Transport Canada and the National Energy Board stand accused of multiple shortcomings in the transportation of dangerous substances in a new report from Canada’s environment commissioner.
Scott Vaughan found Transport Canada does not have a consistent approach to planning and implementing compliance activities, and the National Energy Board has yet to review emergency-procedure manuals for 39 per cent of regulated companies.
Both bodies have undertaken limited followup to correct deficiencies in their records, and must make improvements to reduce the risk and effects of accidents, Vaughan concluded in the year-end report released Tuesday.
“Good oversight of regulatory compliance is necessary to protect public safety and the environment,” he said.
Transport Canada is responsible for regulating the shipment of such dangerous products as industrial acids and petroleum by road, rail, air and ship; the National Energy Board regulates the flow of oil and gas through 71,000 kilometres of pipelines.
The audit also found Transport Canada has only obtained comprehensive emergency-response plans from 50 per cent of the companies it regulates. The other half are operating on temporary approvals, and many have been doing so for 10 years.
The temporary approvals are significantly less stringent, Vaughan told iPolitics.
“An inspector will go in and say, does this look about right? It’s left to the discretion of the inspectors. The only hard requirement is to have an active phone number. That’s in sharp contrast to the permanent approvals, where they actually have a long list of things that they actually have to fill out.”
He added this is an ongoing problem that has already been brought to the department’s attention.
“Many of the weaknesses we found in Transport Canada were identified more than five years ago and have yet to be fixed.”
Vaughan also found deficiencies with Environment Canada’s enforcement of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, the country’s principal federal environmental statute. It covers toxic substances, air and water pollution, and waste disposal.
“The Canadian Environmental Protection Act is an important part of protecting the health of Canadians and the quality of the environment,” Vaughan said. “I am concerned that shortcomings in key management systems have impeded the effective enforcement of the act.”
Environment Canada lacks key information on those it regulates, from individuals to companies and government agencies, the audit concluded. As a result, the department cannot be sure what poses the highest risks to human health and the environment. Many regulations are enforced only if the department receives a complaint.
“Enforcement actions have been limited by longstanding problems with the regulations, inadequate training of enforcement officers, and lack of laboratory tests to verify compliance,” Vaughan said.
He called on all three bodies to clean up their acts.
“I am concerned that these three organizations have not been diligent in verifying that regulated companies have taken action to correct instances of non-compliance.”
The National Energy Board was found to have the worst record on follow-ups, failing to do so 93 per cent of the time. Transport Canada failed to follow up in 73 per cent of cases, and Environment Canada in about 50 per cent of cases.
While Transport Canada and the National Energy Board agreed with the corrective measures suggested by the commissioner, Environment Canada made the unusual move of officially disagreeing with the commissioner’s findings.
Vaughan said this was very rare, and could only find one other example of this occurring at the Office of the Auditor General.
He stood by his report’s findings, calling them “rock solid.”
The Conservative government moved quickly to defend its environmental enforcement record, with Environment Minister Peter Kent immediately releasing a statement, and Conservative MPs attacking the commissioner’s findings at an afternoon meeting of the environment committee.
Kent’s statement highlighted the investments the government has made in strengthening enforcement, and the establishment of the Environmental Enforcement Act that imposes higher fines and stricter sentencing on offenders.
The new legislation and new funding were not in place early enough to be covered by the audit.
But Vaughan did bring to the attention of MPs that a 2007 budget increase failed to deliver on its twin promises to increase the number of inspectors and increase the number of inspections carried out. Since 2007, the number of inspections has stayed the same or declined. Vaughan said it is not clear what happened to the money.
“We just don’t know where it went, and I’m not really sure if Environment Canada does either.”
Origin
Source: iPolitico
Scott Vaughan found Transport Canada does not have a consistent approach to planning and implementing compliance activities, and the National Energy Board has yet to review emergency-procedure manuals for 39 per cent of regulated companies.
Both bodies have undertaken limited followup to correct deficiencies in their records, and must make improvements to reduce the risk and effects of accidents, Vaughan concluded in the year-end report released Tuesday.
“Good oversight of regulatory compliance is necessary to protect public safety and the environment,” he said.
Transport Canada is responsible for regulating the shipment of such dangerous products as industrial acids and petroleum by road, rail, air and ship; the National Energy Board regulates the flow of oil and gas through 71,000 kilometres of pipelines.
The audit also found Transport Canada has only obtained comprehensive emergency-response plans from 50 per cent of the companies it regulates. The other half are operating on temporary approvals, and many have been doing so for 10 years.
The temporary approvals are significantly less stringent, Vaughan told iPolitics.
“An inspector will go in and say, does this look about right? It’s left to the discretion of the inspectors. The only hard requirement is to have an active phone number. That’s in sharp contrast to the permanent approvals, where they actually have a long list of things that they actually have to fill out.”
He added this is an ongoing problem that has already been brought to the department’s attention.
“Many of the weaknesses we found in Transport Canada were identified more than five years ago and have yet to be fixed.”
Vaughan also found deficiencies with Environment Canada’s enforcement of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, the country’s principal federal environmental statute. It covers toxic substances, air and water pollution, and waste disposal.
“The Canadian Environmental Protection Act is an important part of protecting the health of Canadians and the quality of the environment,” Vaughan said. “I am concerned that shortcomings in key management systems have impeded the effective enforcement of the act.”
Environment Canada lacks key information on those it regulates, from individuals to companies and government agencies, the audit concluded. As a result, the department cannot be sure what poses the highest risks to human health and the environment. Many regulations are enforced only if the department receives a complaint.
“Enforcement actions have been limited by longstanding problems with the regulations, inadequate training of enforcement officers, and lack of laboratory tests to verify compliance,” Vaughan said.
He called on all three bodies to clean up their acts.
“I am concerned that these three organizations have not been diligent in verifying that regulated companies have taken action to correct instances of non-compliance.”
The National Energy Board was found to have the worst record on follow-ups, failing to do so 93 per cent of the time. Transport Canada failed to follow up in 73 per cent of cases, and Environment Canada in about 50 per cent of cases.
While Transport Canada and the National Energy Board agreed with the corrective measures suggested by the commissioner, Environment Canada made the unusual move of officially disagreeing with the commissioner’s findings.
Vaughan said this was very rare, and could only find one other example of this occurring at the Office of the Auditor General.
He stood by his report’s findings, calling them “rock solid.”
The Conservative government moved quickly to defend its environmental enforcement record, with Environment Minister Peter Kent immediately releasing a statement, and Conservative MPs attacking the commissioner’s findings at an afternoon meeting of the environment committee.
Kent’s statement highlighted the investments the government has made in strengthening enforcement, and the establishment of the Environmental Enforcement Act that imposes higher fines and stricter sentencing on offenders.
The new legislation and new funding were not in place early enough to be covered by the audit.
But Vaughan did bring to the attention of MPs that a 2007 budget increase failed to deliver on its twin promises to increase the number of inspectors and increase the number of inspections carried out. Since 2007, the number of inspections has stayed the same or declined. Vaughan said it is not clear what happened to the money.
“We just don’t know where it went, and I’m not really sure if Environment Canada does either.”
Origin
Source: iPolitico
No comments:
Post a Comment