Kevin Lamoureux: Mr. Speaker, a national transportation strategy is not new. One could probably trace it back through the last decade as one of those issues that needs to be dealt with. The Liberal Party has been advocating for it for a number of years. At the end of the day, I suspect that it is in all of our best interests.

There are opportunities in terms of passenger transportation. I would love to be able to hop on a train, for example, to go from Winnipeg to Regina. I cannot do that. Yet those are two very important communities, not only in my life but in the lives of millions, I would argue. The transportation corridor from the 905 belt to Montreal, Quebec City and Ottawa all the way down to Hamilton and Windsor is a wonderful opportunity.

There needs to be that overall transportation strategy. I suspect that at least three of the four political parties are going to have a detailed strategy going into the 2015 election.

The post Fair Rail Freight Service Act (Bill C-52) appeared first on Elizabeth May.

I would like to ask my friend from Newton—North Delta if she does not agree. The committee might not be able to get at it because it exceeds the scope of the bill. However, this legislation could be used to leverage and push for more of a national transportation strategy that would take into account the need to move goods and people efficiently by rail.

The post Fair Rail Freight Service Act (Bill C-52) appeared first on Elizabeth May.

We no longer have people on board in the last car, the caboose, which used to be required under regulation, to monitor safety. I believe that the spill at Wabamun Lake, which the hon. member for Edmonton—Strathcona knows about very well, occurred largely due to the cutbacks of key safety positions of personnel on board freight.

It needs to be reliable and safe. We are having far too many derailments.

Olivia Chow: Mr. Speaker, the Transportation Safety Board of Canada has made a series of recommendations, some of which are on staffing. Others are on the need for advanced technology to be installed in rail cars. For example, voice recording in the locomotive cab has not been done yet, even though the recommendation is eight years old.

There has been a recommendation for a positive train control system that would provide an automatic braking system. If the conductor happened to miss a light, a track or a red light stop sign, the train would stop automatically based on GPS technology. Unfortunately, that recommendation is again being ignored by the minister. The United States made it mandatory that all trains have automatic braking devices for safety, but we do not have such legislation in Canada.

Therefore, both staffing and technologies should be in place to keep train services safe.

The post Fair Rail Freight Service Act (Bill C-52) appeared first on Elizabeth May.

Former Bill C-50, C-51 and C-52 will be brought forward as part of an omnibus crime bill, though they deal with internet surveillance laws. “This proposed legislation has critical implications for data security and deserves proper Parliamentary hearings,” said May.  “Folding these issues into a larger bill with no hearings is unacceptable.”

The proposed legislation would force every phone and Internet provider to provide access to subscriber data without a warrant, even when that information is not part of any investigation. A recent survey conducted by the office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada found eight in ten of those polled “opposed giving police and intelligence agencies the power to access e-mail records and other Internet usage data without a warrant from the courts.”

“”It’s like having a CCTV camera in your home, and at your office watching every email you send, every phone call you make and every web site you click on. It’s creepy, it violates personal security and is inappropriate. The police should not be reading your email without a warrant first,” said Emma Jane Hogbin, Green Party Science and Technology Critic.

Privacy Commissioner of Canada Jennifer Stoddart, and her provincial and territorial counterparts, have objected to the proposed legislations because of privacy risks, stating in a letter that they have concerns over “the absence of limits on the access powers, the wide scope of information required to be collected and provided by telecommunications companies without a warrant and the inadequacy of internal controls and the legislative gaps in the oversight model.”

“I’ve been hearing from other Canadians that they share the concerns of the privacy Commissioner.  Canadian law enforcement obviously needs access to a certain amount of data in order to properly investigate crimes.  But these bills push that access way over the top to a point where it becomes an infringement on civil liberties. I encourage Citizens to work with OpenMedia.ca to educate their fellow Canadians about this plan for invasive surveillance,” said May.

The post Electronic surveillance laws go too far appeared first on Elizabeth May.