|
October
18,
2014
-
No.
37
Canada-U.S.
Regulatory Cooperation Council
Oversees Destruction of Public Authority
Canada-U.S. Regulatory Cooperation
Council
Oversees
Destruction of Public Authority
Current Phase of Canada's Annexation into United States
of North
American Monopolies
Early in October, regulators from Canada and the U.S.
met in Washington,
DC to begin implementing the Canada-U.S. Regulatory Cooperation
Council's
(RCC) Joint Forward Plan. The Plan, released in August jointly by the
Harper and Obama governments, is to "harmonize" the functioning of
regulatory departments and agencies in both countries, "set[ting] the
stage for
fundamental changes in the way [they] work together, making it easier
for
businesses to operate in both countries." The RCC was formed in 2011
when
Canada and the U.S. signed the Beyond the Border Joint Declaration.
 The harmonization and
integration of societies on the basis of upholding
public right and the right of the people to decide the affairs that
affect their
lives would be a positive human-centred development which would
contribute
greatly to boosting the well-being of the peoples. However, these
activities are
part of the arrangements to annex Canada into the United States of
North
American Monopolies that began taking shape during the Liberal
governments
of Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin, followed by the signing of the
Beyond the
Border Plan Declaration by the Harper government. This is diametrically
opposed to the historical basis on which Canada was formed as a
nation-state
against U.S. annexationist designs and "manifest destiny."
These arrangements are part of the neo-liberal
anti-social offensive and
usurpation of decision-making power by governments in service of
private
interests, in which Canada's sovereignty has been eroded at an
increasing pace,
with its institutions, laws and regulations, that are supposed to
uphold the
public authority and the public interest, being undermined or
eliminated
altogether. This includes integrating Canada's military and civilian
security
agencies directly into the command structure of the U.S. military
apparatus,
to bolster U.S. imperialism and its striving to dominate the world.
The financial oligarchy refuses to recognize Canada as
an independent
nation state, treating it as a jurisdiction within an entity they call
"North
America." They move production from one jurisdiction to another to
attack wages and
working conditions and extract concessions or to blackmail governments
for
a friendlier business climate and "financial incentives." All of this
places
working people more and more in slave-labour conditions. This same
nation-wrecking and subjugation to imperialism is taking place in the
U.S. and
Mexico as well.
For the working class and people of Canada, Mexico and
the U.S.
as well as those
of Quebec, Puerto Rico and the First Nations, these developments are a
direct
attack on their right to decide their own affairs, way of life and
future.
The times are calling for the working class and people
to oppose the
destruction of the Canadian nation state by putting forward their own
nation-building project. The aim of this resistance is to affirm public
right by
depriving the monopolies of their ability to deprive us of what belongs
to us
by right. Blocking the monopolies from acting with impunity is crucial
at this
time.
TML Weekly is providing information on recent
developments
relating to the manner in which the governments of Canada and the U.S.
are
putting these new arrangements in place.
October Meeting of Regulators and Monopolies
On October 7-8, a meeting was held in Washington, DC to
begin the
process of implementing the Regulator Cooperation Council's Joint
Forward
Plan. On the first day, some 70 regulators from Canada met
with 134 of their counterparts from the U.S. to begin the task of
"bringing the
two regulatory systems into greater sync." Those expected at the
meeting
represented about 90 per cent of the regulators responsible for goods
that cross
the border -- from food to automobiles. On the second day, 200
representatives
of the monopolies and their associations in various industries met with
regulators to provide further "input" as to which regulations they
wanted
changed.
The approach of bringing together regulators across
ministries is new,
states a report in Maclean's Magazine. Until now, the process
has
been driven from the RCC secretariat inside the Canadian Treasury Board
Secretariat and the White House Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs.
This reveals the manner in which monopoly interests have taken over the
executive powers of government for their own interests and are now
seeking
to use these powers to broaden the scope of their control by destroying
public
authorities across the board.
The report states: "The goal is to fundamentally change
the relationships
between regulators in both countries -- to make the alignment of rules
and
procedures the default, rather than the exception -- and to end the
'tyranny of
small differences' that raise costs."
The report continues: "Until now, progress has been ad
hoc and tentative:
some veterinary drugs have been approved through joint testing, and the
two
countries have collaborated on vehicle emissions standards, for
example. One
high ranking official in the office of the regulatory cooperation
council
secretariat in the Treasury Board says 'that's about to change as the
regulatory
agencies meet and design a work plan for the coming year.'" He said the
goal
is not for one country to move to the other's standards but to update
the
standards together, or adopt international standards simultaneously,
with the
unstated aim of upholding monopoly right. Whether the standards are
U.S.,
Canadian or "international" the issue for the working people is by whom
are
they set and whose interests are upheld.
The report presents Canada's interests as synonymous
with those of the
U.S. and in this way asserts that there is no need for independent
Canadian
decision making. "These [regulatory] systems have developed and evolved
independently over decades, and both are highly successful. But because
we
often have different or duplicative approaches to targeting the same
outcomes,
unnecessary and duplicative requirements have developed. The RCC
[Regulatory Cooperation Council] is an effort to bring the systems into
closer
alignment," the report said.
New Plan for Regulatory Alignment
 On August 29, the
Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC) set out its new
Joint Forward Plan to implement the second phase of regulatory
cooperation
between Canadian and U.S. regulatory bodies. The main feature of the
plan is
to systematize the integration of the decision-making regulatory bodies
of
Canada and the U.S. in a manner that serves monopoly right. This is
what the
monopolies and their representatives in government refer to as the
"tyranny of
small differences." These differences in regulations across borders
that
increase costs/lower their profits, are their main preoccupation, not
the
aim of upholding the public interest and the needs of Canadians which
such
regulations are supposed to serve.
A government news release describes the plan in this
manner:
"The Joint Forward Plan builds on the RCC Joint Action
Plan launched in
December 2011 by Prime Minister Harper and President Obama. The initial
RCC Joint Action Plan focussed on several initiatives that reduced
unnecessary
regulatory differences, fostered new approaches and served as a
template for
future efforts between Canada and the United States.
"The new Joint Forward Plan will deepen Canada-U.S.
regulatory
cooperation through new bi-national processes and partnerships. This
approach
will institutionalize joint planning and collaboration between Canadian
and
U.S. regulatory agencies.
"This includes broad new commitments in 24 areas of
regulatory business,
moving from a focus on individual initiatives toward an approach where
regulators not only address current issues but also make the broad
changes
necessary to prevent misalignments from happening in the future.
"The Joint Forward Plan will result in reducing the
burden on business
thereby boosting North American trade and competitiveness."
The plan is said to be based on submissions solicited by
the RCC in both
countries on how the RCC should improve its operation. Those submitting
were mainly representatives of the monopolies, or the monopolies
themselves
in almost every sector of the economy, as well as a number of think
tanks and
industry analysts.[1] In almost all cases those
submitting views congratulated
the RCC on its work to date but raised the need to systematize
regulatory
integration so that going forward no costs for the monopolies are
introduced
with differing regulations across jurisdictions and to eliminate those
differences
that exist. A report from the RCC summarizes the input received:
"Nearly 90 per cent of the responses received were
supportive of efforts
to advance Canada-U.S. regulatory cooperation. Key themes included the
importance of institutionalizing Canada-U.S. regulatory cooperation to
make
it a permanent fixture between our regulatory systems, and the
importance of
stakeholder engagement and their role. Stakeholders also identified
many
additional areas where regulators should work together to secure
alignment in
the next phase of work."
In an article concerning the RCC's work to implement the
Joint Forward
Plan, Kelly Johnston, Vice-President of Campbell Soup expressed the
interests
of the monopolies whose operations are integrated on both sides of the
border.
She said the level of alignment in new food labelling requirements the
two
countries have been working on has been "impressive." However "[...]
the big
prize will be a ‘seamless' inspection system where food items are
inspected
once in North America -- eliminating duplicate inspections and allowing
more
food products to cross the border without being stopped," said
Johnston.
"We're obviously not there yet, but that's where the RCC is headed."
The question of why inspections are carried out is
sidelined, as is Canada
and all Canadians. The only concern is how to ensure that the
monopolies can
operate as easily and freely as possible.
Areas to Be Institutionalized
The Forward Plan outlines the
institutionalization to be carried out by "Establishing
department-level
bi-national processes to strengthen regulatory partnership;
Establishing
department-to-department commitments and work plans; and Addressing
cross-cutting issues."
With respect to "Department Level Bi-National Processes
for Deeper
Regulatory Partnership" the document states: "Partnerships will be
established
between regulatory departments and agencies with similar mandates. Each
will
be adapted to the practical realities between these organizations."
Regarding "Department-to-Department Commitments and Work
Plans," it
notes, "The Joint Forward Plan identifies key areas of work that will
be
addressed by the first of a series of annual technical work plans. Work
will
continue in areas such as marine safety and security, pharmaceuticals,
food
safety, plant and animal health, and crop protection products. In
addition, new
areas of work including, for example, energy efficiency, toy safety ,
medical
devices, chemicals management and the use of natural gas in
transportation
will be launched under the Joint Forward Plan."
Some examples of "commitments" are cited:
"Natural Resources Canada will work with the U.S.
Department of Energy
and the U.S. Department of Transportation (Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials
Safety Administration) on the development of work plans related to
energy
efficiency standards, standards for the use of natural gas in
transportation, and
explosives classification. Work in the areas of marine safety and
security,
locomotive emissions, connected vehicles, transportation of dangerous
goods,
motor vehicle safety standards and rail safety will be undertaken by
Transport
Canada working with its counterparts in the U.S. Department of
Transportation, the U.S. Coast Guard, and the U.S. Environmental
Protection
Agency. Work plans across six sectors will be developed by Health
Canada
with its U.S. counterparts in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration,
the U.S.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and the U.S.
Environmental
Protection Agency. The regulatory issues covered include pharmaceutical
and
biological products, over-the-counter products, medical devices,
veterinary
drugs, workplace chemicals and crop protection products. The Canadian
Food
Inspection Agency (CFIA) work will focus on meat
inspection/certification,
plant health, animal health and food safety. The CFIA will partner with
the
U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration
in the development and implementation of work plans in these areas.
Fisheries
and Oceans Canada will develop a work plan with the National Oceanic
and
Atmospheric Administration in the U.S. Department of Commerce."
The document describes what is meant by "cross-cutting
issues":
"In the course of implementing the initial RCC Joint
Action Plan, it has
become clear that certain laws and/or policies in both governments can
present
challenges to international regulatory cooperation, regardless of
sector. These
cross-cutting issues include areas such as sharing information and
funding."
This is to say that privacy and other laws and regulations which do not
currently permit the sharing of information because they are based on
Canada
and the U.S. being separate countries, represent "challenges" to these
arrangements and are being singled out for removal.
Funding for these arrangements would usually approved
through budgetary
and other arrangements, in most cases requiring the approval of
legislative
bodies. However, omnibus budget bills is one way in which such funding
can
be hidden from scrutiny.
Areas Targeted for Institutionalizing Regulatory
Alignment
The new Forward Plan singles out various areas in which
new permanent arrangements are to be established. The following are
excerpts
concerning a number of those areas:
"Rail Safety Standards: Transport Canada and the Federal
Railroad
Administration have established a bilateral process for the development
of rail
safety requirements. They will sign a Memorandum of Cooperation to
facilitate
the exchange of information on rail related safety research and
regulatory
actions.
"Marine Transportation Security Regulations: Transport
Canada (TC) and
the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) have jointly developed Guidelines
Respecting
Marine Security Regulatory Development Collaboration to facilitate
bi-lateral
regulatory collaboration thereby ensuring ongoing regulatory alignment
for
policies, bulletins and regulations development. The two departments
have
developed joint regulatory priority lists and completed a comparative
study of
Canadian and U.S. regulations so that regulatory differences can be
identified
and prioritized for possible legislative amendments or other
cooperation work.
TC has proposed amendments to the Marine Transportation Security
Regulations to align the definition of Certain Dangerous Cargoes
between
Canada and the United States and provide authority to allow TC to enter
into
Alternative Security Arrangements with the USCG.
"Regulatory Oversight Regime on the Great Lakes &
St. Lawrence
Seaway: Transport Canada and U.S. Coast Guard completed a Port State
Control pilot project that involved 10 joint ship inspections to test
the
feasibility and benefits of mutual recognition of examinations, joint
inspections
and sharing of inspection results. Lessons learned during the pilot
project will
lead to recommendations for a course of action that eliminates
unnecessary
duplication of inspections, screening and reporting regimes. The two
departments are developing possible approaches for mutual recognition
of
regulatory oversight regimes to reduce the number of inspections
conducted on
lakers while maintaining the same level of safety.
"Dangerous Goods Means of Containment: Transport Canada
and the U.S.
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration are moving their
transportation of dangerous goods regulations into closer alignment.
Regulatory
amendments were made to align new and revised standards pertaining to
the
selection, design and manufacture of means of containment used in the
transportation of dangerous goods, mutual recognition of United Nations
standard pressure receptacles, recognition of inspection under U.S.
requirements for highway tanks and a closer alignment of placarding
requirements. A Memorandum of Cooperation was also signed between
United
States and Canadian officials regarding the safe transportation of
dangerous
goods that solidifies international collaboration, information sharing,
and policy
and enforcement coordination.
"Unmanned Aircraft Systems [aka unmanned drones --
TML Ed.
Note]: Transport Canada (TC) and the Federal Aviation
Administration
(FAA) signed Rulemaking Cooperation Guidelines to promote cooperation
in
the early stages of the rulemaking process, which will help ensure
alignment
of Canadian and U.S. Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) programs as both
countries prepare to propose new UAS regulations. The FAA provided and
discussed with TC the release of their UAS Roadmap and a Comprehensive
Plan on the UAS Path Forward. TC and the FAA have coordinated on
efforts
to address the increase in illegal UAS operations."
Note
1. A full list of the submissions to the RCC from those
who agreed to
have them made public can be found here.
Presence of U.S. Security Agents on Canadian Soil Made
Permanent
 The following reports from
the Beyond the Border Action
Plan website
provide an update on the implementation of the security perimeter
arrangement
between Canada and the U.S. which places U.S. military and security
forces
on Canadian soil and in control of Canadian security agencies. They
reveal
how U.S. troops on Canadian soil implementing Canadian law is also
moving
from pilot project to permanent arrangement behind the backs of
Canadians:
- "On April 7, 2014, the U.S. Coast Guard and the Royal
Canadian
Mounted Police ‘J' Division, met in Eastport, Maine, to formally sign
the
Eastern Region International Cross-Border Maritime Law Enforcement
Operations, (also known as Shiprider), regional standard operating
procedures.
These operations provide a cooperative approach to combatting
cross-border
crime on shared Canada -- U.S. waterways, consistent with the Beyond
the
Border vision. The Shiprider program removes the international maritime
boundary as a barrier to law enforcement by enabling seamless and
continuous
enforcement and security operations across the Canada-U.S. border."
- "On February 24, 2014, Canada's Minister of Public
Safety and
Emergency Preparedness, Steven Blaney, Canada's Minister of National
Defence, Robert Nicholson, the U.S. Deputy Secretary of Homeland
Security,
the U.S. Senator for New York and U.S. Congressman for Western New York
officially launched Phase II of the truck cargo pre-inspection pilot at
the Peace
Bridge crossing between Fort Erie, Ontario, and Buffalo, New York. The
pilot
will operate for up to one year, during which time Canada and the U.S.
are
using the pilot to test the concept of conducting U.S. Custom and
Border
Protection (CBP) primary inspection of U.S.-bound truck cargo in Canada
in
order to better manage their shared border and improve economic
opportunities
for both countries. To date, testing of the pre-inspection impact on
border wait
times under the Peace Bridge pilot has been running smoothly and
feedback
from involved partners and stakeholders has been positive. Phase I of
the
pre-inspection pilot, which was conducted at the Pacific Highway
crossing
adjacent to Surrey, BC, concluded in January 2014."
It is important to note that Canadian security agents
are not being placed
on U.S. soil to conduct pre-clearance inspections there. It is clear
this is not
a mutual arrangement.
One of the targets of pre-clearance arrangements when
the Beyond the
Border Action Plan was first launched was to place U.S. security
officials in
or just outside major Canadian manufacturing plants. The reason given
was to
pre-clear goods so they would not require inspection at the border. By
extension this would mean that U.S. national interests and national
security
would include these facilities and the workers' resistance and
organizing would
be criminalized in the name of protecting U.S. national security. This
raises the
importance of opposing the placement of U.S. forces on Canadian soil no
matter what the pretext.
Regulation and Non-Regulation of Economic
Activity
Canada-Europe Trade Agreement Aims to
End All
Restrictions on
Monopoly Right
- Dougal MacDonald -
Action against CETA at
London City Hall, September 25, 2014. Protestors hold up signs
showing the many
municipalities that are taking a stand against CETA. (M. Roy/The Indignants)
One aspect of the Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement
(CETA)
between Canada and the European Union (EU)[1] which has
major
implications for the future of the Canadian people is the regulation or
non-regulation of economic activity by governments. Chapter 14 of CETA
deals with domestic regulations, while Chapter 26 deals with regulatory
cooperation between Canada and the EU, the first time such a chapter
has
appeared in any Canadian free trade agreement. The fact that all of
Harper's
free trade agreements are created to serve the interests of the
monopolies and
not the Canadian people, is blatantly demonstrated in both these
chapters. It
should be noted that any disputes about regulations and any other
matters that
occur after CETA is ratified are to be sorted out by corporate legal
tribunals
which are to operate in secret.
 Chapter 14, Domestic
Regulations, applies to "cross border services" and
to economic activity in the territory of the "other Party" to the
agreement. In
regard to an EU monopoly pursuing economic activity in Canada, CETA
states
that Canada's domestic regulations must be based on criteria which
"preclude
competent authorities from exercising their power in an arbitrary
manner"-- in
other words, which prevent national sovereign bodies from restricting
monopoly right. Further the criteria for domestic regulations must be
both
"objective" -- no doubt from the standpoint of the monopolies -- and
"established in advance" -- suggesting that new regulations can not be
implemented. To better expedite the foreign monopolies' economic
penetration
there must be a "prompt review" of applications, "simple procedures" to
follow
and no undue complications or delays, with final decisions reached
within a
"reasonable period of time." No reference is made to the rights of
workers, the
rights of indigenous peoples or care of the environment as legitimate
factors
to consider.
Chapter 26 of CETA, Regulatory Cooperation, starts by
making clear that,
like domestic regulations, regulatory cooperation must serve the
interests of the
monopolies. Chapter 26 states that the aim of such cooperation is to
"prevent
and eliminate unnecessary barriers to trade and investment," "enhance
the
climate for competitiveness" and support so-called public policy
objectives.
Simply put, these are the aims of governments like the Harper
dictatorship that
shamelessly champions the monopolies. Another aspect of regulatory
cooperation is to identify "alternative instruments" for regulation,
which in the
neoliberal world means "self-regulation" by the monopolies -- leaving
the fox
to mind the henhouse. Any Canada-EU consultation on regulatory
cooperation
is to be "non-public," that is, carried out in secret. It eventually
becomes clear
in Chapter 26 that the real goal is not just regulatory cooperation but
regulatory "convergence" and "harmonization." Both sides are to engage
in a
mutual race to the bottom until the monopolies have totally
unrestricted free
reign to better plunder the economies of both Canada and the EU.
CETA shows once again that the political rule and
concentrated expression
of free trade is the exercise of monopoly right over public right in
all matters
and domains, with private monopoly interests supplanting the public
authority
and civil service within the political institutions. The attack on
domestic
regulations and the aim of converging Canada's regulations with those
of its
more powerful European partners exemplify this, just as the same is
being
achieved through free trade agreements with the United States. All
important
political matters are decided behind closed doors by those private
monopoly
interests directly involved in taking the decisions which affect the
public
authority. The rights of all, especially the working class, are under
extreme
pressure. All forms of civil and labour rule and rights once considered
important to maintaining the stability of the society are rapidly being
abolished
in the rush to establish Canada as a vassal within a United States of
North
American Monopolies.
In order to establish a self-reliant economy with
manufacturing as its
foundation so as to guarantee the well-being of the people under all
circumstances, all free trade agreements must be annulled, including
CETA,
with instead equal trade for mutual benefit with all nations big or
small,
recognizing the inalienable right of the Canadian people and First
Nations to
ownership and control of all their natural resources and the
inalienable right
of the Canadian people to control all decision-making that affects the
socialized economy and the social and natural environment; and all
military
agreements with the U.S. and participation in its foreign wars must be
ended.
Finally, it requires the empowerment of the sovereign people within
modern
renewed political institutions that guarantee the right of the people
to govern
themselves and their own affairs.
Note
1. One year ago, on October 18, 2013, Canada's Prime
Minister Stephen
Harper and EU President José Manuel Barroso announced the
signing of the
Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) between Canada and the
European Union (EU). CETA still has to be ratified by all 28 EU member
states, as well as each of Canada's provinces, a process expected to
take two
years or longer. The plan for CETA was initially hatched after a joint
EU-Canada study released in 2008 and negotiations officially began in
May
2009. As with all of Harper's free trade agreements, the negotiations
have been
deliberately kept secret from the Canadian people. However, on August
13, a
521-page copy of the final draft of CETA, dated August 5 at Brussels,
was
leaked to the public.
Broad Opposition to Neo-Liberal Free Trade
Opposition to Canada-EU Trade Agreement
Continues
Following the spirited September 26 action on Parliament
Hill against
the Canada-EU Comprehensive Trade and Economic Agreement (CETA),
organized by the Canadian Maritime and Supply Chain Coalition, marine
industry workers have followed through on
their vow to make sure that people across the country are mobilized to
stop CETA, by seeing to it that people are properly
informed about the dangers of the CETA, its attack on the regulations
that protect this vital Canadian
industry, workers' rights, public services and the public authority. In
Ontario, Quebec
and British
Columbia, workers have been leafleting on sidewalks and at metro
stations, going door-to-door, as well as calling, emailing and visiting
MPs and government ministers.
St. Catharines; Justice Minister Rob
Nicholson's Office, Niagara Falls
  
Montreal; Quebec
City; Vancouver
Minister of
International Trade Ed Fast's Office, Abbotsford
 
European Day of Action Against CETA, TTPI and TiSA
On October 11, protests took place across Europe
demanding an end to the
negotiations on three major trade agreements: the EU-U.S. Transatlantic
Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP),
the EU-Canada CETA deal, and the trade in services deal (TiSA) being
negotiated by 23 members of the World Trade Organization. Actions took
place in 22 countries across Europe, with marches, rallies and other
public events held in more than 1,000 locations. Europeans are greatly
concerned about how these agreements will supercede the public
authority and the people's right to decide their affairs.
Reporting on the significance of the actions, the
Revolutionary Communist Party of Britain (Marxist-Leninist) points out,
"The TTIP is designed to aid the free flow of finance capital, and ride
roughshod over countries' sovereignty and negate the public authority
of those countries in favour of the rule of international finance
capital. [... I]t is a neo-liberal arrangement for the unfettered
dictate of the monopolies. Not least, it would open up public services,
including schools and hospitals, to privatisation under the direction
of the health monopolies, particularly those of the United States,
under the guise of 'harmonisation' of regulations. In particular, it
would aim to make irreversible this privatisation, which is not to say
that the state would be by-passed. In fact, the role of the state as
the agent of the monopolies would be enhanced by means of TTIP.
"Under TTIP, the monopolies would be empowered by means of the Investor
State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) to sue publicly-owned bodies if they
thought there was an 'indirect expropriation' of future profits. [...]
"The Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA) is planned to
liberalise the trade of services such as banking and transport between
23 parties [including the EU and Canada], initiated by the U.S."
United
Kingdom
London
 
London; Cheltham
Finland
Helsinki
Germany
Berlin
Hamburg
Leipzig
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Maastricht
 
Amsterdam
France
Paris
Spain
Madrid
Portugal
Lisbon
Italy
Milano
Greece
Athens
Romania
 
Bucharest
The Need for Regulations that
Uphold
Security of Social
and Natural Environment and Workers' Safety
Saskatchewan Train Crash Again Shows Urgent Need to
Restrict
Monopoly Right
- George Allen -
 
Tank car carrying
petroleum distillates that was breached and caught fire during the
October 7, 2014 derailment
in Wadena, Saskatchewan.
On October 7, another major CN train derailment occurred
in Canada, this
time about 20 kilometres west of Wadena, Saskatchewan. There were 100
cars
in the train and 26 left the tracks and caught on fire, burning for
several hours.
Six of the derailed cars contained hazardous materials, including two
which
contained petroleum distillates. The railcars that split open and
burned were
Class 111, the same outdated kind that were involved in the massive
Lac-Mégantic disaster in Quebec on July 6, 2013.[1]
About 50
people were
evacuated from Clair, a small community about one kilometre from the
Wadena crash, while others were evacuated from farm homes in the area.
Information on train derailments is concealed or
distorted by railways and
the federal government. A continuously updated research paper entitled CN
Railway
Derailments,
Other Accidents and Incidents
by the
website Railroaded provides 300 examples and notes that there are
literally
thousands more CN examples, not to mention those involving other
railroads
in Canada, the U.S. and elsewhere.[2]
Here are just five examples from the study: "In November
2012, 5,700
litres of diesel fuel spilled onto the track and into the Squamish
Estuary,
British Columbia.... In December 2009, propane, benzene and plastic
pellets
were spilled near Spy Hill, Saskatchewan, igniting and burning 34 rail
cars for
6 days.... In June 2006, 233,000 litres of hydrocarbons spilled, 7 per
cent of
which ended up in the Riviere du Loup, Quebec.... In August 2005, 1.3
million
litres of heavy bunker C fuel oil and 700,000 litres of pole treating
oil spilled
into Wabamun Lake, Alberta, killing hundreds of birds, fish and other
wildlife.... About 2.7 million litres of hydrocarbons spilled and
caught fire near
Mont-Saint-Hilaire, Quebec in December 1999, burning rail cars for more
than
4 days."
According to the Railroaded study, some specific causes
of the continuing
derailments are deteriorating track infrastructure, track warp,
deteriorating rail
cars, and too long-too heavy trains, all of which are responsibilities
of the
railways and the federal government. It states, "Many CN derailments,
spills
and other accidents have involved breaches of federal rail safety and
environmental legislation, provincial environmental protection
legislation,
Canadian Rail Operating Rules, and CN's own safety and environmental
policies." Another cause is extreme fatigue of engineers due to
scheduling, as
verified by recent research by Transport Canada (TC) which found high
levels
of exhaustion among workers driving freight trains. The TC research
report
cited seven Transportation Safety Board (TSB) accidents within the last
five
years where shift irregularity contributed "to the fatigue of the crew"
but the
rail monopolies dismiss the well-documented findings as "biased."
 
Protest against rail
companies lax standards and callous disregard for safety,
shortly after
a CP Rail train derailment in Calgary, September 2013.Both the number of rail accidents and the profits of the
rail monopolies are
on an upward trend, due mainly to increased use of railways for
transporting
crude oil and other petroleum-related cargos. CN and CP reported first
quarter
profits in 2014 of $254 million and $623 million, increases of 17 per
cent and
12 per cent, respectively, over the same quarter last year. According
to
Statistics Canada, railways in Canada moved approximately 237,000
carloads
of fuel oils, crude petroleum and liquid petroleum gas in 2013,
including into
the U.S. However, this is small compared to the major surge of Alberta
oilsands bitumen and conventional oil on the horizon. The Financial
Post reports that a total of 850,000 barrels per day of rail
shipping
capacity is under construction in Alberta, more than the amount that
the
Keystone XL pipeline would carry. It is estimated that by the end of
2014,
trains will be carrying 550,000 barrels daily.
The privatization of the railways and self-regulation by
the industry over
the affairs which concern the society have resulted in crimes against
the
people, with Lac-Mégantic as the most blatant example. The
federal
government, responsible for regulating the railway industry, should be
charged
with criminal negligence. The assault on the human factor has been
profound,
especially the constant reduction of the number of workers and
government
personnel responsible for safety, and secret deals with the railways to
allow
them to operate at sub-standard safety levels. All these actions by the
government to favour the monopolies at the expense of the public
interest are
the main factors causing the continuing rail disasters. For years
workers have
been rightly declaring that the federal and other governments' refusal
to
enforce regulations and hold the rail monopolies to account is what
permits
them to act with impunity time and time again.
The Wadena derailment shows once again that the power to
take decisions
that affect society has been usurped by private monopolies such as CN.
It puts
the society in danger and is also destructive for the natural
environment. It
shows that Canadians must fight to make sure regulations conform to the
standards necessary to guarantee the safety of the society, the natural
environment and the workers who perform the jobs.
Notes
1. The Railroader study can be found here.
2. For more on the Lac-Mégantic tragedy, see TML Daily,
July 11, 2013 - No. 84 and TML Daily, July 4, 2014 - No. 63.
(Photos: TSB Canada, G.C. Carra)
Transportation Safety Board's Report on
Lac-Mégantic Tragedy
Lac-Mégantic,
Quebec, July 6, 2013On August 19, the Office for the Transportation Safety
Board of Canada
(TSB) issued the report from its investigation into the
Lac-Mégantic tragedy.
Created by an Act of Parliament in 1990, the TSB is defined as an
independent agency whose mandate is to advance safety in the marine,
pipeline, rail and air modes of transportation. The 191-page report on
the
Lac-Mégantic tragedy examines the events that took place on July
5 and 6,
2013, presents its views on the causes and contributing factors that
led to the
disaster and discusses present and future measures taken to prevent
another
such event.[1]
Confirmation of Certain Facts
Without presenting an
exhaustive summary, it can be said that the report confirms some of the
most
disturbing facts related to the disaster.
First, it confirms that the train's lead locomotive was
defective, which
explains the fire that occurred just over an hour before the disaster.
The
locomotive had mechanical problems, the engine was leaking oil and it
was
spewing excessive amounts of black and white smoke. Montreal, Maine
&
Atlantic (MMA), the rail company responsible for the train, had been
informed
of the problems but had taken no action to address them and kept the
locomotive in service. The report also confirms that on the evening of
July 5,
2013, the train was parked in Nantes and left unattended on a main
track with
an incline that led to Lac-Mégantic's downtown area. According
to the report,
it was common practice for MMA to park a train on the main track,
rather
than the siding track which is equipped with a derail that will engage
and stop
the train should it start to move on its own.
The train was operated by a single locomotive engineer.
When he parked
the train for the night, he applied seven hand brakes as well as the
independent
air brakes of five cars and the remote control equipment car. This was
also
common practice with MMA. The engineer left the engine of the lead
locomotive running to power the compressor for the air brake system.
However, the oil leak started a fire and extinguishing it required that
the
engine be shut down. The emergency team made up of firefighters and the
MMA representative called to the scene (who, according to the report,
had not
been trained by MMA on how to secure a train) left after the fire was
extinguished, without restarting the engine. Without an air supply, the
air
brakes were gradually released and the train, restrained by only seven
hand
brakes, started to roll down the grade where 63 of the 72 tanker cars
derailed
in downtown Lac-Mégantic, bringing death and destruction.
Recovery continues in
downtown Lac-Mégantic, July 23, 2014,
more than a year after the
disaster.The TSB reports that given the load of the train, it
would have taken
between 15 to 20 hand brakes to safely immobilize it. The TSB found
that
Transport Canada's Canadian Rail Operating Rules leave it up to railway
companies to decide how many brakes they have to apply to stop their
trains,
limiting itself to asking that companies apply a "sufficient" number of
brakes.
Official MMA policy was to secure 10 per cent of the cars plus two,
which
would have meant nine or 10 hand brakes, but the report found that it
was
common practice to apply fewer hand brakes than required and offset
that by
engaging the air brakes on the locomotive. Note that over the years
rail
companies have abandoned the practice of applying all the air brakes in
their
trains (on both locomotives and railcars) in the name of "saving time."
Governments have allowed them to do so with impunity.
The TSB also reported that the crude oil transported by
the train was
mislabelled as containing a less volatile and less flammable product,
meaning
the tanker cars were even more inadequate than what was indicated.
Railway Companies Hold Decision-Making Power
The report also presents many facts that illustrate how
Transport Canada refuses to play its role as a public authority
responsible for
ensuring transportation safety. The report lays out how Transport
Canada does
not consider its role that of enforcing safety regulations but merely
verifying
that companies produce reports on their safety management and make
suggestions as needed. Since 2001, Transport Canada has required that
railway
companies produce safety management systems (SMS) in which they
themselves define their own security program. Transport Canada reviews
some
of these reports (it does not have the resources to check them all),
makes
suggestions and issues notices of non-compliance to companies, but it
does not
enforce the application of security measures. In the case of MMA, the
report
mentions that the company had been given multiple notices of
non-compliance
over the years but no punitive action was taken against it. In fact,
according
to the report, MMA established its SMS in 2002 but had not implemented
it
until 2010 and then only after a Transport Canada audit.
The report further discusses the 2012 decision by MMA to
operate its
trains in Canada with only one person on board. It is not simply that
Transport
Canada allowed MMA to do so, as the media has reported. In fact, MMA
simply informed Transport Canada of its unilateral decision and went
ahead
and did it. Transport Canada claims it did not have the authority to
approve
or reject such matters but could only put pressure on the company to
take
measures to mitigate risks.
Causes and Factors of the Tragedy and Recommendations
In
terms of the causes and contributing factors of this tragedy, and the
risks that
lead to such tragedies, the report cites dozens of issues including how
the train
was parked, leaving hazardous materials unattended on a main track,
poor
immobilization of the train due to the small number of hand brakes
applied,
the condition of the lead locomotive, poor safety culture within MMA
and the
overall failure of Transport Canada to ensure that adequate security
measures
are taken by companies.
The TSB discusses measures taken since the disaster and
measures needed
to improve rail safety and prevent disasters like Lac-Mégantic
and then lays
out its own recommendations.
One recommendation is to the effect that Transport
Canada and its U.S.
counterpart, the Pipeline and Hazardous Safety Administration, require
all
Class 111 tanker cars for the transport of flammable liquids conform to
standards of protection that will significantly reduce the risk of
spills when
these cars are involved in accidents. Another recommendation calls on
Transport Canada to force the rail companies transporting hazardous
materials
to plan their routes and make periodic risk assessments; another
requests that
Transport Canada require emergency plans when transporting large
amounts
of liquid hydrocarbons. There are also recommendations for a more
secure
immobilization system for trains carrying dangerous goods, that trains
should
not be left unattended on the main track and that Transport Canada
review the
regulation that currently simply prescribes that a sufficient number of
brakes
be applied to stop the train.
The TSB expressed partial satisfaction with the measures
taken by
Transport Canada and the railway companies since the derailment.
Transport Canada's Response
Through Transport Minister
Lisa Raitt, Transport Canada immediately responded to the TSB report in
a
brief statement. The Minister made no reference to the criticisms of
Transport
Canada made in the report. The Minister continues to give the
self-serving
position that upholds monopoly right that the disaster was caused by
non-compliance with rules on braking and that the proof is the criminal
charges brought against the three MMA employees. It presents some of
the
steps taken by Transport Canada since the Lac-Mégantic disaster
as evidence
that the government has addressed the problem -- that trains carrying
hazardous materials will now be operated by at least two people, or
that these
trains should not be left unattended on a main track. It refuses to
address the
fundamental issue that the government has abandoned decision-making
regarding the rail industry to private interests at the expense of
public safety
so that even existing laws and regulations are not enforced.
Note
1. To view the full report, click here.
Key Moments in Privatization and Deregulation of
Canadian
Railway Industry
1985: The
deregulatory policy "Freedom to Move" was
introduced by
the federal government. This policy change separated economic and
safety
legislation and eliminated barriers to structural transformation in the
rail
industry. With this change, the national railways were restructured by
closing
lines and transferring thousands of kilometres of track to local
interest
companies.
The period from 1984 to 1989 was used to adjust some
current laws and
to introduce new ones to bring Canadian law in line with the Free Trade
Agreement (FTA) between the United States and Canada (1987) and the
future
North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) between the United States,
Canada and Mexico (1994). Railroads were particularly affected.
1987: The Government of Canada enacted the National
Transportation
Act, which deregulated prices and the restructuring of
railways. The argument given was that Canadian railways could not
compete
with American companies, which were able to abandon unprofitable routes
and
set their own rates under the Staggers Rail Act of 1980.
1989: The Railway Safety Act (RSA) came
into force.
This was a time of dramatic change in rail transportation in Canada
marked by
privatization and restructuring of the industry and government
deregulation.
The RSA, developed in a spirit of collaboration between the private
sector and
the government, changed the approach to safety from a prescriptive
regulatory
one to one which gave railroads the role of determining the safety of
their own
operations.
1995: CN, a Crown corporation, was privatized.
Between 1990
and 2006 nearly 10,000 km of railway lines were abandoned, in almost
equal
amounts by each of CN and Canadian Pacific. CN and CP now operate about
74 per cent of the rail network in Canada, compared to 90 per cent in
the
1990s. There are forty short-line companies operating more than 16,000
km
of track. VIA Rail continues to dominate the passenger sector of rail
service,
carrying 95 per cent of intercity rail passengers.
1996: The federal government passed the Canada
Transportation
Act (TAC 1996) shortly after privatizing CN. It codified
and revised the National Transportation Act of 1987 to bring
Canadian regulations more in line with the American regulations in the Staggers
Rail
Act. It simplified the process of
sale and
abandonment of railway lines, so that railway companies were no longer
required to demonstrate that the sale or abandonment of unprofitable
lines
served the public interest and the sale or abandonment of unprofitable
lines
would be decided by commercial interests. In addition, the new
regulations
reduced the waiting period for approval of short-line railway sales to
operators
from about two years to just a few weeks. The TAC 1996 also reduced
Transport Canada's power to intervene in decisions about routes,
employment
and company policies.
1999: Further changes were made to the RSA,
including
regulatory reforms that introduced the rail companies' obligation to
adopt
safety management systems (SMS) that they themselves developed. New
roles
were devolved to industry and government: railway companies develop and
adopt an SMS; the ministry checks the company's SMS based on its
results
rather than by performing detailed inspections based on safety norms.
The
rationale presented was that railway companies must manage conflicting
priorities: safety is a priority to be balanced against
cost-effectiveness,
technology, investment returns, etc. Therefore it is up to companies to
develop
safety programs and the ministry's role is that of auditor of company
reports.
Even in its role as auditor of these reports, Transport Canada verifies
only a
part of them. MMA was able to operate for eight years without even
having
implemented an SMS.
PREVIOUS
ISSUES | HOME
Read The Marxist-Leninist Daily
Website: www.cpcml.ca
Email: editor@cpcml.ca
|
