LS-341E
BILL C-77: AN ACT TO AMEND THE MOTOR VEHICLE
Prepared by LEGISLATIVE HISTORY OF BILL C-77
TABLE OF CONTENTS C. Extra-provincial Motor Carrier Safety D. Extra-provincial Bus Undertakings E. Exemptions, Regulations, Enforcement, and Offence and Punishment BILL C-77: AN ACT TO AMEND THE
MOTOR VEHICLE TRANSPORT ACT, On 25 March 1999, Bill C-77, an Act to amend the Motor Vehicle Transport Act, 1987 and to make consequential amendments to other Acts, was introduced in the House of Commons by the Hon. Stéphane Dion on behalf of the Minister of Transport, the Hon. David Collenette. The Motor Vehicle Transport Act, 1987 (MVTA) applies to extra-provincial motor carrier (truck and bus) undertakings. These are domestic or foreign motor carriers that operate across provincial or international boundaries. The federal government has the constitutional responsibility for regulating such motor carriers, but the MVTA delegates to the provinces the authority to regulate them. Amendments to the Act in 1987 made the exercise of provincial regulation (licensing) of extra-provincial trucking conditional on the application of federally prescribed fitness (safety and insurance) standards, and the elimination of most economic controls. The amendments also established federal authority to regulate the safe operation of extra-provincial motor carriers. The MVTA currently consists of the following four major components:
Other components of the current Act cover enforcement and consequential amendments to other legislation. According to Transport Canada’s Position Paper entitled Review of the Motor Vehicle Transport Act (February 1998), the environment in which Canadian motor carriers operate has changed considerably since 1988. Deregulation ushered in an era in which governments focused on the safety performance of motor carriers. Canadian regulatory policy since 1988 has been driven in part by national and international trade initiatives which sought to remove obstacles to trade in transportation services. Both the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Agreement on Internal Trade include commitments to harmonize standards and remove barriers in the motor carrier sector. Within Canada, the Agreement on Internal Trade process also provided an impetus for examining the largely regulated bus sector through a government/industry task force. According to the departmental Position Paper, government and industry recognize that a consistent regime for motor carrier safety must be based on recognized standards. Since 1988, the federal and provincial governments have supported the development and implementation of Canadian standards through the National Safety Code for Motor Carriers (NSC), which sets comprehensive standards for commercial vehicle operations. Those standards are developed by committees made up of federal, provincial, territorial, industry and public interest representatives that report to government through the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators. The NSC standards have been agreed on and are largely implemented by the provincial and territorial governments, albeit with some differences. The proposed changes to the MVTA set out in Bill C-77 are intended to support consistent application of the regulatory regime that has evolved across jurisdictions. In announcing the proposed amendments, Mr. Collenette stated, "These amendments establish carrier safety as the primary focus of the federal regulation of motor carriers and create the tools for ensuring national consistency in safety performance regulation. The amendments also eliminate barriers to competition in the bus industry, while allowing flexibility to deal with rural transportation in a deregulated environment." Building on the reforms introduced in 1987, the proposed amendments would modernize and streamline the regulation of extra-provincial motor carrier (truck and bus) undertakings in Canada. Among other things, they would:
In a news release, Mr. Collenette stated, "These amendments meet the objectives of the Government of Canada to promote safety, modernize transportation regulation, reduce the regulatory burden on industry, and help improve industry efficiency and productivity." Clauses 1 to 6 of the bill would amend the Motor Vehicle Transport Act, 1987, while clauses 7 to 9 would make consequential amendments to three other Acts and clause 10 concerns the coming into force of provisions of the bill. Clause 1 would amend section 1 of the Motor Vehicle Transport Act, 1987 to change the Act’s name to the Motor Vehicle Transport Act. Clause 2 would repeal certain definitions in section 2(1) of the Act, including the definitions of a "local truck undertaking" and a "provincial transport board." It would add two new definitions that are relevant to the bill: an "extra-provincial motor carrier undertaking" would mean an extra-provincial bus undertaking or an extra-provincial truck undertaking, both of which are defined in the current Act; and a "provincial authority" would mean a person or body that had, under the law of a province, authority to control or regulate motor carrier undertakings operating exclusively in the province. Clause 3 would repeal sections 3 to 10 of the Act and replace them with proposed sections 3 to 10.5. The current Act does not specifically address overall transportation policy. Proposed section 3(1) would set out the objectives of the Act, which would be to ensure that the National Transportation Policy set out in section 5 of the Canada Transportation Act was carried out with respect to extra-provincial motor carrier undertakings; that the regulatory regime for those undertakings was focused on safety performance assessments based on the National Safety Code for Motor Carriers; and that the operating standards that applied to those undertakings were applied consistently across Canada. According to proposed section 3(2), the Governor in Council could, on the recommendation of the Minister after consultation with the provinces, issue transportation policy statements consistent with the objectives set out in proposed section 3(1). Proposed section 3(3) stipulates that, with respect to extra-provincial motor carrier undertakings, provincial authorities would be required to have regard to all transportation policy statements issued under proposed section 3(2). The Minister could conduct any research, studies and evaluations that he or she considered necessary to carry out the objectives of the Act (proposed section 3.1). The Minister could, after consultation with the provinces and on the terms and conditions that he or she specified, enter into agreements with provincial governments or other persons or bodies in support of the objectives set out in new section 3 (proposed section 3.2(1)). In addition, after such consultation the Minister could enter into arrangements with foreign states to promote the objectives of the Act, including the recognition by Canada of documents analogous to safety fitness certificates issued by those states and the recognition by those states of safety fitness certificates issued in Canada (proposed section 3.2(2)). According to the departmental backgrounder on the proposed amendments to the MVTA, this reciprocal recognition of standards and ratings would promote a more efficient and productive movement of goods and support the international harmonization objective of NAFTA. C. Extra-provincial Motor Carrier Safety In effect, proposed amendments to the MVTA would allow provinces and territories whose safety compliance regimes were compatible with the NSC standards to give an extra-provincial motor carrier (truck or bus) a safety rating, and to issue it with a safety fitness certificate that would be recognized by other Canadian jurisdictions. In the case of extra-provincial carriers that had poor safety performances, proposed amendments would also allow a province or territory, under the authority of the Act, to apply sanctions, including downgrading the ratings of such carriers and revoking their safety fitness certificates and thus their right to operate. According to proposed section 4(1), no person or body could operate an extra-provincial motor carrier (truck or bus) undertaking without holding a safety fitness certificate issued under the authority of the Motor Vehicle Transport Act. A safety fitness certificate would not have to be in any particular form (proposed section 4(2)). Each provincial authority could, in accordance with the regulations, issue a safety fitness certificate allowing a person or body to operate an extra-provincial motor carrier undertaking (proposed section 5(1)). Such a safety fitness certificate would be valid throughout Canada (proposed section 5(2)). The provincial authority that reviewed decisions to issue or revoke safety fitness certificates could establish any rules or procedures that would apply in that regard. In the absence of such rules or procedures, the procedures governing reviews of decisions with respect to the granting and revocation of licences of motor carrier undertakings in that province would apply (proposed section 5(3)). If the Minister, after consultation with the provinces, was satisfied that the provincial authority in a province was not issuing safety fitness certificates in accordance with the Act, he or she could, by order, determine that the provincial authority no longer had the power to issue such certificates (proposed section 6(1)), as of the date of the publication of the order in the Canada Gazette (proposed section 6(2)). An extra-provincial motor carrier undertaking that held a safety fitness certificate issued by a provincial authority that had in this way lost its power to issue certificates would, not later than 60 days after publication of the order, be required to file a declaration with another provincial authority that the undertaking was subject to supervision by it (proposed section 6(3)). According to proposed section 7, if the Minister was satisfied that a provincial authority that had lost its power to issue safety fitness certificates under proposed section 6 had remedied its default and established a plan to ensure that it did not recur, he or she would, by order, be required to revoke an order made under proposed section 6(1). D. Extra-provincial Bus Undertakings The MVTA currently allows each province to regulate extra-provincial bus undertakings in the same manner as local (i.e., strictly intra-provincial) bus undertakings. The Act now stipulates that, in a province that requires a licence for the operation of a local bus undertaking, no person shall operate an extra-provincial bus undertaking except under and in accordance with a licence issued under the authority of Part I of the Act. The Act further provides that each provincial transport board may, in its discretion, issue a licence to a person to operate an extra-provincial bus undertaking on the like terms and conditions and in the like manner as if it were a local bus undertaking. As well, where the provincial transport board determines or regulates tariffs and tolls for local bus transport, it may, in its discretion, do so for extra-provincial bus transport on like terms and conditions and in the same manner. According to the departmental backgrounder on the proposed amendments to the MVTA, the current regulatory regime for extra-provincial bus carriers is becoming increasingly inconsistent and fragmented. The department notes that a number of provinces and territories are prepared to abandon economic regulation and that deregulation through the MVTA network would ensure that extra-provincial carriers were treated consistently. The bill proposes gradual elimination of the economic regulation of the extra-provincial bus industry. Proposed section 8 in clause 3 of the bill stipulates that proposed sections 4 to 7 (outlined above and concerning the issuance of a safety fitness certificate) and proposed sections 9 to 10.5 (outlined below) would apply to an "extra-provincial bus undertaking," a term defined in the current Act to mean "a work or undertaking, for the transport of passengers or passengers and goods by bus, that connects a province with any other or others of the provinces or extends beyond the limits of a province." A province could require an extra-provincial bus undertaking to notify the relevant provincial authority of the bus service that it provided and to publish its tariffs, schedules and a notice of intention to abandon all or part of its service (proposed section 9). Proposed sections 10.1 to 10.5 would apply to a person or body that transported passengers between two points in a province (i.e., intra-provincial transportation) by means of an extra-provincial bus undertaking (proposed section 10). According to proposed section 10.1, if a licence was required for the operation of a local bus undertaking in a province, no person or body would be permitted to engage in the intra-provincial bus transportation of passengers except in accordance with a licence issued under proposed section 10.2. Each provincial authority could, in its discretion, issue a licence to a person or body to engage in the intra-provincial bus transportation of passengers in the province on the like terms and conditions and in the like way as local bus transport (proposed section 10.2). Where tariffs and tolls for local bus transportation of passengers in a province were determined or regulated by the provincial authority, that authority could, in its discretion, determine or regulate the tariffs and tolls for the intra-provincial bus transportation of passengers on the like terms and conditions and the like manner (proposed section 10.3). The provincial authority would be required to exercise the discretion given to it by proposed sections 10.2 and 10.3 by applying the same criteria to an extra-provincial bus undertaking as it would to a local bus undertaking in like circumstances (proposed section 10.4). According to proposed section 10.5(1), but subject to proposed section 10.5(2), proposed sections 10 to 10.4 would cease to have effect two years after the coming into force of proposed section 10.5. Proposed section 10.5(2) stipulates that, at any time while proposed sections 10.1 to 10.4 were in force, the Governor in Council could, by order, on the recommendation of the Minister made after consultation with the provinces, continue those sections in force for any further period specified in the order. Certain proposed amendments would thus, over a two-year period, deregulate extra-provincial bus service, while leaving the provinces and territories free to choose whether to continue to regulate intra-provincial bus service by extra-provincial bus undertakings during that period. According to the departmental backgrounder on the proposed amendments to the MVTA, this deregulation would, by increasing competition, help the extra-provincial bus industry operate more efficiently and productively. E. Exemptions, Regulations, Enforcement, and Offence and Punishment Clause 4 would amend the current section 16 of the Act and add a new section 16.1. The current section 16, which would become section 16.(1), would in future provide that the Minister could, after consultation with any affected provinces, exempt from the operation of the Act or of any its provisions, either generally or for a limited period, or in respect of a limited area, any person, or the whole or any part of any extra-provincial motor carrier undertaking or any class of those undertakings, provided the Minister believed the exemption would be in the public interest and would not be likely to affect motor carrier safety. Proposed section 16(2) would provide that an exemption under proposed section 16(1) would be subject to any terms or conditions that the Minister might specify in it. Proposed section 16.1(1) would provide broad powers for the Governor in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister after consultation with the affected provinces, to make regulations generally for purposes of carrying out the provisions of the Act. Included among other regulation-making powers would be those prescribing classes of extra-provincial motor carrier undertakings for purposes of the Act; respecting the criteria according to which provincial authorities could issue safety fitness certificates under proposed section 5; and prescribing the type, amount and conditions of insurance and bonding coverage that an extra-provincial motor carrier undertaking would have to hold. A regulation made under proposed section 16.1(1) could incorporate by reference: a) a standard relating to the safe operation of a motor carrier undertaking as amended from time to time; and 2) the law of a province relating to motor vehicle undertakings as amended from time to time (proposed section 16.2). Clause 5 of the bill would replace the current sections 17(1) and (2) of the Act with proposed sections 17(1)to (3) in order to conform with changes proposed in the bill. According to proposed section 17(1), if the Minister considered that the government of a foreign country had engaged in unfair, discriminatory or restrictive practices with regard to Canadian extra-provincial motor carrier undertakings operating in that country or between that country and Canada, he or she, with the concurrence of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, would be required to seek the elimination of those practices through consultations with that country. Section 17(2) would in future make reference to a "provincial authority" instead of the "provincial transport board" and to a "safety certificate" instead of a "licence." A provincial authority to which an order applied would be required to comply with it (proposed section 17(3)). Clause 6 of the bill would replace sections 22 to 35 of the Act with proposed sections 22 to 26. Proposed section 22 would now refer to a "provincial authority" rather than a "provincial transport board," the phrase in the current section 22. The heading preceding proposed sections 23 to 26 would read "Transitional Provisions." According to proposed section 23, an extra-provincial motor carrier undertaking that, on the day immediately before the coming into force of this provision, was authorized to operate within a province, would be deemed to hold a safety fitness certificate issued under proposed section 5. Proposed section 24 deals with licences for the operation of an extra-provincial bus undertaking within a province that had been issued under a law of that province and were in effect on the day immediately before proposed section 24 came into force. Where such licences had been issued to persons holding a licence for that undertaking issued under the Act as it read before the coming into force of the proposed section, they would be deemed to have been issued under proposed sections 10 to 10.5. According to proposed section 25(1), and subject to proposed section 25(2), an application for a licence that had been made under current sections 5, 8 or 13 as these read before the coming into force of proposed section 25, and that was pending on the day immediately preceding that event, would be deemed to have been made under proposed section 5 of the Act and would be dealt with in accordance with the Act. Proposed section 25(2) deals with applications for a licence for intra-provincial bus transport that had been made under the current section 5 as it read immediately before the coming into force of proposed section 25, and were pending on the day immediately before that event. Such application would be deemed to have been made under proposed section 5 and under proposed sections 10 to 10.5 and would have to be dealt with in accordance with the Act. After the expiry of four years after the coming into force of proposed section 26 and before the expiry of five years, the Minister would be required to undertake and complete a comprehensive review of the operation and effect of the amendments to the Act in the bill and, without delay, to prepare a report on that review (proposed section 26(1)). The report would have to be available to the Council of Ministers responsible for Transportation and Highway Safety at its next meeting after the report’s completion (proposed section 26(2)). Clauses 7 to 9 of the bill would make consequential amendments to the Energy Supplies Emergency Act, the Excise Tax Act and the Canada Grain Act. According to clause 10, the bill, any provision of the bill or any provision of any legislation enacted by the bill would come into force on a day or days to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council. There has been little or no commentary on the bill in the press, though the deregulation of inter-provincial bus transportation appears to be a contentious issue. In response to concerns and questions raised in the House after the bill had been introduced, Mr. Collenette said that the proposals were the result of a process that had gone on for three or four years and arose from a general consensus among the provinces and the federal government that there should be a shift toward freer movement of goods and people within Canada. Mr. Collenette further noted that consultations with the provinces had revealed that certain provinces had concerns about the bill, while other provinces, such as Ontario, did not. The Minister said that this was a matter that Members could bring up during second reading debate on the bill in the House. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||