Skip to main content

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.

Minutes of Proceedings

42nd Parliament, 1st Session
Meeting No. 74
Tuesday, October 3, 2017, 3:31 p.m. to 8:06 p.m.
Televised
Presiding
Hon. Judy A. Sgro, Chair (Liberal)

House of Commons
• Olivier Champagne, Legislative Clerk
• Jean-Denis Kusion, Procedural Clerk
 
Library of Parliament
• Zackery Shaver, Analyst
Department of Transport
• Helena Borges, Associate Deputy Minister
• Brigitte Diogo, Director General, Rail Safety
• Marcia Jones, Director, Rail Policy Analysis and Legislative Initiatives
• Valerie Lagacé, Senior Legal Counsel
• Alain Langlois, General Counsel and Deputy Executive Director
• Sara Wiebe, Director General, Air Policy
Department of Industry
• Ian Disend, Senior Policy Analyst, Marketplace Framework Policy Branch
Pursuant to the Order of Reference of Monday, June 19, 2017, the Committee resumed consideration of Bill C-49, An Act to amend the Canada Transportation Act and other Acts respecting transportation and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts.

The Committee commenced its clause-by-clause study of the Bill.

Helena Borges, Alain Langlois, Marcia Jones, Brigitte Diogo and Ian Disend answered questions.

Pursuant to Standing Order 75(1), consideration of Clause 1, Short Title, was postponed.

The Chair called Clause 2.

By unanimous consent, Clauses 2 to 8 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 6; NAYS: 0.

On Clause 9,

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 9, be amended

(a) by replacing line 33 on page 3 with the following:

“(1.01) The Agency may make regulations”

(b) by replacing line 8 on page 4 with the following:

“tors to the public for each class 1 rail carrier.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Kelly Block and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 2; NAYS: 5.

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 9, be amended by adding after line 33 on page 4 the following:

“(4.1) The Minister shall, no later than three years after the day on which this section comes into force, appoint one or more persons to carry out a comprehensive review of its operation and shall, within a year after the review is undertaken or within such further time as the House of Commons may authorize, submit a report to Parliament on that review, including recommendations for any changes.”

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it infringed on the financial initiative of the Crown, as provided on pages 767-768 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition.

Clause 9 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 2.

By unanimous consent, Clauses 10 to 12 inclusive carried on division severally.

On Clause 13,

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 13, be amended by replacing lines 9 and 10 on page 6 with the following:

“purpose of carrying out its powers, duties and functions respecting any matter that comes within its jurisdiction under an Act of Parliament and, despite subsec-”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Kelly Block and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 5.

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 13, be amended by replacing line 19 on page 6 with the following:

“two days after it is received.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Kelly Block and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 8; NAYS: 0.

Clause 13, as amended, carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 8; NAYS: 0.

On Clause 14,

Michael D. Chong moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 14, be amended

(a) by replacing lines 2 to 5 on page 7 with the following:

“arrangement shall notify the Commissioner of Competition of that arrangement and may, in addition, notify the Minister.”

(b) by replacing lines 25 to 30 on page 7 with the following:

“(6) The Commissioner shall, within 45 days after the day on which he or she receives the notice with the information referred to in subsection (2), inform the parties and the Minister as to whether, in his or her opinion, the proposed arrangement raises significant considerations with respect to competition or the public interest.”

(c) by replacing lines 31 to 33 on page 7 with the following:

“(7) If the Commissioner is of the opinion that the proposed arrangement does not raise significant considerations with respect to competition or the public interest, sections 53.72 to 53.79 do”

(d) by replacing lines 1 to 3 on page 8 with the following:

“(8) If the Commissioner is of the opinion that the proposed arrangement raises significant considerations with respect to competition or the public interest, the arrangement is subject to the”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Michael D. Chong and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

Michael D. Chong moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 14, be amended

(a) by replacing line 19 on page 8 with the following:

“(3) The Commissioner shall make public a summary of”

(b) by replacing line 13 on page 9 with the following:

“der subsection (7), render a final decision and make that decision public. The Minister”

After debate, by unanimous consent, the amendment was allowed to stand.

By unanimous consent, Clause 14 was allowed to stand.

By unanimous consent, Clauses 15 to 18 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 0.

On Clause 19,

Robert Aubin moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 19, be amended by replacing line 20 on page 14 to line 37 on page 15 with the following:

“86.11 The carrier shall

(a) make terms and conditions of carriage and information regarding any recourse available against it in the event of the delay or cancellation of flights to, from and within Canada, including connecting flights, or in the event of denial of boarding on such a flight readily available to passengers in language that is simple, clear and concise;

(b) facilitate the assignment of seats to children under the age of 14 years in close proximity to a parent, guardian or tutor at no additional cost and make the carrier’s terms and conditions and practices in this respect readily available to passengers; and

(c) establish terms and conditions of carriage with regard to the transportation of musical instruments.

86.12 (1) This section applies in the event of the delay or cancellation of flights to, from and within Canada, including connecting flights.

(2) In the event of the cancellation or delay of a flight, the carrier shall offer to each passenger their choice of

(a) reimbursement of the full cost of the ticket at the price at which it was bought, for the part or parts of the journey not made — and for the part or parts already made if the flight is no longer serving any purpose in relation to the passenger’s original travel plan — together with, if applicable, the cost of a return flight to the first point of departure at the earliest opportunity;

(b) re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to their final destination at the earliest opportunity; and

(c) re-routing, under comparable transport conditions, to their final destination at a later date at the passenger’s convenience, subject to availability of seats.

(3) In the event of the cancellation of a flight, the carrier shall pay to each passenger an amount of compensation of

(a) 250 dollars for all flights of 1500 kilometres or less;

(b) 400 dollars for all flights between 1500 and 3500 kilometres; or

(c) 600 dollars for all flights of 3500 kilometres or more.

(4) The carrier is not required to pay a passenger the compensation set out in subsection (3) if

(a) the passenger was informed in writing of the cancellation more than 14 days before the flight;

(b) the passenger agreed to re-routing pursuant to subsection (2); and

(c) the flight cancellation was the result of extraordinary circumstances that could not be avoided despite the taking of reasonable measures, including the closing of an airport due to weather conditions.

86.13 (1) The carrier may deny boarding to certain passengers as a result of a flight being overbooked if not enough passengers volunteer to surrender their seats.

(2) The carrier shall pay each passenger who surrenders their seat the total of

(a) the amount of compensation agreed to by the passenger and carrier; and

(b) the compensation provided for in subsection 86.12(3) up to the cost of the ticket at the price at which it was bought.

86.14 (1) If a flight is delayed two hours or more, the carrier shall offer without charge to every passenger meals and refreshments and access to means of communication.

(2) If a flight is delayed overnight, the carrier shall offer without charge to each passenger accommodation for the night.

(3) If a flight is delayed more than five hours, the carrier shall reimburse the passenger the cost of the ticket at the price at which it was bought for the parts of the journey not made.

86.15 If the Agency is of the opinion that the cancellation or delay was the result of a measure or decision taken by the owner or operator of an airport, the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority, NAV CANADA or the Canada Border Services Agency, the Agency shall order that entity to reimburse the carrier for any expenses that it incurred under sections 86.12 to 86.14.

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Robert Aubin and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 1; NAYS: 5.

Clause 19 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 0.

By unanimous consent, Clauses 20 to 22 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 0.

On Clause 23,

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 23, be amended

(a) by replacing lines 1 and 2 on page 18 with the following:

“(1.2) The Agency shall not determine that a company is fulfilling its service obligations unless it is satisfied that the com-”

(b) by deleting lines 14 and 15 on page 18.

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Kelly Block and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 5.

Clause 23 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 0.

Clause 24 carried.

Clause 25 carried.

On Clause 26,

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 26, be amended

(a) by replacing line 19 on page 20 with the following:

“movement of traffic is within a radius of 160 km of an interchange in Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba or Saskatchewan or within a radius of 30 km of an interchange in any other province, or a pre-”

(b) by replacing line 22 on page 20 with the following:

“(a) one of the companies to interswitch the traffic in accordance with the regulations and the interswitching rate; and”

(c) by replacing line 29 on page 20 with the following:

“movement of traffic is within a radius of 160 km of an interchange in Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba or Saskatchewan or within a radius of 30 km of an interchange in any other province, or a pre-”

(d) by replacing lines 4 to 6 on page 21 with the following:

“be within the interswitching limits referred to in subsection (3) if it is not more than 30 km beyond these limits.”

After debate, by unanimous consent, the amendment was allowed to stand.

After debate, by unanimous consent, Clause 26 was allowed to stand.

Clause 27 carried.

Clause 28 carried.

On Clause 29,

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 29, be amended by replacing line 21 on page 22 with the following:

“the movement of the shipper's traffic in the reasonable direction from the point of origin to the point of destination;”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Kelly Block and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 5.

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 29, be amended by deleting lines 5 to 42 on page 23.

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Kelly Block and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 29, be amended by replacing line 10 on page 23 with the following:

“in Canada, and the movement of traffic is in the reasonable direction from the point of origin to the point of destination;”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Kelly Block and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 29, be amended by deleting lines 28 and 29 on page 23.

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Kelly Block and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

Ken Hardie moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 29, be amended by adding after line 42 on page 23 the following:

“(4) For the purpose of paragraph (3)(b), an interchange located in the metropolitan area of Montreal is deemed to be the nearest interchange and to be located outside the Quebec–Windsor corridor if

(a) the point of origin of the movement of the shipper’s traffic is located in Quebec and north of the Quebec-Windsor corridor;

(b) the shipper has access to the lines of only one class 1 rail carrier at the point of origin; and

(c) the nearest interchange is located in the Quebec–Windsor corridor.

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Ken Hardie and it was agreed to.

On Clause 20,

By unanimous consent, it was agreed, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 20, be amended by replacing line 29 on page 16 with the following:

“(a) to the east by longitude 121.21° W,”

On Clause 29,

Robert Aubin moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 29, be amended by adding after line 20 on page 24 the following:

“(3) The provisions of section 127 relating to applications to interswitch traffic between connecting lines apply, with any necessary modifications, to long-haul interswitching.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Robert Aubin and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 29, be amended by replacing line 5 on page 26 with the following:

“determine a commercially competitive rate by having regard to the cost per”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Kelly Block and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 5.

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 29, be amended by replacing lines 10 to 12 on page 26 with the following:

“paragraph (1)(b) to be less than the average of the cost per tonne kilometre for the movement by the local carrier of commercially comparable traffic in respect of which no long-”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Kelly Block and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 29, be amended

(a) by replacing line 2 on page 29 with the following:

“the economic well-being of a shipper or a railway company is seriously”

(b) by adding after line 6 on page 29 the following:

“(2) The Minister shall, no later than three years after the day on which sections 129 to 136.7 come into force, appoint one or more persons to carry out a comprehensive review of their operation and shall, within a year after the review is undertaken or within such further time as the House of Commons may authorize, submit a report to Parliament on that review, including recommendations for any changes.”

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it infringed on the financial initiative of the Crown, as provided on pages 767-768 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition.

After debate, by unanimous consent, Clause 29 was allowed to stand.

By unanimous consent, Clauses 30 to 41 inclusive carried severally.

On Clause 42,

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 42, be amended by replacing line 35 on page 34 to line 3 on page 35 with the following:

“(a) forecasts, for each commodity and principal destination corridor, the total monthly volume of grain expected to be moved for the crop year by the prescribed railway company; and

(b) identifies the operational plans established by the prescribed railway company to enable it to move the grain that it is required to move during the crop year, which are to include information, related specifically to the movement of grain, on hopper car fleet size, fleet utilization assumptions and train operations.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Kelly Block and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 4; NAYS: 5.

Clause 42 carried.

By unanimous consent, Clauses 43 to 45 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 0.

On Clause 46,

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 46, be amended by adding after line 9 on page 36 the following:

“(b.1) if the shipper intends to proceed with the arbitration as set out in section 164.1, a statement to that effect;”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Kelly Block and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 5.

Clause 46 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 0.

On Clause 47,

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 47, be amended by replacing lines 12 to 17 on page 36 with the following:

“164.1 If the shipper’s submission under section 161 indicates that the shipper intends the arbitration to proceed under this section, sections 163 and 164 do not apply and the arbitra-”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Kelly Block and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 2; NAYS: 4.

Clause 47 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 1.

By unanimous consent, Clauses 48 to 51 inclusive carried severally by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 0.

On Clause 52,

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 52, be amended by deleting lines 11 and 12 on page 39.

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Kelly Block and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 5.

At 5:20 p.m., the sitting was suspended.

At 6:29 p.m., the sitting resumed.

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 52, be amended by deleting lines 19 to 24 on page 39.

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Kelly Block and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 2; NAYS: 4.

Clause 52 carried.

By unanimous consent, Clauses 53 to 59 inclusive carried severally.

On new Clause 59.1,

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 59.1, be amended by adding after line 23 on page 41 the following new clause:

“59.1 (1) The Minister shall, no later than three years after the first day on which sections 2 to 52 of this Act are all in force, carry out a comprehensive review of the operation of this Act in relation to the Canada Transportation Act and any other Act of Parliament for which the Minister is responsible that pertains to the economic regulation of a mode of transportation or to transportation activities under the legislative authority of Parliament.

(2) The Minister shall, within a year after the review referred to in subsection (1) is undertaken or within such further time as the House of Commons may authorize, submit a report to Parliament on that review, including recommendations for any changes.”

Debate arose thereon.

Michael D. Chong moved, — That the amendment be amended by replacing the word “three” with the word “five”.

After debate, the question was put on the subamendment of Michael D. Chong and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 5.

The question was put on the amendment of Kelly Block and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 5.

Clause 60 carried.

On new Clause 60.1,

Angelo Iacono moved, — That Bill C-49 be amended by adding after line 34 on page 41 the following new clause:

“60.1 (1) Despite sections 173 to 176 of the Canada Business Corporations Act, CN’s directors may amend its articles in accordance with the amendment set out in section 60.

(2) When the directors amend the articles under subsection (1), they shall send the articles of amendment to the Director in accordance with section 177 of the Canada Business Corporations Act.

(3) The following definitions apply in this section.

CN has the same meaning as in subsection 2(1) of the CN Commercialization Act. (CN)

Director has the same meaning as in subsection 2(1) of the Canada Business Corporations Act. (directeur)”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Angelo Iacono and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 3.

On Clause 61,

Robert Aubin moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 61, be amended by replacing lines 13 to 16 on page 42 with the following:

“(2) No company referred to in subsection (1) shall use the information that it records, collects or preserves under that subsection.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Robert Aubin and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 5.

Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Monday, May 2, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-49, in Clause 61, be amended by adding after line 20 on page 42 the following:

“(4) The information that a company records, collects or preserves under subsection (1) shall not be destroyed if it is used, or can reasonably be expected to be used, for any purpose authorized under this Act.”

The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 0; NAYS: 6.

Clause 61 carried.

On Clause 62,

Robert Aubin moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 62, be amended

(a) by replacing line 24 on page 42 to line 14 on page 43 with the following:

“17.91 A company that collects or communicates information under section 17.31 or 17. 92 may do so”

(b) by replacing line 25 on page 43 to line 8 on page 45 with the following:

“17.92 Only the Canadian Transportation Accident Investigation and Safety Board may use the information that a company records, collects or preserves under subsection 17.31(1) to determine the causes and contributing factors of an accident or incident that must be reported under the Canadian Transportation Accident Investigation and Safety Board Act and that the Board investigates.”

(c) by deleting lines 19 to 36 on page 45.

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Robert Aubin and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 1; NAYS: 5.

Pursuant to the order adopted by the Committee on Monday, May 2, 2016, the following amendment, submitted by Elizabeth May for the consideration of the Committee, was deemed moved:

That Bill C-49, in Clause 62, be amended by adding after line 4 on page 43 the following:

“(1.1) For greater certainty, the information that a company records, collects or preserves under subsection 17.31(1) is not to be used for any purpose other than the one referred to in paragraph (1), including managerial review or productivity and employee output measurement.”

The question was put on the amendment of Elizabeth May and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 0; NAYS: 6.

Clause 62 carried.

By unanimous consent, Clauses 63 and 64 carried severally.

On Clause 65,

Robert Aubin moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 65, be amended by deleting lines 23 to 25 on page 46.

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Robert Aubin and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 6.

Clause 65 carried.

Clause 66 carried.

On Clause 67,

Robert Aubin moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 67, be amended

(a) by replacing lines 20 and 21 on page 47 with the following:

nautics Act, the National Energy Board Act or the Canada Shipping Act, 2001 to use”

(b) by replacing lines 28 and 29 on page 47 with the following:

Act, the National Energy Board Act or the Canada Shipping Act, 2001 and”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Robert Aubin and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 1; NAYS: 5.

Clause 67 carried.

Clause 68 carried.

On Clause 69,

Robert Aubin moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 69, be amended by replacing lines 1 to 6 on page 49 with the following:

“(3) The costs incurred for the delivery of screening by the Authority under the terms of an agreement entered into under subsection (1) shall be borne by the Authority and may not be recovered from the other party to the agreement.”

The Chair ruled the proposed amendment inadmissible because it was contrary to the principle of the Bill, as provided on page 766 of House of Commons Procedure and Practice, Second Edition.

Clause 69 carried.

By unanimous consent, Clauses 70 to 76 inclusive carried severally.

On Clause 77,

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 77, be amended by replacing lines 22 and 23 on page 54 with the following:

“may specify, a report for each of its railway lines containing the information specified in paragraphs 1250.2(a)(1) to (11) of Title”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Kelly Block and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 4.

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 77, be amended by replacing line 28 on page 55 with the following:

“five days after the last day of the period of seven”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Kelly Block and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 0.

Clause 77, as amended, carried.

By unanimous consent, Clauses 78 to 97 inclusive carried severally.

On Clause 98,

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 98, be amended by replacing lines 26 and 27 on page 65 with the following:

“(7) Section 77 comes into force 60 days after the day on which this Act receives”

Debate arose thereon.

Gagan Sikand moved, — That the amendment be amended by replacing the word “60” with the word “180”.

After debate, the question was put on the subamendment of Gagan Sikand and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.

The question was put on the amendment of Kelly Block, as amended, and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 9; NAYS: 0.

Clause 98, as amended, carried.

By unanimous consent, the Committee reverted to the consideration of the amendment of Michael D. Chong previously stood which read as follows: That Bill C-49, in Clause 14, be amended

(a) by replacing line 19 on page 8 with the following:

“(3) The Commissioner shall make public a summary of”

(b) by replacing line 13 on page 9 with the following:

“der subsection (7), render a final decision and make that decision public. The Minister”

By unanimous consent, the amendment was withdrawn.

Sean Fraser moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 14, be amended

(a) by replacing lines 19 and 20 on page 8 with the following:

“(3) Unless a notice is withdrawn or is deemed to have been withdrawn under section 53.8, the Commissioner shall make public a summary of the conclusions of the report that does not include any confidential information.”

(b) by replacing line 13 on page 9 with the following:

“der subsection (7), render a final decision and make public a summary of that decision that does not include any confidential information. The Minister”

(c) by replacing line 26 on page 9 with the following:

“tion, vary or rescind the terms and conditions and shall make public a summary of that decision that does not include any confidential information.”

(d) by replacing line 27 on page 9 with the following:

“53.76 (1) The parties to an authorized arrangement may”

(e) by adding after line 37 on page 9 the following:

“(2) If the Minister authorizes the amendment under paragraph (1)(a), he or she shall make public a summary of that decision that does not include any confidential information.”

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Sean Fraser and it was agreed to.

After debate, Clause 14, as amended, carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 8; NAYS: 0.

By unanimous consent, the Committee reverted to the consideration of the amendment of Michael D. Chong previously stood which read as follows: That Bill C-49, in Clause 26, be amended

(a) by replacing line 19 on page 20 with the following:

“movement of traffic is within a radius of 160 km of an interchange in Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba or Saskatchewan or within a radius of 30 km of an interchange in any other province, or a pre-”

(b) by replacing line 22 on page 20 with the following:

“(a) one of the companies to interswitch the traffic in accordance with the regulations and the interswitching rate; and”

(c) by replacing line 29 on page 20 with the following:

“movement of traffic is within a radius of 160 km of an interchange in Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba or Saskatchewan or within a radius of 30 km of an interchange in any other province, or a pre-”

(d) by replacing lines 4 to 6 on page 21 with the following:

“be within the interswitching limits referred to in subsection (3) if it is not more than 30 km beyond these limits.”

The question was put on the amendment of Michael D. Chong and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 2; NAYS: 5.

Clause 26 carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 1.

By unanimous consent, the Committee reverted to Clause 29 previously stood.

Sean Fraser moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 29, be amended by replacing lines 14 to 17 on page 29 with the following:

“its list only after the expiry of 120 days after it

(a) has published a notice of its intention to do so on its Internet site or the Internet site of an association or other entity representing railway companies; and

(b) has sent a copy of the notice to the Agency.

(3) For greater certainty, the removal of an interchange under subsection (2) does not relieve a railway company from its service obligations.”

At 7:52 p.m., the sitting was suspended.

At 8:00 p.m., the sitting resumed.

After debate, the question was put on the amendment of Sean Fraser and it was agreed to, by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 0.

Kelly Block moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 29, be amended by adding after line 17 on page 29 the following:

“(3) A railway company shall not remove an interchange from its list without applying to the Agency for permission to do so.

(4) A railway company shall not remove an interchange if to do so would compromise its level of service obligations under sections 113 to 116. ”

The question was put on the amendment of Kelly Block and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 2; NAYS: 5.

Robert Aubin moved, — That Bill C-49, in Clause 29, be amended by adding after line 17 on page 29 the following:

“(3) A railway company shall not remove an interchange if doing so would compromise its ability to fulfil its service obligations.”

The question was put on the amendment of Robert Aubin and it was negatived, by a show of hands: YEAS: 3; NAYS: 5.

Clause 29, as amended, carried by a show of hands: YEAS: 5; NAYS: 3.

Clause 1, Short Title, carried.

The Title carried.

The Bill, as amended, carried.

ORDERED, — That the Chair report the Bill, as amended, to the House.

ORDERED, — That Bill C-49, as amended, be reprinted for the use of the House at report stage.

The Committee proceeded to the consideration of matters related to Committee business.

It was agreed, — That the Committee proceed to clause-by-clause consideration of Bill S-2, An Act to amend the Motor Vehicle Safety Act and to make a consequential amendment to another Act, on Tuesday, October 17, 2017; and that Members submit their suggested amendments to the Clerk of the Committee no later than 5:00 pm on Thursday, October 12, 2017.

At 8:06 p.m., the Committee adjourned to the call of the Chair.



Marie-France Lafleur
Clerk of the Committee