Committee
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Consult the user guide
For assistance, please contact us
Add search criteria
Results: 1 - 16 of 16
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
The dominant fact today about the oil industry and therefore pipeline safety is the fact that it's experiencing a sudden and rather deep downturn.
Do you have any concerns that the economic pressures the oil industry is facing might have an impact on pipeline safety and on the ability of companies to meet some of these financial demands laid out in the act?
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you.
As I understand it, the bill would set up a consolidated revenue fund that would be available to pay for claims that a company is unable to satisfy in the event of a catastrophic spill. Is that right?
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Can you say how it's the case and how it's not the case, and give us some insight into the thinking around it?
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Can you give us any sense of what the considerations would be that would go into figuring out a reasonable period of time for industry to pay back Canadians?
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Mr. Labonté, in one of your answers you referred to the fact that this comes as part of a broader universe of different forms of transport and safety levels of those different forms of transport. That was especially interesting to me because in my riding of Toronto Centre there is very heightened concern about rail safety because of the rail line that passes through this very dense urban riding.
Could you give us a sense of how the safety measures set out here for pipelines compare with the level of safety and regulation for transport by rail? Have you thought about it in the context of that bigger puzzle?
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
I'd like to follow up on some of the questions that Monsieur Caron and Ms. Charlton were asking specifically about the three-year time limit.
Let's imagine a situation in which the billion-dollar limit has been reached and then, after the three years, new claims arise. How would those claimants be covered?
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
If I may say, in defence of that line of questioning, surely part of the job of legislation is to imagine various hypothetical situations and to cover them.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
But I thought I just understood from the first part of the answer that, if I made a claim after the three years, I would be okay because negligence had already been established, and now I'm understanding that's not the case.
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
Do I have another minute?
View Chrystia Freeland Profile
Lib. (ON)
I'll go back to Ms. Charlton's point about volumetrics versus type of goods.
Again, in my riding, on rail safety, my constituents are extremely concerned about certain types of oil being transported by rail, especially in their case the Bakken. Are there any particular types of oil transported in pipelines that you are particularly concerned about? I heard your arguments about volumetrics being the best metric, but is there something which there should be a special level of scrutiny around?
Results: 1 - 16 of 16

Export As: XML CSV RSS

For more data options, please see Open Data