. de Jong (Regina–Qu’Appelle), moved Motion No. 13, — That Bill C–14 be amended by adding after line 6, on page 18, the following new Clause:

“49.4.

(1)

A railway company to whom a request is made by the Minister under section 49.1 or 49.2 shall forthwith comply with that request.

(2)

Where a railway company to whom a request is made by the Minister under section 49.1 or 49.2 fails to comply with that request, the Minister may, without prejudice to any penalty to which the company may be liable under this Act, exercise all the powers referred to in this Act to obtain that information.”

Debate arose on the motions in Group No. 7.

The question was put on Motion No. 10 and it was negatived on division.

Accordingly, Motions Nos. 11, 12 and 13 were also negatived on division.

Group No. 8

Mr. Mercier (Blainville–Deux-Montagnes), seconded by Mr. Paré (Louis-Hébert), moved Motion No. 18, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 98, be amended by replacing line 37, on page 42, with the following:

“the Agency, the obtaining of an environmental assessment and compliance with zoning by-laws in the municipalities in any province affected by the railway line.”

Mr. Gouk (Kootenay West–Revelstoke), seconded by Mr. Stinson (Okanagan–Shuswap), moved Motion No. 19, — That Bill C–14, in Clause 101, be amended by adding after line 19, on page 44, the following:

 

“(5)

The Agency may make regulations requiring railway companies to include in agreements relating to the construction or maintenance of a utility or infrastructure crossing prescribed terms and conditions specified or referred to in the regulations or to make such agreements subject to these prescribed terms and conditions.”

At 1:30, pursuant to Standing Order 30(6), the House proceeded to the consideration of Private Members’ Business.

Mr. Gouk (Kootenay West–Revelstoke), seconded by Mr. Stinson (Okanagan–Shuswap), moved, — That, in the opinion of this House, the government should strike an impartial public judicial inquiry into the total process of awarding and cancelling the 1993 Pearson Airport redevelopment contract, leading up to and including the allegations that the Prime Minister of Canada solicited a $25,000 campaign contribution from Paxport Inc. just prior to the last Liberal Party leadership race and the awarding of the Pearson Airport contract to Paxport. (Private Members’ Business M–167)

Debate arose thereon.

Pursuant to Standing Order 96(1), the Order was dropped from the Order Paper.

Pursuant to Standing Order 32(1), papers deposited with the Clerk of the House were laid upon the Table as follows:

At 2:30 p.m., the Speaker adjourned the House until Monday at 11:00 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).