Evaluation Summary – Evaluation of the Remote Passenger Rail Program (RPRP)

Evaluation results indicate that:

  • The RPRP continues to address the ongoing need of providing a surface transportation link to Canadians who live in remote communities.
  • The Keewatin Railway Company (KRC) has experienced a strong increase in demand for their passenger rail service, which has at times exceeded the seating capacity of their current fleet of passenger cars.
  • Currently, there is a clear rationale for Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada and Indigenous Services Canada (CIRNA & ISC) to play a role in the administration of the RPRP, given that:
    • The composition of RPRP funding recipients now only includes First Nations,
    • there is strong alignment between the objectives of the RPRP and CIRNA & ISC’s core responsibilities and ongoing departmental activities, and
    • in a statement made in late August 2017, the Prime Minister of Canada announced changes to the structure of the former Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada (which resulted in the creation of CIRNA & ISC) and indicated that once those changes were complete that “services currently delivered to Indigenous Peoples by other departments shall be considered for transfer…”
  • The RPRP was found to be administered in an efficient manner.

It was recommended that Transport Canada:

  1. Determine a plan of action to assess the feasibility of transferring the RPRP to CIRNA & ISC.  If the transfer of the RPRP is deemed to be feasible, engage and collaborate with CIRNA & ISC to outline the rationale for requesting the transfer.
  2. Consult internally with the Centre of Expertise on Transfer Payments to critically examine the current terms and conditions of the RPRP, including the funding instrument, in order to determine the applicability of the guidance in the Directive of Transfer Payments, given that the recipients are First Nations and their operating contexts are different.
  3. Consult with the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat to facilitate collaboration between other government departments (e.g., CIRNA & ISC) to explore the feasibility of harmonizing transfer payment programs, to the extent possible, as stated in the Directive on Transfer Payments
  4. Engage KRC to address the rail safety issues related to exceeding passenger seating capacity.

Transport Canada’s Management Response and Action Plan

  • Transport Canada senior management agreed with the recommendations and have put into place a plan that will:
    • Explore the possibility of transferring the RPRP to CIRNA & ISC,
    • examine the current terms and conditions and other funding approaches to determine an appropriate level of financial control, and
    • approach KRC to understand the safety issue further and report to the Rail Safety group within Transport Canada to inform them of the situation.

About the Remote Passenger Rail Program

  • In 2004 and 2005, owners of rail lines in Manitoba and Quebec announced plans to divest and possibly close their government subsidized rail lines.  First Nations groups in those areas expressed interest in purchasing the lines and taking over the passenger rail services.
    • This resulted in the creation of Tshiuetin Rail Transportation (TRT) in Quebec and Labrador (from Sept-Iles to Schefferville) and Keewatin Railway Company (KRC) in Northern Manitoba (from The Pas to Pukatawagan).
  • In response to these developments a federal contribution program was designed, which is currently known as the Remote Passenger Rail Program (RPRP)
  • The RPRP was designed in an effort to ensure that safe, reliable, viable, and sustainable passenger rail services were provided to remote communities and is currently administered by the Transportation Infrastructure Programs branch of Transport Canada’s Programs Group.
  • Average annual funding, across both railways, is approximately $13.4 M.

About the Evaluation

  • In accordance with the Policy on Results (2016) the evaluation addressed the key evaluation issues of relevance, effectiveness, and efficiency for both the TRT and KRC.
  • A variety of evaluation methods were employed to address the key evaluation issues, including:
    • a document/literature review,
    •  interviews,
    •  media/information scan, and
    • data analysis.
  • The evaluation covers the five fiscal years from 2011/12 – 2016/17.