Transport Canada’s four strategic outcomes reflect the long-term and enduring benefits to Canadians arising from our mandate and vision. They are as follows:
| 1. An Efficient Transportation System |
| 2. A Clean Transportation System |
| 3. A Safe Transportation System |
| 4. A Secure Transportation System |
We can report progress in relation to the expected results,2012-13 Report on Plans and Priorities performance indicators21 and targets,22set out in Transport Canada’s PAA structure for 2012-13 (Figure 1). The PAA is a structured inventory of the department’s programs. These programs are arranged in a hierarchical manner to depict the logical relationship between each program and the SO to which they contribute. What distinguishes the different levels of a PAA is the scope and reach of the programs at those levels. The program level has a broad scope and area of societal intervention, while the sub-program level has a more limited and specific focus on a smaller target group and area of intervention.
The department uses qualitative and quantitative indicators, also called performance measures, to assess whether it is achieving the expected results and contributing to the strategic outcomes. Performance measurement and reporting is used across the department in a variety of means, using differing types of data sources, a mixture of formats and collection frequency. Using a systematic method to develop, communicate, monitor and report performance information provides a uniform foundation to achieve these outcomes. In an effort to better report on results of activities and to demonstrate value to Canadians, the department will continue to strengthen performance indicators in its Performance Measurement Framework.
This section describes how the department met the expected results indicated in the 2012-13 Report on Plans and Priorities, and presents the financial and non-financial resources dedicated to each program and sub-program. We have included information for financial variances in Section I Summary of Performance. We provided explanations for FTE variances if these were significant. This section also identifies Transport Canada initiatives that are included in the FSDS.
Strategic Outcome 1: An Efficient Transportation System
An efficient transportation system requires a strong and modern marketplace policy framework and infrastructure to strengthen Canada’s long-term economic competitiveness. Work is ongoing to ensure that policy and legislative frameworks remain relevant and allow industry to respond to challenges and take advantage of opportunities for the future. Transportation infrastructure initiatives create jobs, support trade and tourism, connect Canadians and attract investments.
The demands of global trade, population growth, an aging demographic, and the effects of climate change require new and innovative solutions to keep Canada’s transportation system efficient, accessible and competitive. Investing in the right technologies, research and skills development will enable the transportation sector to continue to support national prosperity.
The following four programs23 and eight sub-programs24 support this SO:
| Programs | Sub - Programs | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.1 Transportation Marketplace Frameworks |
1.1.1 Air Marketplace Framework |
1.1.2 Marine Marketplace Framework |
1.1.3 Surface Marketplace |
| 1. 2 Gateways and Corridors |
1.2.1 Asia-Pacific Gateway and Corridor Initiative |
1.2.2 Gateways and Border Crossings Fund |
|
| 1.3 Transportation Infrastructure |
1.3.1 Airport Infrastructure |
1.3.2 Marine Infrastructure |
1.3.3 Surface Infrastructure |
| 1.4 Transportation Innovation |
|
|
|
The sections below explain how we met the commitments presented in the planning highlights in Transport Canada’s 2012-13 Report on Plans and Prioritiesxxxiii. We discuss actual results achieved against expected results below, with performance indicators and targets, at the program and sub-program level.
Program 1.1: Transportation Marketplace Frameworks
Description: The Transportation Marketplace Frameworks program encourages transportation efficiency by fostering a competitive and viable transportation sector. Program activities include setting the regimes governing the economic behaviour of carriers in all modes of transportation; setting the rules of governance for all the transportation infrastructure providers falling under federal authority; monitoring the transportation system; representing the interests of Canada at international transportation fora and on other international bodies, and enabling access to transportation for Canadians.
Performance Analysis and Lessons Learned
Transport Canada assessed the current air and marine policy frameworks to ensure their responsiveness to trends that affect those transportation modes and to promote a competitive and viable transportation system that supports trade opportunities. We have identified preliminary issues with the marine policy framework and are undertaking detailed analysis. Building on efforts to date, we take an integrated approach to explore a broad range of longer-term policy issues related to the aviation sector in Canada.
Through its Blue Sky policy, Canada has negotiated new or expanded air transport agreements covering over 70 countries and now, according to the International Civil Aviation Organizationxxxiii (ICAO), ranks third in the world for the number of open air transport agreements. An evaluation of the Blue Sky policy was conducted in 2012 and it found that the objectives of the policy were met in an efficient manner. In addition, the ratification of the Cape Town Convention and Aircraft Protocolxxxiii will help to strengthen airline and aerospace industries through an international legal framework for the financing of aircraft equipment. This Convention has the potential to result in significant savings for Canadian air carriers when purchasing aircraft, which will contribute to the carriers’ competitiveness.
We are implementing responses to the recommendations of the comprehensive review of rail freight service, that aim to improve the efficiency, effectiveness and reliability of the rail system and help the rail system support domestic and international trade. We completed the facilitation process on developing a service agreement model and commercial dispute resolution process to address railway freight service issues and system inefficiencies. In December 2012, the Minister of Transport tabled the Fair Rail Freight Service Act, which made amendments to the Canada Transportation Actxxxiii on service agreements between shippers and railways. The legislation received Royal Assent on June 26, 2013.
We also monitored and analyzed the freight transportation system and engaged with transportation sector partners and stakeholders. We are developing a data management strategy to ensure the availability and accuracy of capacity and performance data. Discussions were held with transportation service providers and select shippers to identify their data needs as well as freight transportation impediments, and to develop potential solutions. We also engaged the trucking industry on various issues and initiatives, including those related to the Canada – US border, weights and dimensions, safety, and competition issues.
Bringing together various transportation sector stakeholders – including carriers, shippers, and government agencies – is important not only to address transportation system challenges and opportunities and overcome impediments, but also to maintain knowledge of trends and developments and achieve a national perspective on transportation issues. Within the department, collaboration across disciplines, regions, and modes is crucial in developing policies that address stakeholder issues.
| Total Budgetary Expenditures (Main Estimates) 2012–13 |
Planned Spending 2012–13 | Total Authorities (available for use) 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
9 |
9 |
10 |
9 |
0 |
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
67 |
75 |
(8) |
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results |
|---|---|---|---|
|
A competitive transportation sector |
Percentage change in freight transportation intensity |
>0 |
Rail (2010 data) +5.4 percent |
|
A competitive transportation sector |
Percentage change in passenger transportation intensity |
>0 |
Rail (2012 data) +1.8 percentage point Air (2011 data) +0.2 percentage point |
The FTE variance is a result of the fact that the workload under this program required a larger number of employees than planned within the allotted budget.
The freight objective of this program was met in the rail sector. In the case of trucking, transborder demand dropped by 3.3 percent which drove the indicator lower. Transborder demand has been affected by a fragile U.S. economic recovery and a decline of 1.2 percentage points in the modal share of trucking in Canada-U.S. trade. For the marine sector, the number of tonnes handled at the Canadian ports in 2011 increased over 2010 levels, but at a lower rate than the number of port calls made by vessels, yielding an overall 4 percent drop in the average tonnes handled per port call.
The increase in air and rail passenger intensity reflects airlines and Via Rail’s efforts to keep capacity closely aligned with demand. Air passenger data for 2012 is not yet fully available.
Sub-program 1.1.1: Air Marketplace Frameworks
Description: The Air Marketplace Framework program encourages transportation efficiency by fostering a competitive and viable air industry, including airlines, airports and NAV CANADA. It provides opportunities for Canadian airlines to grow and compete successfully in a more liberalized global environment and sets the governance regimes of national air infrastructure providers. Program activities include: establishing laws and regulations (e.g., Canada Transportation Act, Air Canada Public Participation Act) governing the economic behavior of air carriers and air infrastructure providers; encouraging competition and the development of new and expanded international air services to benefit travellers, shippers, and the tourism and business sectors by managing bilateral and multilateral air service relations; working collaboratively with other government departments and industry stakeholders to promote air transport facilitation policies and initiatives in support of broader Government of Canada industry, trade, travel and tourism objectives such as Gateways and Corridors Initiatives and the Blue Sky International air policy; and, representing the interests of the Canadian aviation sector at the ICAO.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
4 |
4 |
0 |
||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
32 |
30 |
2 |
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results |
|---|---|---|---|
|
A competitive air transportation sector |
Percentage change in Passenger-kilometre generated by aviation in Canada (domestic and international) |
>1 percent |
Revenue Passenger Kilometres (RPK) 2012 - 224.0 billion (estimate) |
|
A competitive air transportation sector |
Percentage change in Tonne-kilometre generated by aviation in Canada (domestic and international25 |
>1 percent |
Good Tonne-Kilometres (GTK) 2012 – 3.8 billion |
While air traffic was up 4.5 percent when measured in terms of passengers, the growth in revenue passenger kilometres was somewhat more modest at 2.2 percent. The past year was characterised by service reduction on long haul flights, particularly to Asia and Europe, and increased flights to sun destinations, which have a smaller distance travelled, hence lower RPK. The domestic market RPK grew 4.6 percent, in line with passenger traffic growth of 5.3 percent. The international sector (U.S. and all other countries) grew by 1.6 percent and by 3.9 percent on a passenger count basis, clearly showing that international air travellers were flying on average shorter distances. This change in demand can be attributed at least in part to the current global economic situation, which has slowed travel to Europe and Asia, while Canadians continue to display a strong appetite for U.S. and sun destinations.
While there was an overall growth in the number of air passengers carried in 2012 (compared to 2011), cargo carried by air experienced a decrease of an estimated 1.5 percent in the number of tonnes and an overall decline of 2.9 percent in terms of tonne-kilometres in 2012. The International Air Transportation Association noted a similar trend worldwide, as a result of the substantial decline in world trade, and a shift to trade in commodities which are more suited to sea shipping.
Sub-program 1.1.2: Marine Marketplace Frameworks
Description: The Marine Marketplace Framework program encourages transportation efficiency by ensuring the appropriate economic policy and legislative frameworks in order to foster a competitive and viable Canadian marine industry. The program is responsible for: developing policies, legislation, and regulations such as the Canada Marine Act and its regulations and the Marine Liability Act; monitoring the Canadian marine industry and ports system, establishing the rules of governance for Canada port authorities; negotiating/adopting international conventions and agreements, establishing the economic regimes governing market entry to both the Canadian marine marketplace and Canadian international marine trade; representing the interest of Canada’s marine sector in international forums such as the International Maritime Organization, and, setting the marine transportation liability regime.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) |
Difference 2012–13 |
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
2 |
2 |
0 |
|
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
17 |
22 |
(5) |
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results |
|---|---|---|---|
|
A competitive marine transportation sector |
Percentage change in transborder tonnage handled by Canadian carriers (vessels) |
>2 |
Transborder tonnage |
|
Percentage change in North American traffic handled by Canadian ports |
>2 |
2011 – 195.7 billion tonne-km |
Transborder marine tonnage by Canadian vessels declined by 6 percent, in-line with the 6.2 percent decline in overall marine tonnage for all vessels, independent of nationality. However, the value of marine shipments between the U.S. and Canada increased by 19.5 percent during this period indicating a changing mix of commodities and an increase in the value of per tonne of goods involved in transborder trade.
North American traffic handled by Canadian ports declined by 8.9 percent. However, the value of marine shipments between the U.S. and Canada increased by 19.5 percent during this period indicating a changing mix of commodities and an increase in the value of per tonne of goods involved in transborder trade. Other contributing factors for the decline include modal switching (to rail, trucks, etc.), a declining share of imports/exports to/from the US and the general state of the US economy.
Sub-program 1.1.3: Surface Marketplace Frameworks
Description: The Surface Marketplace Framework program encourages transportation efficiency by fostering healthy and competitive rail, motor carrier and bus industries in Canada. The program develops, oversees and implements policy frameworks, legislation, regulations and international agreements such as the Canada Transportation Act (Part 3 – Railway Transportation); oversees freight rail services and the relationships between railways and shippers and passenger rail operations; administers statutory payments to Canadian National (CN) Railway Company for certain pensioners; administers the grain hopper car operating agreements with CN and Canadian Pacific railways and the Grain Monitoring program; establishes economic regimes governing access to the rail industry, the relationships between main freight rail lines and each of shippers, communities, passenger railways and short line railways; reviews mergers and acquisitions involving surface modes, reviews conditions of entry into the commercial trucking and bus marketplace; and works with provinces, territories and North American partners to harmonize rules affecting surface transportation, such as North American Free Trade Agreement trucking standards.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
3 |
3 |
0 |
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
18 |
22 |
(4) |
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Target | Actual Results |
|---|---|---|---|
|
An efficient surface transportation sector |
Percentage change in traffic volume (in tonne-km) of rail and motor carriers |
<2 percent Target 2014 |
Class 1 Railways262011–337.9 billion Truck for Hire |
Rail traffic volume increased due to greater demand for natural resources and an increase in the movement of crude oil by rail. All commodities, except iron ore, autos and auto parts reported increased tonnage in 2011. Trucking tonne-kilometre was relatively flat in 2011 in Canada with the domestic sector increasing by 0.8 percent, despite a 2.5 percent increase in Gross Domestic Product. The trucking sector may have been affected by the fact that the manufacturing sector did not grow as strongly as the bulk-heavy natural resource sector in 2011.
Program 1.2: Gateways and Corridors
Description: Canada is a trading nation, and the efficiency and reliability of this trade impacts directly on the nation’s prosperity and well being. As a result, it is imperativethat the federal government play a role in the development of an integrated transportation network linking importers and exporters to markets and suppliers in the increasingly complex global value chains. Guided by the National Policy Framework for Strategic Gateways and Trade Corridors xxxiv , the Gateways and Corridors program aims at supporting Canada's international commerce by creating more efficient, reliable and seamless trade-related transport systems in Canada. The program sets strategies and frameworks for improving and integrating transportation networks in key regions; fosters partnerships between all levels of government and the private sector, supports and oversees projects that contribute to the increased capacity and efficiency of gateway and corridor infrastructure, develops and puts in place measures that remove impediments to the effective development of gateways and corridors; and markets the use of gateways and corridors.
Performance Analysis and Lessons Learned
With Canada’s Economic Action Plan, the federal government continues to invest in Canada’s Gateways xxxviii . Canada’s world-class gateways and transportation corridors are essential to building a strong and competitive economy, enhancing our global competitiveness and supporting economic prosperity throughout the country. In 2012-13, Transport Canada continued to advance, develop and implement Canada’s three strategic gateways and corridors initiatives: the APGCI xxxviii, the Continental Gateway and Trade Corridorxxxviii and the Atlantic Gateway and Trade Corridor.xxxviii
These gateway initiatives are having concrete impacts:
- APGCI: During this period, we completed the 80th Street. Overpass project in British Columbia’s Lower Mainland (part of the Roberts Bank Rail Corridor program). We started 11 infrastructure projects, and signed eight contribution agreements (supporting eight separate infrastructure projects). In addition, in October 2012, we conducted an open call for proposals. We undertook outreach and non-infrastructure competitiveness activities to maximize the impact of infrastructure investments, including pan-Western consultations on APGCI priorities, the launch of a data portal to provide access to supply chain performance metrics, the on-going facilitation of the Asia-Pacific Gateway Performance Table, and the implementation of the Government of Canada’s response to the Rail Freight Service Review. Please refer to Section III, 3.3 Supplementary Information of this report for additional information.
- Continental Gateway and Trade Corridor: In Quebec, Transport Canada signed contribution agreements to provide funding for improvements to the Port of Sept-Îles and the Port of Montreal. As an example of the impact of investing in infrastructure on the Canadian economy, the expansion of the Port of Sept-Îles will allow for the creation of about 5,800 direct jobs. The department also signed a contribution agreement with the Société de développement économique du Saint-Laurent to fund an update of the 2008 study on the St. Lawrence – Great Lakes Corridor. In addition, Transport Canada continued its collaboration with la Grappe métropolitaine de logistique et de transport de Montréal (Cargo M) on freight transportation issues in the Montreal area. In Ontario, Transport Canada continued collaborating with the Ministry of Transportation, Metrolinx and the Peel Region on urban goods movement.
- Atlantic Gateway and Trade Corridor: Significant progress has been achieved in advancing the implementation of the Atlantic Gateway and Trade Corridor Strategy in collaboration with the Federal-Provincial Officials Committee, the Atlantic Gateway Advisory Council and other stakeholders. In 2012-13, nine Atlantic Gateway infrastructure projects funded under the Gateways and Border Crossings Fund were completed or near completion and six projects were underway. In addition, we undertook over a dozen marketing activities over the course of the year to promote the Atlantic Gateway as an efficient, reliable and secure transportation solution both regionally and internationally.
The DRIC xxxix project is progressing well and reaching key milestones. Detailed information can be found in Section 1.2. The crossing will provide necessary border crossing capacity to handle anticipated trade and traffic growth, as well as transportation-system redundancy and state-of-the-art border security operations at Windsor-Detroit - the busiest commercial land border crossing in North America
Transport Canada is also leading the development and timely implementation of transportation-related initiatives as set out in the Canada – U.S. Beyond the Border Action Planxxxiii, in partnership with relevant Canadian and U.S. government agencies. In 201213, this included an announcement of funding for infrastructure upgrades at four key border crossings, development of the first binational border infrastructure investment plan, and the announcement of truck cargo pre-inspection pilot projects at the Pacific Highway and Peace Bridge border crossings.
Since 2006, through detailed system analysis and program delivery under the APGCI and the Gateways and Border Crossings Fund, Transport Canada has learned various lessons on the most effective means of identifying and developing strategic projects, including:
- gathering data and conducting analysis to provide objective and empirical evidence to support policy decisions, recommendations, and infrastructure investments;
- articulating eligibility processes and criteria to provide a high level of transparency, and support engagement and collaboration;
- implementing an efficient and robust selection process to ensure projects are financially viable and able to be completed on time, while employing multidisciplinary teams to apply merit and system-based selection criteria founded on analytical evidence;
- proactively engaging stakeholders and creating extensive networks to address a variety of regulatory and governance challenges, and to maximize resources; and
- promoting and marketing Canada’s transportation assets, nationally and regionally, and reaching out at the international level to maintain Canada’s competitiveness.
| Total Budgetary Expenditures (Main Estimates) 2012–13 |
Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Total Authorities (available for use) 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1,063 |
1,063 |
1,057 |
396 |
667 |
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
63 |
79 |
(16) |
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Target | Actual Results |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Gateways and corridors are efficient, reliable and support international commerce |
Efficiency and reliability as measured by total transit time of international containerized freight using Canada’s strategic gateways and trade corridors |
Total transit time for a given year ≤ total transit time for the previous year |
2011-12 = 7.0 days |
The FTE variance is composed of two elements: (1) a variance of 11 FTEs due to transfers made during the fiscal year from other program areas, and (2) a variance of 5 FTEs due to new funding that was provided in Budget 2012 for APGCI.
With respect to the expected result, the increase of 0.4 days in transit time for containers transiting through Canadian ports in 2012-13 (compared to the 2011-12 period) was primarily due to seasonality factors. Transit times increased for containers being imported through the Asia–Pacific Gateway during the winter months of 2013, due to very harsh winter conditions in Canada, causing the overall Canadian port average time for the year to increase by 0.4 day.
Sub-program 1.2.1: Asia-Pacific Gateway and Corridor Initiative
Description: The rapid economic growth of China and other Asia Pacific countries is reshaping global trade flows. China is now Canada’s second largest trading partner and the growth in Canada-Asia trade traffic is expected to continue. The Asia-Pacific Gateway and Corridor Initiative program works to make Canada the best trade link between Asia and North America. This program coordinates and manages an integrated set of investment (through direct delivery and contributions), and policy measures to boost Canada’s commerce with the Asia-Pacific region; increase the share of North America bound container imports from Asia; and improve the reliability of the Gateway and Corridor.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
205 |
157 |
48 |
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
11 |
16 |
(5) |
|
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Canada's Asia-Pacific Gateway and Corridor is efficient, reliable and attracts international trade |
Efficiency 27and reliability as measured by total transit time of international containerized freight using the Asia-Pacific Gateway and Trade Corridor |
Total transit time for year X ≤ total transit time for year X-1 (prev. year) Target date: 2014 |
2010-11 = 8.7 days 2011-12 percent change =-4.6 percent |
|
Canada's Asia-Pacific Gateway and Corridor is efficient, reliable and attracts international trade |
Change in Volume of twenty-foot equivalent unit (TEU) imports and exports as a share of the North American West Coast trade |
2 percent Target date: 2014 |
The Canadian market share is as follows: |
The increase in transit time is primarily the result of the winter months, causing the average transit time to increase 6.0 percent from the previous period (2011-12).
The Canadian market share has grown by 0.31 points from 2010-11, translating into a year over year growth of 2.72 percent.
Sub-program 1.2.2: Gateways and Border Crossings Fund
Description: The Gateways and Border Crossings Fund program works to improve the flow of goods between Canada and the rest of the world by looking at policy measures and by enhancing infrastructure at key locations, such as major border crossings between Canada and the United States, including the new Windsor-Detroit crossing. It focuses on two key initiatives, namely the Ontario-Quebec Continental Gateway and Trade Corridor and the Atlantic Gateway.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
857 |
239 |
618 |
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
52 |
63 |
(11) |
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Canada's strategic Gateways and Corridors are efficient, reliable and are used for international trade |
Efficiency and reliability as measured by total transit time of international containerized freight using the Continental and Atlantic trade corridors |
Total transit time for year X ≤ total transit time for year X-1 (prev. year) |
2011-12: 4.34 days |
|
Canada's strategic Gateways and Corridors are efficient, reliable and are used for international trade |
Percentage change in value of imports and exports using strategic gateways and corridors |
>0 percent |
The total combined value of trade for Ontario, Québec and the Atlantic provinces:
|
Results indicate a reduction of 1.15 percent in the transit time over the 2011-12 period. In terms of overall changes in international trade, for fiscal years 2010-11 to 2011-12 the value of Canada’s international trade for the Ontario, Quebec and Atlantic Regions grew by 7.68 percent (from $609.6 billion to $656.5 billion). Note: 2012-13 data is not available
Program 1.3: Transportation Infrastructure
Description: The Transportation Infrastructure program looks after transportation infrastructure under Transport Canada's mandate to improve efficiency and provide service. The program: acts as the steward of certain commercial transportation assets operated by third parties on behalf of the federal government (airport authorities, port authorities, federal bridges, VIA Rail, Seaway, Marine Atlantic); provides funding for Canada’s strategic transportation infrastructure, targeted to support federal objectives; develops transportation infrastructure policy in consultation with stakeholders; supports essential services in certain communities; manages legacy commitments; and divests assets and contracts out operations, where needed.
Performance Analysis and Lessons Learned
In 201213, Transport Canada delivered contribution funding under transportation infrastructure programming across Canada. Numerous new agreements were concluded to advance transit and highway infrastructure projects. Regional and remote rail programming was streamlined to ensure that essential services are provided to communities not served by other reliable transportation services year round. We also effectively funded the delivery of multiple projects under the Outaouais Road Agreementxxxiii , the Building Canada Fundxxxiii , the Border Infrastructure Fund and the Canada Strategic Infrastructure Fund (the department delivered some of these projects on behalf of Infrastructure Canadaxxxiii). Most of the funds have been allocated to projects, as many of these programs are nearing completion.
We developed long-term, cost- efficient asset strategies for Transport Canada-owned and operated airports and ports. Transport Canada continues to recognize that the best long-term solution for these assets is their transfer to local communities in order to better respond to local needs. As well, a process was initiated to strategically dispose of over 5,000 acres of property no longer required for the operation of the St. Lawrence Seaway, and continued to sell other real property land holdings no longer required for operations. Finally, Transport Canada continued to work on the development of a land use management strategy for the Pickering Lands, including work to transfer a portion of these lands to Parks Canada.
We continued to improve the efficiency of Canadian marine transportation through the Port Divestiture program. Through Canada’s Economic Action Plan, the federal government committed $27.3 million for 2012-13 and 2013-14 to support the divestiture of port facilities and the continued operation and maintenance of federally owned ports. To date, 489 of the 549 sites identified for divestiture at the outset of the program in 1995 have been divested, an 89 percent success rate.
We provided support to VIA Rail’s implementation of the nearly $1 billion major capital program funded by the Government of Canada, which includes $60 million from Budget 2012. These capital investments should improve the efficiency and reliability of VIA’s services by renewing train equipment, expanding track capacity, upgrading stations, and undertaking other strategic projects.
A single-window approach to transportation infrastructure, with a common template for contribution agreements, and a shared risk and project management process allows Transport Canada to provide our clients with an increased level of reliability and service and allows us to focus our efforts on higher risk projects. These will be valuable lessons to take forward as we renew federal infrastructure funding.
| Total Budgetary Expenditures (Main Estimates) 2012–13 |
Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Total Authorities (available for use) 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
309 |
309 |
331 |
310 |
(1) |
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
241 |
236 |
5 |
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Target | Actual Results |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Federally funded infrastructure is available, reliable and operational |
Percentage of federally funded transportation infrastructure that meets operational targets |
100 percent |
100 percent |
This program achieved its expected result with 100 percent of infrastructure available, reliable and operational.
Sub-program 1.3.1: Airport Infrastructure
Description: In keeping with the National Airports policy, the Airport Infrastructure program looks after airport services under federal purview for the benefit of Canadian travellers and businesses. It provides stewardship of airport authorities, operates airports in certain communities and manages other airports’ infrastructure legacy commitments.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
40 |
40 |
0 |
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
127 |
116 |
11 |
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Target | Actual Results |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Airport infrastructure is available to users |
Percentage of federally supported airport infrastructure that is operational |
100 percent |
100 percent |
The sub-program achieved its expected results with 100 percent of infrastructure operational.
Sub-program 1.3.2: Marine Infrastructure
Description: The Marine Infrastructure program operates from a commercially based policy framework, and supports Canadian trade by making marine assets available for commercial use. The program is delivered by methods such as providing stewardship of assets operated by third parties, providing direct public sector delivery, and managing contribution agreements. The program: acts as steward of Canada port authorities and the land they manage; operates and divests Transport Canada’s public ports; acts as steward of, and provides support to, remote, regional and constitutionally-mandated ferry services; and acts as steward of, and provides support to, the Canadian portion of the Seaway.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
172 |
164 |
8 |
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
57 |
75 |
(18) |
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Target | Actual Results |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Marine infrastructure is operational and available to all users |
Percentage of marine infrastructure operational |
100 percent |
100 percent |
This sub-program achieved its expected results with 100 percent of marine infrastructure operational.
Sub-program 1.3.3: Surface Infrastructure
Description: The Surface Infrastructure program supports Canada's trade and mobility by fostering efficient and economic access to surface transportation networks while furthering transportation safety. The program develops, designs, negotiates and manages federal funding for highways, borders, railways, transit and federal bridges; works with provinces, territories and other partners to develop infrastructure programs and policies, with a particular focus on the National Highway System; acts as steward for VIA Rail and federal bridges; and manages regional rail service legacy commitments.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
97 |
106 |
(9) |
|||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
57 |
45 |
(12) |
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Target | Actual Results |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Federally funded surface infrastructure projects are completed and available to users |
Percentage of federally funded surface infrastructure operational |
100 percent |
100 percent |
The sub-program achieved its expected results with 100 percent of federally funded surface infrastructure operational.
Program 1.4: Transportation Innovation
Description: The Transportation Innovation program supports the Advantage Canada framework to promote skills development, and create health, environmental, societal and economic benefits for Canadians. It achieves this by building better linkages between science and policy, supporting technology development aligned with policy issues of significance to the department, and serving as a focal point in the delivery of a coordinated and integrated transportation innovation agenda. The program sets policy and strategic direction for research and development; develops designs, negotiates, and manages research programs for breakthrough technologies, including intelligent transportation systems; advances the development and dissemination of scientific knowledge, and the application of technology; partners and collaborates with other federal departments, provinces and territories; and supports skills development for a highly qualified transportation workforce.
Performance Analysis and Lessons Learned
In 201213, Transport Canada promoted innovation in the transportation sector with a focus on encouraging the deployment of innovative technologies and practices to enhance transportation system performance and productivity. This work supports the department’s efforts to assess and renew its policy framework for a competitive and modern transportation system. It also supports the Advantage Canada Frameworkxxxiv , a strategic, long-term economic plan designed to improve Canada’s economic prosperity.
Transport Canada conducted 18 research and development projects in close alignment with two strategic research priorities, namely: longer-term safety and security, and cold climate technologies. Research in these areas is highly leveraged with industry and academia, in areas such as aviation ground icing prevention, improving security screening at ports and airports, and minimizing the effects of permafrost degradation on northern infrastructure.
Through the Northern Transportation Adaptation Initiative,xxxviii we act as a knowledge broker, bringing together experts from provincial and territorial governments, academia and industry to address transportation challenges related to permafrost degradation and Arctic marine shipping. Initiatives addressed the most pressing transportation issues facing the North and included climate change vulnerability assessments of critical northern infrastructure, as well as evaluations of innovative tools and technologies. We also formed strategic partnerships with territorial governments and universities, resulting in two agreements being signed: one with the Government of Nunavut (to study permafrost under the Iqaluit Airport) and another with Université de Montréal (to develop innovative modelling tools to adapt northern transportation infrastructure).
In the Intelligent Transportation Systemsxxxviiiarea, we completed 14 projects, including the development of a strategic plan and architecture for British Columbia, advanced traveler information for Alberta, implementation of a transportation management centre in the Region of Waterloo, a wind management system for the Confederation Bridge and general awareness building and education activities across Canada. In addition, five new technology projects were approved and eight projects are ongoing that will be completed in 2013–14.
Innovative technologies have the potential to improve the efficiency, safety and security of the Canadian transportation system. For instance, developing new de-icing products and new aircraft materials will make for an even safer aviation sector, and a number of innovative technologies, if and when implemented, can lead to reduced security risks at airports and ports.
| Total Budgetary Expenditures (Main Estimates) 2012–13 |
Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Total Authorities (available for use) 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
14 |
14 |
14 |
9 |
5 |
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
31 |
22 |
9 |
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Target | Actual Results |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Research and development investments are optimized to improve the transportation system for Canadians. |
Ratio of research and development funding leveraged from external sources |
1:1 |
The ratio of research and development funding leveraged from external sources was 3.5:1 |
The FTE variance is explained by employees on leave, retiring, leaving the department and/or taking assignment positions within the department that were not replaced give the impact of Budget cost reduction measures.
The program achieved its expected results; the ratio of research and development funding leveraged from external sources was 3.5:1 (this includes in-kind contributions). All (100 percent) of the approved funding available for research and development was used to conduct research and development activities on a portfolio of 18 projects.
Strategic Outcome 2: A Clean Transportation System
Transport Canada takes a leadership role in ensuring an environmentally responsible transportation system while balancing safety, security and economic efficiency. This means playing a key role in furthering the transportation sector components of the Government of Canada’s environmental agenda. We do this by helping reduce pollution and emissions from transportation sources; protecting the marine and freshwater environment; and fulfilling the important stewardship role of ensuring that Transport Canada’s lands, facilities and activities comply with environmental legislation, including the use of an environmental management system.
Transport Canada also plays a strong leadership role as it engages with national and international partners to limit the environmental impacts of transportation, contributes to the Government of Canada’s initiatives to improve federal regulatory reviews including for environmental assessments of major resource projects and ensuring improvements to our own regulatory, consultation and review processes for transportation-related projects.
The following three programs and four sub programs support this strategic outcome:
| Program | Sub Program | |
|---|---|---|
| 2.1 Clean Air from Transportation |
2.1.1 Clean Air Regulatory Framework and Oversight |
2.1.2 Clean Air Programs |
| 2.2 Clean Water from Transportation |
2.2.1 Clean Water Regulatory Framework |
2.2.2 Clean Water Regulatory Oversight |
| 2.3 Environmental Stewardship of Transportation |
|
|
The sections below explain how we met the commitments presented in the planning highlights in Transport Canada’s 2012-13 Report on Plans and Priorities xxxviii . We discuss actual results achieved against expected results, with performance indicators and targets, at the program and sub-program level.
Program 2.1: Clean Air from Transportation
Description: The Clean Air from Transportation program advances the federal government’s environmental agenda in the transportation sector and complements other federal programs designed to reduce air emissions for the health of Canadians and the environment for generations to come. The program regulates air emissions from the transportation sector and oversees Transport Canada’s Clean Air program obligations and commitments.
Performance Analysis and Lessons Learned
In 2012-13, Transport Canada led the Government of Canada’s participation at the International Maritime Organizationxxxviii to advance the development of measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from international maritime shipping. The proposed Regulations Amending the Vessel Pollution and Dangerous Chemicals Regulations were pre-published in Canada Gazette, Part I, on July 21, 2012 and final regulations were prepared for publication in the spring of 2013. These regulations implement the North American Emission Control Area to limit air pollutant emissions from ships, the Energy Efficiency Design Index and Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan to address greenhouse gas emissions from ships, standards related to managing greywater (drainage from showers, sinks and laundry), and requirements for ship-to-ship oil transfer.
Building on the success of the world’s first voluntary agreement to address greenhouse gas emissions from aviation, Transport Canada and the Canadian aviation industry completed the development and release of Canada’s Action Plan to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Aviation.xxxix Stakeholder involvement was vital to this outcome. As a result of early and active engagement, the response to Canada’s Action Plan at ICAO xliii has been overwhelmingly positive and has been showcased as a best practice on a number of occasions. In addition, through a partnership with the Canadian Airports Council, Transport Canada, Pearson International Airport, Zurich Airport and Airports Council International, an Airport Carbon and Emissions Reporting Tool was developed to enable an airport operator to calculate its own greenhouse gas emissions inventory. The tool is being made available to more than 1,600 airports worldwide.
We also supported the development of measures to address aviation greenhouse gas emissions at ICAO, by participating in the experts’ group assessing potential options to address emissions from aviation by providing scientific and technical support to various working groups.
Drafting of the proposed Locomotive Emissions Regulations is underway. The original timeline was adjusted with pre-publication of the regulations in Canada Gazette, Part I scheduled to occur in 2013. In collaboration with the US Environmental Protection Agency, we also continued to work with key stakeholders to address greenhouse gas emissions from rail under the framework of the Regulatory Cooperation Council Locomotive Emissions Initiative.
We launched calls for proposals under the Truck Reservation Systems program and the Shore Power Technology for Ports program. Through both of these initiatives, Transport Canada will support six new projects at various Canadian ports. For example, the Port of Halifax will implement shore power for cruise ships, the Seaspan Ferries Corporation will install shore power at the Swartz Bay Terminal on Vancouver Island, and the Port of Metro Vancouver will install global positioning system (GPS) technology to improve port-trucking efficiency and environmental performance.
Research on new technologies and practices for emissions reduction and measurement for the rail and marine sectors continued in 2012-13. For the rail sector, we created the Clean Rail Academic Grant program and provided federal funds to academics currently developing technologies and practices that aim to reduce air pollutant emissions. In addition, we completed a technology scan to determine what emission control technologies are currently available in order to base realistic emission reductions in current and future regulations. This scan is beneficial for the rail industry as it provides information on tools and technologies available to meet air pollutant emission standards. For the marine sector, we completed inventories of port emissions for all Canada Port Authority ports.
Since its launch, the ecoTECHNOLOGY for Vehicles II program has tested 21 advanced vehicle technologies in partnership with North American environmental and safety regulators, presented results at industry forums and published 17 technical papers covering seven key technology areas to help advance the integration of new on- road vehicle technologies in a safe and timely manner. Transport Canada is working in collaboration with U.S. regulatory agencies to inform the development of aligned/harmonized North American safety and environmental regulatory approaches to new passenger vehicle and truck technologies. One challenge, however, continues to be the difference in Canadian and U.S. financial planning cycles. We will address this by engaging U.S. regulators earlier in the planning cycle, to maximize opportunities to leverage joint testing activities.
In 2012-13, we launched the Canadian Vehicle Use Study (CVUS) to address data gaps and collect information for light-duty vehicles that in turn will inform Canada’s vehicle greenhouse gas emission regulations. The CVUS was recently acknowledged as an international first in the Clerk of the Privy Council’s Twentieth Annual Report to the Prime Minister on the Public Service of Canada. In addition, we also made progress to expand the CVUS to collect data from registered heavy-duty vehicles in Canada.
| Total Budgetary Expenditures (Main Estimates) 2012–13 |
Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Total Authorities (available for use) 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
25 |
25 |
25 |
19 |
6 |
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
92 |
87 |
5 |
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Target | Actual Results |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Decrease in intensity of greenhouse gas emissions and air pollutants in the transportation sector |
Percentage change in transportation emission intensity |
An intensity improvement that is consistent with the plan established under the government's horizontal approach to clean air Target date: 2020 |
From 2005-2010 Freight transportation: increase from 82 grams to 94 grams per tonne-km. Passenger transportation: decrease from 142 grams to 128 grams of carbon dioxide per passenger-km. |
While all freight transportation modes have become more efficient (and less greenhouse gas intensive) between 2005 and 2010 , the last year data was available, the increased reliance on trucks (a relatively greenhouse gas intensive mode of transportation) to move freight has increased in the overall greenhouse- gas- intensity of freight transportation from 82 grams to 94 grams per tonne-km. For passenger transportation, between 2005 and 2010 , the greenhouse gas intensity of passenger transportation decreased from 142 grams to 128 grams of carbon dioxide per passenger-km during that same period.
Sub-program 2.1.1: Clean Air Regulatory Framework and Oversight
Description: Deriving its authority from the Railway Safety Act, the Canada Shipping Act, 2001, the Motor Vehicle Fuel Consumption Standards Act and the Aeronautics Act, Transport Canada’s Clean Air Regulatory Framework and Oversight program contributes to reducing the air emissions from transportation by creating and implementing regulatory regimes. The program: sets the legal and regulatory frameworks that govern the transportation sector’s air emissions; oversees transportation firms’ compliance with their regulatory obligations; represents Canada in discussions to set international standards for air emissions in the transportation sector; and contributes to developing and implementing instruments to reduce air emissions from Canada's transportation sector.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
15 |
12 |
3 |
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
61 |
61 |
0 |
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Target | Actual Results |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Clean air regulatory framework (and policies) that align with international standards |
Percentage of instruments that are aligned with domestic legislation or international standards |
100 percent Target date: 2015 |
100 percent |
This sub-program achieved its expected result. For aviation, 100 percent of instruments are aligned with domestic legislation and/or international standards. For marine, 100 percent of instruments are aligned with domestic legislation
Sub-program 2.1.2: Clean Air Programs
Description: The Clean Air program advances the federal government’s environmental agenda in the transportation sector by: promoting and demonstrating ways to reduce transportation greenhouse gas emissions and other air pollutants; promoting, testing and demonstrating advanced vehicle technologies to reduce transportation greenhouse gas emissions and other air pollutants from motor vehicles; creating partnerships; and designing, negotiating and managing initiatives for transportation emission reduction. Specific initiatives: Clean and Safe Vehicle Technology program, Marine Shore Power for Ports Initiative and Reducing Truck Idling at Ports Initiatives.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
10 |
7 |
3 |
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
32 |
26 |
6 |
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Target | Actual Results |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Clean Transportation technologies are available to users |
Number of sites using clean transportation technologies |
10 |
5 |
As of March 2013, Clean Air initiatives have contributed to projects at five sites. The Shore Power Technology for Ports program has contributed to the installation and commissioning of shore power technology in four ports across Canada. With respect to the Truck Reservation System program – one site (Port Metro Vancouver) is currently using clean transportation technologies. A second call for proposals was initiated for the Shore Power Technology for Ports program and additional contribution agreements are expected under the Truck Reservation System programxliii . Overall, the program is on track to meet its 2015 performance target.
Program 2.2: Clean Water from Transportation
Description: The Clean Water from Transportation program protects the marine environment by reducing the pollution of water from transportation sources. This program regulates and monitors the release and impact of discharges from marine vessels into the marine environment, regulates ballast28 water, and contributes to setting domestic and international rules that govern limits to liability of marine pollution incidents. This program advances the federal government’s clean water agenda in the transportation sector and complements other federal programs designed to protect the marine environment for the health of Canadians and the environment for generations to come. This program also represents Canada in discussions to set international standards to prevent pollution from vessels operating in Canada’s waters.
Performance Analysis and Lessons Learned
Transport Canada delivered on its commitment to protect the marine environment by contributing to the reduction of water pollution from transportation activity. National Aerial Surveillance program (NASP) pollution surveillance aircraft conducted surveillance in all regions of Canada. It is evident that the NASP continues to have a positive impact in deterring potential polluters who transit waters under Canadian jurisdiction.
We maintained an inspection program for vessels entering the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway that ensured 100 percent compliance before entering these waters by requiring corrective action when deficiencies in ballast water management were found. With respect to the percentage of ships in compliance with reporting rules for ballast water, 2012–13 saw 95 percent compliance at the national level.
The proposed Regulations amending the Vessel Pollution and Dangerous Chemical Regulations include updates for standards for ship – to -ship transfers of oil, as well as new standards for grey water (drainage from showers, sinks and laundry).
As well, we announced a number of measures toward the creation of a World-Class Tanker Safety Systemxliii , including the implementation of eight tanker safety measures, such as tanker inspections, systematic surveillance and monitoring ships, Incident Command System, pilotage programs, public port designations, scientific research, new and modified aids to navigation, and modern navigation systems. As well, the Safeguarding Canada's Seas and Skies Act was introduced and a Tanker Safety Expert Panel was created to review Canada’s current marine pollution preparedness and response regime and propose further measures to strengthen it.
Recognizing the importance of having program instruments (policies, procedures and work instructions) ready for implementation at the same time regulatory changes are introduced, we help ensure that all regulatory framework instruments are well integrated, properly balanced and synchronized with one another. This results in a much more adaptive framework and supports more effective and consistent adoption of the requirements.
Following senior level discussions with the marine shipping industry on how consultations are carried out, we are making changes to the Canadian Marine Advisory Council to allow greater opportunity for stakeholder comment.
| Total Budgetary Expenditures (Main Estimates) 2012–13 |
Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Total Authorities (available for use) 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
2 |
2 |
7 |
7 |
(5) |
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
13 |
27 |
(14) |
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Target | Actual Results |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Prevention of pollution in the marine environment from vessels operating in waters under Canadian jurisdiction. |
Percentage change in number of releases by vessels of substances that could have a negative impact on the marine environment (i.e. pollution, ballast water) |
5 percent reduction Target date: 2017 |
50 percent |
The FTE variance is explained by the additional funding provided to the department for the World Class Tanker Safety System initiative.
For 2012-13, there were 14 releases by vessels identified by the NASP that could have a negative impact on the marine environment. This is a reduction of 50 percent from the 2009-10 baseline of 28 releases, far exceeding the target.
Sub-program 2.2.1: Clean Water Regulatory Framework
Description: Guided by the Canada Shipping Act, 2001, the Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act, the Marine Liability Act and international conventions, the Clean Water Regulatory Framework program sets the legal and regulatory frameworks that govern the protection of the marine environment from pollution, the introduction of invasive species and the environmental impact of pollution incidents.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
|||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
2 |
1 |
1 |
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Target | Actual Results |
|---|---|---|---|
|
A modern clean water regulatory framework and policies that are harmonized with adopted international standards |
Percentage of instruments that are aligned with domestic legislation and/or adopted international standards |
95 percent Target date: 2017 |
100 percent |
This sub-program achieved its expected results.
Sub-program 2.2.2: Clean Water Regulatory Oversight
Description: The Clean Water Regulatory Oversight sub-program contributes to reducing pollution from vessel transportation by monitoring compliance of transportation firms within the Marine Safety regulatory framework through surveillance, inspections, audits, monitoring and enforcement.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|
|
2 |
6 |
(4) |
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
11 |
27 |
(16) |
||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Industry is compliant with the regulatory framework |
Percentage industry compliance with regulatory framework for environmental response regime |
95 percent |
100 percent |
|
Industry is compliant with the regulatory framework for ballast water discharges in waters under Canadian jurisdiction |
Percentage of vessels in compliance with Ballast Water Control and Management Regulations reporting rules |
95 percent |
95 percent |
This sub-program achieved its expected results. As previously noted, our inspection program for vessels entering the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway, ensures 100 percent compliance before entering these waters.
Program 2.3: Environmental Stewardship of Transportation
Description: The Environmental Stewardship program fulfills Transport Canada’s responsibilities in working towards an environmentally responsible national transportation system for Canadians by ensuring compliance with the department’s environmental obligations in relation to acts, regulations, policies and guidelines. The program fulfills Transport Canada's responsibility to implement its Departmental Sustainable Development Strategy under the Federal Sustainable Development Act; ensures that Transport Canada’s lands and facilities are managed in an environmentally responsible manner in compliance with federal legislation and policies; provides functional support for environmental assessments, including assessments of major resource projects; and manages contaminated sites.
Performance Analysis and Lessons Learned
Through Canada’s Economic Action Plan 2012, the government is investing $165 million over two years to support Responsible Resource Development xliii and create jobs, growth and long-term prosperity while strengthening our world-class protection of the environment for future generations of Canadians. This investment includes renewing funding for Transport Canada’s participation in the Major Projects Management Office xliv Initiative. In 2012-13, Transport Canada worked with other departments to develop common procedures, guidance and project agreements to govern the environmental assessment and regulatory review of major resource projects under the Major Projects Management Office (MPMO) and Northern Projects Management Office (NPMO). We are currently involved in 55 of the 78 MPMO projects, and all milestones and service standards were met pursuant to project agreements. We are involved in all 33 projects under the NPMO initiative and signed three project agreements in 2012-13.
On July 6, 2012 the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (2012) came into effect establishing a new improved federal environmental assessment regime. To align with this new regime, Transport Canada undertook a major review of the Environmental Assessment program, including the clarification of roles and responsibilities, and the development of a national framework for environmental reviews on federal lands.
Transport Canada is responsible for a wide range of transportation operations and over 700 properties, including owned and/or operated airports and ports. Operations include fleets of aircraft and vehicles, stores, warehouses and offices in central and remote sites across the country. Environmental performance at these sites is monitored through Transport Canada’s National Environmental Management System. In 2012-13, we successfully reviewed and streamlined this system to increase efficiencies. Cost-saving measures were identified such as multi-purpose visits to ensure departmental compliance with environmental legislation, monitor remediation of contaminated sites and follow up on environmental assessments.
In 2012-13, the department achieved 100 percent of our commitments under Themes I-III of the FSDS. Transport Canada contributes to Greening Government Operations (GGO) targets through Theme IV. The targets under Theme IV are national in scale and cover a wide range of activities including reducing greenhouse gas emissions from our operations, improving the environmental performance of our buildings, reducing paper consumption and properly managing our electronic and electrical equipment. Transport Canada is in a good position to achieve, and in some cases, exceed all GGO targets. For additional details on Transport Canada’s GGO activities please see Section III, 3.3 Supplementary Information Tables of this report.
| Total Budgetary Expenditures (Main Estimates) 2012–13 |
Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Total Authorities (available for use) 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
33 |
33 |
46 |
20 |
13 |
|||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
89 |
101 |
(12) |
|||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Compliance with Transport Canada's environmental obligations in relation to acts, regulations, policies and guidelines |
Percentage of departmental commitments achieved under the Federal Sustainable Development Strategy |
100 |
100 |
|
Compliance with Transport Canada’s environmental obligations in relation to acts, regulations, policies and guidelines |
Number of instances where Transport Canada was not in compliance with applicable environmental legislation |
0 |
0 |
The FTE variance is mostly due to a transfer of FTES to the Programs Group from another area of the department which was not reflected in the planned FTE numbers. A total of 314 National Environmental Management System reviews, were conducted in 2012-13. These reviews include 58 from the Environmental Protection program, 44 from the Environmental Evaluation and Mitigation program and 212 monitoring activities for environmental assessments completed under the former Canadian Environmental Assessment Actxlviii .
Strategic Outcome 3: A Safe Transportation System
Transport Canada supports a safe transportation system that aims to facilitate the movement of people and goods across Canada, without loss of life, injury or damage to property. The activities under this strategic outcome direct much of their collective effort at influencing the behaviour of the public and industry through laws and regulations, and can play an important role in contributing to clean transportation strategic outcomes described in program 2.2. Transportation safety is enhanced by harmonized and streamlined regulatory regimes that are informed by the expertise of multiple countries and stakeholders. Sharing best practices and cooperating in research during the regulatory development stage results in effective and efficient regulatory frameworks that enhance transportation safety. In addition, Transport Canada ensures that Canadians and the transportation industry are in compliance with the regulatory framework through their safety oversight programs. These rules are complemented by policies, standards, directives, and guidelines that further influence the use of safe transportation practices and enable a safety culture that seeks to make safety a part of a company’s every action.
The following five programs and 18 sub-programs support this strategic outcome:
| Program | Sub Program | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3.1 Aviation Safety |
3.1.1 Aviation Safety Regulatory Framework |
3.1.2 Aviation Safety Oversight |
3.1.3 Airports Capital Assistance |
3.1.4 Aircraft Services |
| 3.2 Marine Safety |
3.2.1 Marine Safety Regulatory Framework |
3.2.2 Marine Safety Oversight |
3.2.3 Navigable Waters Protection |
3.2.4 Divestiture of Marine Training |
| 3.3 Rail Safety |
3.3.1 Rail Safety Regulatory Framework |
3.3.2 Rail Safety Oversight |
3.3.3 Rail Safety Outreach |
|
| 3.4 Road Safety |
3.4.1 Motor Vehicle Safety Regulatory Framework |
3.4.2 Motor Vehicle Safety Oversight |
3.4.3 Motor Carrier Safety |
3.4.4 Road Safety Outreach |
| 3.5 Transportation of Dangerous Goods |
3.5.1 Transportation of Dangerous Goods Regulatory Framework |
3.5.2 Transportation of Dangerous Goods Oversight |
3.5.3 Emergency Response for the Transportation of Dangerous Goods |
|
The following sections explain how we met the commitments presented in the planning highlights in Transport Canada’s 2012-13 Report on Plans and Priorities. We discuss actual results achieved against expected results, with performance indicators and targets, at the program and sub-program level.
Program 3.1: Aviation Safety
Description: The Aviation Safety program develops, administers, and oversees the policies, regulations and standards necessary for the safe conduct of civil aviation within Canada's borders in a manner harmonized with the international aviation community. It also manages programs to support safety-related investments at regional/small airports and provides air transport services to support Transport Canada’s and other government department’s operations.
Performance Analysis and Lessons Learned
In 201213, we enhanced the Civil Aviation Safety management framework. We delivered on the majority of the commitments made in the Civil Aviation action plan. As of the end of March 2013, we completed 77 percent of these commitments. All of the remaining commitments in the action plan will be completed by September 2013. We addressed eight of the 10 audit findings from the 2012 report by the Office of the Auditor General through the Management Response and detailed Action Plan including the successful implementation of a national risk-based approach to oversight planning that considers surveillance and service activities (safety management systems and non-safety management systems (SMS)). An internal management review exercise held in June 2012 reviewed organizational risks and provided guidance on actions to mitigate the identified risk areas, as well as re-validated risk areas and alignment between business and operational risks.
To support risk-based inspection and operational decision-making when conducting oversight activities, inspectors are equipped with risk-based surveillance planning tools and guidance material such as the National Aviation Safety Information Management System – a risk indicator database, and the Surveillance Directive and Staff Instruction which allows for the development of risk-based surveillance plans. We provide ongoing support and training to inspectors through communication, SMS training activities, as well as improvement and publication of tools and guidance on surveillance procedures. Examples include delivering of e-learning modules and surveillance workshops to 474 inspectors across the country.
We finalized the Civil Aviation organizational structure by completing work descriptions and implementing classification decisions and staffing strategies. The Civil Aviation Steering Committee provided active oversight of the implementation plan. We developed transition, staffing and communication strategies in collaboration with human resources to support managers and employees during implementation of the new structure. We transitioned 75 percent of Civil Aviation positions and 78 percent of employees. We achieved all transition and integration activities within prescribed timelines.
The senior management decision to centralize management and monitoring of progress towards achieving commitments identified in the Civil Aviation Action Plan by April 2013 helped us identify trends or possible issues in implementing the action plan. The success in implementing the action plan proved the benefit of this approach which will be used in future activities as it ensures we take action in a timely manner by the numerous stakeholders involved in undertakings of this magnitude.
| Total Budgetary Expenditures (Main Estimates) 2012–13 |
Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Total Authorities (available for use) 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
231 |
231 |
227 |
199 |
32 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||||
|
1,803 |
1,622 |
181 |
|||||
| Performance Results | |||||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||||
|
A safe civil aviation system |
Number of accidents per 100,000 hours of flight (five year average) |
6.5 |
6.1 accidents per 100,000 hours of flight |
||||
The FTE variance of 181 is explained by lower than expected FTE utilization as a result of the transition of the Civil Aviation Organization, as well as the realization of organizational efficiencies across the Aviation Safety program including Aircraft Services.
The expected results for the program were exceeded. However, it should be noted that Aviation Safety completed an in-depth review of its key performance indicators in 2011-12 and 2012-13. As a result of this review, several indicators were replaced and are no longer in use. The new set of indicators were approved and incorporated for reporting in the Performance Management Framework for 2013-14.
Sub-program 3.1.1: Aviation Safety Regulatory Framework
Description: The Aviation Safety Regulatory Framework program develops and balances the use of policies, guidelines, regulations, standards and education based on risk, to promote a safe and harmonized aviation safety framework for Canadians and air travellers in Canada; and, Canada’s aviation industry.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
31 |
23 |
8 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||
|
261 |
174 |
87 |
|||
| Performance Results | |||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||
|
A risk-based regulatory framework consistent with International Conventions and major trading partners, and Cabinet Directive on Streamlining Regulation |
Percentage of policies, standards and regulations implemented that meet Cabinet Directive on Streamlining Regulation requirements |
90 percent Target date: March 2015 |
No data to report. |
||
|
A risk-based regulatory framework consistent with International Conventions and major trading partners, and Cabinet Directive on Streamlining Regulation |
Percentage of identified aviation hazards and risks related to the regulatory framework that are assessed |
100 percent Target date: |
No data to report. |
||
Aviation Safety completed an in-depth review of its key performance indicators in 2011-12 and 2012-13. As a result of this review several indicators were replaced and are no longer in use. The new set of indicators were approved and incorporated for reporting in the Performance Management Framework for 2013-14.
Sub-program 3.1.2: Aviation Safety Oversight
Description: The Aviation Safety Oversight program, based on risk, supports compliance of the aviation industry with the regulatory framework through services, assessments and validations, inspections, audits and, when necessary, enforcement.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
122 |
119 |
3 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||
|
1,158 |
1,089 |
69 |
|||
| Performance Results | |||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||
|
Aviation community has a strong safety culture |
Percentage of aviation industry understanding |
75 percent Target date: March 2015 |
No data to report
|
||
Aviation Safety completed an in-depth review of its key performance indicators in 2011–12 and 2012-13. As a result of this review several indicators were replaced and are no longer in use. The new set of indicators were approved and incorporated for reporting in the Performance Management Framework in 2013-14.
Sub-program 3.1.3: Airports Capital Assistance
Description: In keeping with the National Airports Policy, the Airports Capital Assistance program helps Canada maintain airport safety at non-federally owned eligible airports. It provides funding for airside safety-related capital projects, which may also extend to non-airside asset protection. It targets airports with a demonstrated financial need to fund the capital expenditures necessary to maintain safety.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
50 |
32 |
18 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||
|
19 |
18 |
1 |
|||
| Performance Results | |||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||
|
Eligible airports meet safety standards required for continued operation |
Percentage of eligible airports that have maintained their certification as a result of receiving Airports Capital Assistance program funding |
100 percent Target date: |
100 percent |
||
The expected results were achieved.
Sub-program 3.1.4: Aircraft Services
Description: The Aircraft Services program provides aircraft and aircraft maintenance and training services to Transport Canada and other federal government departments and agencies.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
29 |
25 |
4 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||
|
365 |
340 |
25 |
|||
| Performance Results | |||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||
|
Trust and confidence from clients |
Percentage of client satisfaction (satisfied or very satisfied) with services |
80 percent Target date: March 2014 |
No data to report |
||
|
Trust and confidence from clients |
Number of category 329 or greater category occurrences (per 1,000 flight hours) |
1.37 |
1.55 |
||
Aircraft Services developed a survey that will be circulated to clients in the winter of 2014 providing data for the target date. In the past fiscal year, this sub-program has gone through significant changes with workforce reductions and the sale of aircraft. Flying hours decreased by 17 percent. The rate of category 3+ safety reports per 1,000 flight hours is down 35 percent from the previous year but does not meet the reduction in the five year moving target because of the lag in analysis. The dataset is too small to be statistically significant however further analysis shows there is no consistent pattern in the types of incidents and therefore no systemic safety issues that are of cause for concern.
Program 3.2: Marine Safety
Description: The Marine Safety program protects the life and health of Canadians by contributing to a safe and efficient marine transportation system. This program derives its authority from a number of acts, the Canada Shipping Act, 2001xlviii , the Navigable Waters Protection Actxlviii , the Safe Containers Convention Actxlviii , the Pilotage Act xlix , the Coasting Trade Act Table of Contents and the Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act National Policy Framework for Strategic Gateways and Trade Corridors , to develop and enforce a marine safety regulatory framework for the domestic and foreign vessels (non-pleasure craft and pleasure craft), enforce international conventions signed by Canada; and protect the public right to navigation on Canada’s waterways.
Performance Analysis and Lessons Learned
Transport Canada remains committed to providing high quality service. We continue to realize the benefits of implementing formalized service standards and enhanced integrated program planning, continuous performance monitoring and reporting for inspection and certification activities. We developed the first Delegated Statutory Inspection Program Annual Report, to report on the performance of delegated vessels30. The report results are incorporated into planning for oversight activities to ensure continual program monitoring and improvement. Active monitoring, quarterly performance reporting, data integrity and interoperability, continue to provide opportunities for meaningful program analysis and timely corrective action.
We have strengthened guidance on how to apply current regulated fees to a variety of services. We have also undertaken a review of the fee structure as part of a modernization initiative to align it with current private and international sectors. In doing so, we updated service standards covering timelines, accuracy and accessibility of services. The goal of this initiative is to produce a single regulation that consolidates tariff-related marine user fee provisions from various Transport Canada regulations.
Work is also currently underway to implement management action plans in response to audits of Marine Safety xliii .
We continue to recognize the importance of consulting with our stakeholders regarding program changes and regulatory projects and, where applicable, on the supporting program instruments (policies, procedures and work instructions). We also continue to recognize the importance of consulting horizontally on internal program changes and regulatory projects and the impacts they may have on other programs. This helps ensure that program changes and regulatory projects are effectively communicated, well-integrated, properly balanced and that stakeholder concerns are taken into account, resulting in a more effective and consistent program.
| Total Budgetary Expenditures (Main Estimates) 2012–13 |
Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Total Authorities (available for use) 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
62 |
62 |
65 |
57 |
5 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||||
|
603 |
575 |
28 |
|||||
| Performance Results | |||||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||||
|
A safe marine transportation system |
Number of Canadian commercial Vessel (non-pleasure craft) occurrences per 1,000 vessels in the Canadian registry (five-year moving average) |
9.5 Target date: December 2015 |
12.36 per 1,000 vessels |
||||
|
A safe marine transportation system |
Number of pleasure craft fatalities for recreational boating activities (five-year average) |
111 |
74 Four-year average as only data from 2009-12 was available |
||||
The FTE variance is due to the ongoing reorganization of Marine Safety and Security impacting the Marine Safety program and efficiency improvements, which reduced FTE utilization. There are staffing actions underway to support the long-term needs of the program.
Expected results are on track to meet the December 2015 target of 30 percent decrease in occurrences.
Sub-program 3.2.1: Marine Safety Regulatory Framework
Description: The Marine Safety Regulatory Framework program provides a balance of tools - policies, guidelines, regulations and standards based on performance and risk, to support the safety of seafarers, commercial vessels (non-pleasure craft) and pleasure craft; harmonize Canada’s marine safety framework with other jurisdictions; and support pilotage services in Canada.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
11 |
7 |
4 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||
|
92 |
65 |
27 |
|||
| Performance Results | |||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||
|
A risk-based regulatory framework consistent with international conventions and Cabinet Directive on Streamlining Regulation |
Percentage of regulations aligned with domestic legislation and/or adopted international standards |
85 percent Target date: March 2015 |
No data available |
||
This sub-program is on track to meet the expected result.
Sub-program 3.2.2: Marine Safety Oversight
Description: The Marine Safety Oversight program monitors commercial vessel (non-pleasure craft) industry and pleasure craft compliance with the marine safety regulatory framework. This program issues Canadian Maritime documents and other official documents to Canadian seafarers (officers and crews on Canadian vessels); approves seafarer training; registers and licenses commercial vessels (non-pleasure craft) and pleasure craft; issues safety certificates and approvals for vessels, equipment and design; inspects commercial vessels (non-pleasure craft) entering Canadian waters; responds to Marine Occupational Safety and Health issues; conducts surveillance and investigations; and promotes safe practices.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
46 |
43 |
3 |
||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | ||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | ||
|
447 |
441 |
6 |
||
| Performance Results | ||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | |
|
Compliance with regulations for inspected domestic vessels (non-pleasure craft) |
Percentage of inspected domestic vessels (non-pleasure craft) that are compliant with regulations |
68 percent Target date: March 2015 |
55 percent - Not Achieved. |
|
|
Compliance with regulations for pleasure craft |
Percentage of pleasure craft compliant with regulations (includes those that received a courtesy check) |
60 percent Target date: March 2015 |
92 percent |
|
|
The Port State Control regulatory oversight addresses the highest risk foreign vessels |
Percentage of high risk foreign vessels inspected |
95 percent Target date: March 2017 |
No data available |
|
For inspected domestic vessels (non-pleasure craft) out of 4,556 inspections in fiscal year 2012-13, 2050 inspections had at least one deficiency. This means that 55 percent of inspected domestic vessels (non-pleasure craft) were found compliant with regulations. By continuing to engage stakeholders to reinforce requirements in addition to circulating guidance and awareness material, it is anticipated that the expected result well be achieved by the March 2015 target date.
Following the 2012 boating season, we received and analyzed 3,988 valid Pleasure Craft Courtesy Check forms. Results show that 92 percent had their pleasure craft licence marked on the hull of their craft, and of those required, 92 percent provided proof of competency31.
Sub-program 3.2.3: Navigable Waters Protection
Description: The Navigable Waters Protection program protects the public right of safe navigation in Canada’s waters by removing obstructions to navigation; approving any works built or placed in, on, over, under, through or across navigable water before construction; regulating lights or markers required for safe navigation during and/or on completion of certain works; regulating the placement of private buoys as per the Private Buoy Regulations of the Canada Shipping Act 2001; and, acting as Receiver of Wreck as per the Canada Shipping Act 2001, Part 7.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
5 |
7 |
(2) |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||
|
64 |
70 |
(6) |
|||
| Performance Results | |||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||
|
The public’s right to safely navigate Canada’s waterways is protected |
Number of public complaints received for works not compliant with navigable waters legislation |
175 Target date: March 2015 |
130 |
||
The sub-program expected results were exceeded.
Sub-program 3.2.4: Divestiture of Marine Training Assets
Description: The Divestiture of Marine Training Assets program provides cost-shared funding for the upgrade or replacement of marine training simulators and divests department owned Marine Emergency Duties (MED) assets for continued certification of Canadian seafarers.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
|||
| Performance Results | |||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||
|
Marine training institutions in Canada independently provide world class training |
Number of Transport Canada owned marine training simulators divested to Provinces/ Marine Training Institutes for seafarer certification training |
1 |
1 |
||
|
Marine training institutions in Canada independently provide world class training |
Number of institutions providing MED training without federal assistance (Transport Canada-owned MED facilities divested with 70 percent/30 percent funding split) |
1 |
1 |
||
The expected results were achieved.
Program 3.3: Rail Safety
Description: Under the authority of the Railway Safety Actxliii, the Rail Safety program develops implements and promotes safety policies, regulations, standards and research. The program provides oversight of the rail industry promotes public safety at crossings and identifies the risks of trespassing. It also provides funds to improve safety at grade crossings.
Performance Analysis and Lessons Learned
Transport Canada made considerable progress on several initiatives, key among them being amendments to the Railway Safety Actxliv, which received Royal Assent on in May 2012. These amendments will allow us to improve the Safety Management Systems Regulations, and develop access control regulations, amongst other potential regulatory instruments.
In the 2012-13 Report on Plans and Priorities, we identified several regulations that needed to be developed once the amendments to the Railway Safety Act received Royal Assent, with focus on regulations to bring into force administrative monetary penalties and the requirement for a Railway Operating Certificate. Consistent with the Rail Safety senior management committee, the Advisory Council on Rail Safety, and the Federal-Provincial Working Group, we approved a new set of regulation-making priorities with the focus turning to amending the Railway Safety Management System Regulations and combating trespassing. We will collaborate with all internal and external stakeholders to help determine its regulatory priorities.
A related accomplishment was addressing the application of the Railway Safety Act to local railway companies. The Railway Safety Act was amended to include the local railways based on recommendation #7 from the report of the Railway Safety Act Review Panel. The panel wanted all railways operating on federal tracks to be included under the Act to help resolve some jurisdictional gaps. This change means that beginning May 12013 41 additional railway companies will fall under the federal rail safety regime. Efforts included identifying railways that fall under the new definition of local railway companies and informing them, as well as key partners, and stakeholders, of their obligations under the new regime through a communications campaign and information sessions.
We completed the Rail Safety Integrated Gateway system, which will allow for better capture and analysis of safety performance data throughout the industry. We are modified and upgraded the national inspector training program, and we are continuing to develop a quality management system. As part of the national rail safety training program, we developed and modified several key courses for inspectors, including courses on Audit, SMS and orientation of rail safety inspectors.
We improved the Rail Safety Quality Management program by developing and implementing several new directives and procedures. These improvements included updating the risk-based business planning process, creating a new information management directive, and enhancing service performance by revising the complaints and inquiries procedure.
| Total Budgetary Expenditures (Main Estimates) 2012–13 |
Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Total Authorities (available for use) 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
37 |
37 |
37 |
34 |
3 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||||
|
208 |
176 |
32 |
|||||
| Performance Results | |||||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||||
|
A safe rail transportation system |
Rate of rail accidents (per million train miles) that occur on railways under federal jurisdiction (includes main-track collisions, and derailments, non-main track derailments and collisions, fires/explosions and others) (five-year average) |
13.3 |
11.73 |
||||
|
A safe rail transportation system |
Rate of rail incidents (per million train miles) that occur on railways under federal jurisdiction (includes abnormal position of main-track switch, movement exceeding limit of authority, leaks of dangerous goods, incapacitation of crew member, runaway rolling stock, signal that is less restrictive than required and unprotected overlap of authorities) (five year average) |
2.32 |
2.36 |
||||
The variance between planned and actual FTEs is mostly due to reduced outreach activities and unstaffed positions related to program support.
The rate of rail accidents is down from the five year average of 13.07. Rate of rail incidents is also down from the five-year average.
Sub-program 3.3.1: Rail Safety Regulatory Framework
Description: The Rail Safety Regulatory Framework program, under the Railway Safety Act, develops and balances the use of various tools such as policies, guidelines, regulations, standards, and rules, based on risk, to promote a safe and harmonized rail safety regime for the rail industry and the public, at large, while ensuring the viability of the rail sector.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
3 |
4 |
(1) |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||
|
22 |
22 |
0 |
|||
| Performance Results | |||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||
|
The regulatory framework addresses the highest risks |
Percentage of rail risk mitigation strategies developed per total number of identified risks |
90 percent |
100 |
||
The expected results were achieved.
Sub-program 3.3.2: Rail Safety Oversight
Description: The Rail Safety Oversight program promotes compliance with the regulatory framework through inspections, audits, monitoring and enforcement, when necessary, of the rail industry.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
15 |
15 |
0 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||
|
144 |
131 |
13 |
|||
| Performance Results | |||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||
|
Rail industry has a strong safety culture |
Index of railway industry SMS implementation |
Tbd |
This performance indicator is under review |
||
|
Rail industry is compliant |
Percentage of rail industry that is compliant with rules, regulations and standards as set out in the Railway Safety Act |
80 percent Target date: March 2015 |
This performance indicator is under review |
||
These performance indicators are under review therefore expected results are not available.
Sub-program 3.3.3: Rail Safety Outreach
Description: The Rail Safety Outreach program promotes public awareness and education regarding safety near crossings and the risks of trespassing in order to prevent deaths and injuries. It also promotes safety with the rail industry by sharing best practices, research and technology. It provides funding for safety improvements at grade crossings.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
18 |
16 |
2 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||
|
42 |
23 |
19 |
|||
| Performance Results | |||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||
|
Safe crossings |
Percentage of crossing collisions reduced |
5 percent Target date: March 2015 |
2012: 10 percent increase |
||
|
Trespassing reduced |
Percentage of trespassing accidents reduced |
5 percent Target date: March 2015 |
2012: 10 percent increase |
||
The number of crossing accidents increased to 187 from 170 in 2011. This is down from the five year average of 195. The number of trespasser accidents increased from 67 to 74 in 2012. This is still down from the five year average of 79. This is partly explained through an increase in the number of million-train miles in 2012.
Program 3.4: Road Safety
Description: Guided by the Motor Vehicle Safety Actxlviii and the Motor Vehicle Transport Act, xlviii the Road Safety program develops standards and regulations, provides oversight and engages in public outreach in order to reduce the deaths, injuries and social costs caused by motor vehicle use, and to improve public confidence in the safety of Canada’s road transportation system.
Performance Analysis and Lessons Learned
Transport Canada successfully implemented the “Temporary Vehicle Importation System” xlviii , an on-line tool to allow importers to electronically apply for temporary vehicle importation. This has reduced application processing time from up to four weeks to one week.
In addition to the online tool, based on feedback from industry, we streamlined the pre-clearance vehicle importation system and improved compliance by importers. The new system with fewer, but more qualified importers has reduced the compliance burden on industry, the Canada Border Services Agency and Transport Canada.
We streamlined the exemptions process under the Motor Vehicle Transport Act to accommodate industry sectors that use motor carriers subject to the Hours of Service Regulations. The streamlined process resulted in expedited timelines for decision on applications,(e.g. reduction from 16 weeks to 9 weeks, depending on the complexity of the application), improved guidelines for applicants, service standards and greater applicant engagement to ensure that the applicant can implement the exemption, if granted.
The success of these initiatives is due in large part to effective industry stakeholder engagement and the removal of unnecessary processing steps consistent with the principle of lean management.
| Total Budgetary Expenditures (Main Estimates) 2012–13 |
Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Total Authorities (available for use) 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
23 |
23 |
24 |
23 |
0 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||||
|
113 |
84 |
29 |
|||||
| Performance Results | |||||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||||
|
Safer vehicles |
Collisions per 10,000 motor vehicle registered |
To be determined |
53.5 |
||||
|
Safer vehicles |
Fatalities (vehicle occupants) per 10,000 police-reported collisions occurring on public roads |
To be determined |
26.4 |
||||
|
Safer vehicles |
Serious injuries (vehicle occupants) per 10,000 police-reported collisions occurring on public roads |
To be determined |
134.1 |
||||
The FTE variance is mainly in response to the implementation of Budget 2012 cost reduction measures. Positions relating to the FTEs were eliminated as the work being performed, particularly with respect to outreach activities that were not core to Road Safety’s mandate.
With respect to results, in 2011, there were 53.5 total collisions per 10,000 accidents this represents a 15.8 percent reduction as compared to the average rate of the previous five years. In 2011, the metric for fatalities was 26.4, which represents a 9.2 percent reduction as compared to the average rate of the previous five years. 134 serious injuries present an 11.3 percent reduction as compared with the average rate of the previous five years.
Sub-program 3.4.1: Motor Vehicle Safety Regulatory Framework
Description: In support of vehicle safety, the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulatory Framework program develops policies, regulations and standards that govern the design, construction, functioning or marking of vehicles and equipment; and conducts research (crashworthiness, biomechanics, crash avoidance and human factors) to determine the need for and effectiveness of regulations and standards; and, contribute to the assessment and development of technological solutions to improve vehicle safety.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
5 |
5 |
0 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||
|
24 |
20 |
4 |
|||
| Performance Results | |||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||
|
A risk-based and performance-based regulatory framework that is harmonized with international vehicle safety regimes where appropriate |
Percentage of standards that are harmonized with international motor vehicle safety standards |
80 percent |
78 percent |
||
There are 45 regulations applying to light duty vehicles. Approximately 10 of these regulations are not harmonized due to additional significant bilingual, metric or safety requirements; thus 35 regulations or 78 percent are harmonized.
Sub-program 3.4.2: Motor Vehicle Safety Oversight
Description: Guided by the Motor Vehicle Safety Act, the Motor Vehicle Safety Oversight program monitors motor vehicle and equipment manufacturers’ compliance with Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations and the Canada Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. The program verifies that regulated vehicles and vehicle parts, child restraints, and tires made in, or imported into Canada, meet safety performance requirements and equipment installation standards; and, monitors vehicle manufacturers to make sure they fulfill their obligations in a responsible manner.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
8 |
9 |
(1) |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||
|
49 |
39 |
10 |
|||
| Performance Results | |||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||
|
Motor vehicle industry is compliant with the regulatory framework |
Percentage of the Motor vehicle industry that is compliant with the regulatory framework |
80 percent |
92 percent |
||
The expected results for the sub-program were exceeded. Industry compliance is calculated based on a sampling of the regulated vehicles and equipment. Compliance will vary within a small range depending on the particular vehicles and equipment inspected.
Sub-program 3.4.3: Motor Carrier Safety
Description: Guided by the Motor Vehicle Transport Act, the Motor Carrier Safety program promotes motor carrier (truck and bus) safety through a safety performance regime based on the National Safety Code (performance standards for commercial vehicle operations); by providing a national framework for provinces and territories to administer motor carrier safety regulations; by managing a contribution program for provinces and territories towards consistent implementation of the National Safety Code; and, by promoting consistent regulation of motor carriers across Canada.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
5 |
5 |
0 |
||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | ||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | ||
|
7 |
5 |
2 |
||
| Performance Results | ||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | |
|
Harmonized safety regime for motor carriers among provinces and territories through adoption of the National Safety Code |
Percentage of jurisdictions that have adopted all of the 15 standards under the National Safety Code |
80 percent Target date: |
Approximately 75 percent |
|
Approximately 75 percent of jurisdictions have adopted all or most of the National Safety Code standards and we are on track to meet our target.
Sub-program 3.4.4: Road Safety Outreach
Description: The Road Safety Outreach program promotes road-user and road infrastructure safety for the increased safety of the travelling public. The program and its partners (e.g., provinces/territories, police, universities, non-governmental Organizations) identify, develop and monitor safety interventions and performance measures; promulgate best practices; and, provide road safety knowledge to the public.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
4 |
4 |
0 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||
|
34 |
20 |
14 |
|||
| Performance Results | |||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||
|
Road Safety partners and the public are aware of federal road safety issues |
Percentage awareness of federal road safety programs – survey(s) and studies of individual road safety initiatives |
Observational surveys 90 percent |
This program was eliminated as part of the expenditure reduction process |
||
|
Road Safety partners and the public are aware of federal road safety issues |
Percentage awareness of federal road safety programs – survey(s) and studies of individual road safety initiatives |
Road Safety database 40 percent |
This program was eliminated as part of the expenditure reduction process |
||
|
Road Safety partners and the public are aware of federal road safety issues |
Percentage awareness of federal road safety programs – survey(s) and studies of individual road safety initiatives |
Road Safety database 40 percent |
This program was eliminated as part of the expenditure reduction process |
||
Program 3.5: Transportation of Dangerous Goods
Description: Required by the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, 1992,xlix the TDG program, based on risk, develops safety standards and regulations, provides oversight and gives expert advice (for example, through the Canadian Transport Emergency Centre)lxiii(CANUTEC) on dangerous goods incidents to promote public safety in the transportation of dangerous goods by all modes of transport in Canada; identify threats to public safety, and enforce the Act and its regulations, guide emergency response and limit the impact of incidents involving the transportation of dangerous goods, and develop policy and conduct research to enhance safety.
Performance Analysis and Lessons Learned
Transport Canada implemented an action plan that addresses the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development Audit of Transportation of Dangerous Products. We have already completed many of our action items to meet our commitments as a result of the Audit, including:
- developing and implementing an approved national risk-based inspection planning process which will strengthen our oversight function;
- developing a follow-up policy based on a severity index and updating TDG inspectors and managers through updates to the TDG Inspectors’ Manual and training;
- developing a tool to capture key additional data required to generate compliance rate indicators; and
- implementing an Emergency Response Assistance Plan Assessment Framework that clarifies the policy and procedure requirements for the review and approval of the Emergency Response Assistance Plans, providing a uniform and consistent approach to plan assessments.
We are largely on track for completing the remaining action items within the approved timelines, including:
- establishing a quality assurance program to verify compliance monitoring and follow-up procedures by TDG inspectors;
- clarifying roles and responsibilities for dangerous goods inspections within Transport Canada; and
- implementing a performance measurement system that allows Transport Canada to report on the rate of regulatory compliance.
We strengthened compliance monitoring guidance by developing and applying Chapter 23 of the Inspectors’ Manual, the policy on public inquiries. We identified core competencies for Remedial Measures Specialists; and established follow-up procedures for non-compliance. We delivered training to all inspectors in Transport Canada’s regional offices across Canada. The adoption of the lean philosophy has allowed us to identify waste, increase efficiencies and better align our resources.
| Total Budgetary Expenditures (Main Estimates) 2012–13 |
Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Total Authorities (available for use) 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
12 |
12 |
13 |
13 |
(1) |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||||
|
124 |
114 |
10 |
|||||
| Performance Results | |||||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||||
|
Public safety during the transportation of dangerous goods |
Number of reportable releases of dangerous goods per trillion dollars of Canadian gross domestic product (five year average) |
221.1 [recalculated target] |
286.4 |
||||
|
Public safety during the transportation of dangerous goods |
Number of reportable releases of dangerous goods, that caused injuries or deaths per trillion dollars of Canadian gross domestic product (five-year average) |
3.8 |
4.3 |
||||
The variance between planned and actual FTEs is the result of a program normalization exercise. To ensure that the appropriate resources were available to meet program objectives, several technical positions were deleted while other positions are being staffed.
With respect to our expected results, we have changed our methodology and therefore the new data does not compare directly to the pre-established targets. However the number of reportable releases of dangerous goods per trillion dollars of Canadian gross domestic product matches the recalculated target.
Sub-program 3.5.1: Transportation of Dangerous Goods Regulatory Framework
Description: The Transportation of Dangerous Goods Regulatory Framework program promotes public safety in the transportation of dangerous goods. The program develops and balances policies, procedures, guidelines, certificates for equivalent level of safety, rules and standards, based on risk, to promote public safety in handling, offering for transport, transporting and importing of dangerous goods; harmonizes or aligns, as appropriate, its regulations with international, United Nations or United States dangerous goods programs; leads in the development of Canadian regulations that are adopted by provinces and territories; and, takes the lead in developing national and international standards for the manufacture, selection and use of dangerous goods means of containment.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
3 |
4 |
(1) |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||
|
31 |
40 |
(9) |
|||
| Performance Results | |||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||
|
The regulatory framework provides clear direction to the dangerous goods industry and the public regarding the safe transportation of dangerous goods |
Percentage of harmonization of Transportation of Dangerous Goods regulations and standards with domestic and/or international standards |
70 percent |
70 percent |
||
We developed all planned regulatory amendments. Regulatory amendments are at different stages of the regulatory process and once approved, will represent approximate alignment with the 70 percent target.
Sub-program 3.5.2: Transportation of Dangerous Goods Oversight
Description: Required by the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, 1992, the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Oversight program monitors stakeholders’ compliance with the Transportation Dangerous Goods Act, 1992 and Regulations through services, assessments, inspection, investigation, enforcement, charge, care, management, control, examination, or review; monitoring compliance of modal shippers, consignors and importers, Emergency Response Assistance Plan, means of containment standards, and facility assessments; and training of all federal, provincial and territorial inspectors.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
7 |
6 |
1 |
||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | ||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | ||
|
67 |
56 |
11 |
||
| Performance Results | ||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Target | Actual Results | |
|
The dangerous goods industry is compliant. |
Percentage of companies that are compliant with the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, 1992, regulations and standards |
60 percent |
53 percent |
|
The TDG Oversight program uses a risk based approach for targeted inspections augmented by a random Compliance Estimation Program. The current binary TDG indicator for non-compliance is being improved to better reflect the severity of non-compliance. In response to the December 2011 Report of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development on TDG[i], a more nuanced compliance indicator was developed for use in future reports that will better consider the scope and severity of non-compliance (and also include modal information).
Sub-program 3.5.3: Emergency Response for the Transportation of Dangerous Goods
Description: Required by the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, 1992, the Transportation of Dangerous Goods (TDG) Emergency Response program protects the safety of human life and health and of property and the environment by providing immediate 24-hour technical information, safety precautions and action measures to first responders through CANUTEC following an incident involving dangerous goods; attending dangerous goods incidents and providing onsite response direction by Transportation Dangerous Good’s Remedial Measure Specialist; producing the Emergency Response Guide book as a tool for initial response during the first 15 minutes at the scene of an accident involving dangerous goods; and conducting research on emergency response to releases of chemicals.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
3 |
3 |
0 |
|
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |
|
26 |
17 |
9 |
|
| Performance Results | |||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results |
|
Safe operations at accident sites |
Percentage of compliant accident sites |
100 percent |
100 percent |
The expected results were achieved.
Strategic Outcome 4: A Secure Transportation System
Transport Canada develops policies and programs that respond to emerging security risks while keeping Canada competitive and develops and enforces transportation security regulations. The department also works with domestic and international partners towards a shared and effective transportation security agenda. A secure transportation system supports a strong Canadian economy and the country’s competitiveness in global markets. As a trading nation, Canada must move people and goods across vast distances to domestic and international destinations, and the number of people travelling by air, sea and land increases every year. International and public confidence in the security of Canada’s transportation infrastructure is critical.
Transport Canada promotes a holistic approach to security. The department develops policies, programs and regulations; and enforces these regulations in response to emerging security risks. The department’s role is diverse and complex, as reflected in the many activities that include enhancing the security of the surface transportation system, ports and airports across Canada. The following three programs and seven sub programs support this strategic outcome:
| Program | Sub Program | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
4.1 Aviation Security |
4.1.1 Aviation Safety Regulatory Framework |
4.1.2 Aviation Safety Oversight |
4.1.3 Airports Policing Assistance Program |
4.1.4 Air Cargo Security Major Crown Project |
|
4.2 Marine Safety |
4.2.1 Marine Security Coordination and Collaboration |
4.2.2 Marine Security Oversight and Enforcement |
4.2.3 Marine Security Regulatory and Policy Framework |
|
|
4 .3 Surface and Intermodal Security |
|
|
|
|
The following sections explain how we met the commitments presented in the planning highlights in Transport Canada’s 2012-13 Report on Plans and Priorities. We discuss actual results achieved against expected results, with performance indicators and targets, at the program and sub-program level.
Program 4.1: Aviation Security
Description: The Aviation Security program develops, administers and oversees policies, programs, regulations and standards necessary for a secure Canadian aviation system in a manner harmonized with the international aviation community.
Performance Analysis and Lessons Learned
Transport Canada refined and strengthened the aviation security oversight function by establishing a quality control function to regularly monitor national delivery of the Aviation Security program to support continuous improvement of the oversight program. We developed and delivered a course on risk assessment methodologies that provided a common understanding to all inspectors within the program.
We released the National Civil Aviation Security program to clarify Canada’s approach to aviation security. Keeping Canada’s aviation system secure is a shared responsibility between Transport Canada, other government departments, federal, provincial/territorial and municipal law enforcement agencies and industry. Each partner plays an important role in helping to reduce security risks and to increase the public’s understanding, confidence and support of aviation security investments.
We implemented a new risk based approach to inspection planning to focus our oversight activities on areas of higher concerns. In 2011, we developed and implemented an enhanced Quality Control function for aviation security oversight that responds to the 2010 Audit of Aviation Security Regulatory Oversight,lxiii and fosters continuous improvement of the oversight program. Enhanced quality control, through the monitoring of data and processes, allows the department to regularly monitor national delivery of the oversight program to ensure that inspection activities across regions are conducted consistently and accurately following established policies and procedures.
While the program has always been based on risk, developing common methodologies for identifying risks and inspecting against them has strengthened the oversight function at the program level.
The Beyond the Border Action Plan between Canada and the United States is improving security in North America and aligning regulatory approaches between the two countries. Key activities include:
- expanding airport screening trusted traveller lanes at eight of Canada’s major airport, to include flights to the United States;
- upgrading the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority’s checked baggage screening equipment so that passengers flying to the United States from Canadian airports with pre-clearance will no longer have their baggage re-screened for connecting flights. This change is facilitating easier travel through U.S. cities and reducing the risk of bags missing connecting flights while maintaining a high level of security; and
- achieving mutual recognition on the national air cargo security program. Cargo shipped on passenger aircraft will now be screened once for transportation security reasons, at the point of origin, and will not need to be rescreened prior to being loaded on an aircraft in the other country.
| Total Budgetary Expenditures (Main Estimates) 2012–13 |
Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Total Authorities (available for use) 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
46 |
46 |
37 |
34 |
12 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||||
|
385 |
292 |
93 |
|||||
| Performance Results | |||||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||||
|
Canada is aligned with international aviation security standards |
Percentage of aviation security regulations aligned with the International Civil Aviation Organizations standards |
100 percent |
100 percent |
||||
The variance in FTEs is mainly due to the transfer of positions to Internal Services in advance of the creation of a new program in 2013-14, in order to gain efficiencies and minimize operational costs with respect to security screening of employees and transportation workers at restricted access facilities.
Expected results were achieved.
Sub-Program 4.1.1: Aviation Security Regulatory Framework
Description: The Aviation Security Regulatory Framework program develops and balances the use of various tools - policies, guidelines, regulations, standards and measures - to promote a secure and harmonized Canadian aviation security regime.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
7 |
7 |
0 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||
|
69 |
62 |
7 |
|||
| Performance Results | |||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||
|
Regulatory framework meets international standards and recommended practices |
Percentage of the regulatory framework that meets international standards |
100 percent |
100 percent |
||
Expected results were achieved.
Sub-Program 4.1.2: Aviation Security Oversight
Description: The Aviation Security Oversight program supports compliance with the security framework through inspections, audits, monitoring, surveillance, enforcement and education, when necessary, of the aviation industry.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
25 |
17 |
8 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||
|
255 |
162 |
93 |
|||
| Performance Results | |||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||
|
Stakeholders understand the compliance requirements within the security regulatory framework |
Percentage of inspections completed that did not result in an administrative monetary penalty |
90 percent |
99 percent |
||
We exceeded expected results with 99 percent of inspections completed that demonstrated compliance and thus did not result in an administrative monetary penalty.
Sub-program 4.1.3: Airport Policing Assistance Program
Description: The Airport Policing Assistance program provides funding. to eligible, designated airports in financing the heightened cost of security-related policing in accordance with Transport Canada’s regulated security measures.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
|||
| Performance Results | |||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||
|
Airports comply to security requirements |
Percentage of airports that implement the agreements |
100 percent |
100 percent |
||
Expected results were achieved. Budget 2012 announced the termination of this program effective April 1, 2013.
Sub-program 4.1.4: Air Cargo Security Major Crown Project
Description: The Air Cargo Security Major Crown Project supports the National Security policy by identifying strategies to enhance the security of air cargo.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
13 |
8 |
5 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||
|
62 |
67 |
(5) |
|||
| Performance Results | |||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||
|
Canada is harmonized with international air cargo security standards |
Percentage of the regulatory framework that meets international air cargo security standards |
100 percent Target date: March 2015 |
100 percent |
||
Expected results were achieved.
Program 4.2: Marine Security
Description: The Marine Security program, with partners, enforces the Marine Transportation Security Act lxiii to protect Canada and Canadians in a way that respects Canadian values. It safeguards integrity and security, and preserves the efficiency of Canada’s marine transportation system against unlawful interference, terrorist attacks, or from being used as a means to attack our allies.
Performance Analysis and Lessons Learned
Transport Canada led or directly supported three initiatives of the Beyond the Borderlxiv Action Plan. We completed a Pacific region pilot project, jointly with the U. S. Coast Guard, to develop plans and protocols to manage the swift resumption of maritime traffic after a major disruption. We also contributed to the development of the integrated cargo security strategy and the conduct of supporting pilot projects, led by Canada Border Services Agency. The strategy identifies and resolves security concerns as early as possible in the supply chain or at the perimeter, to allow us to reduce the level of these activities at the Canada–U.S. border. In collaboration with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, we helped complete initial deliverables to enhance domain awareness in the maritime environment.
Maritime domain awareness means having true and timely information about everything on, under, related to, adjacent to, or bordering a sea, ocean or other navigable waterway. For marine security, it means being aware of anything in the marine domain that could threaten Canada's national security. We continued efforts within the federal government as well as with stakeholders and global partners to reduce marine security risks and achieve greater maritime domain awareness through our Marine Security Operations Centres.
We collaborated with other departments and the United States to align Canadian Marine Response Event Protocol and the U.S. Marine Operational Threat Response, ensuring bi-national cooperation in maritime security matters.
We implemented the action plan for the Canada–US Regulatory Cooperation Council lxvii, an element of the Canada Economic Action Plan to boost security, trade and travel. The goal is to align marine security requirements where possible and establish a framework to jointly address issues related to the safety and security of vessels operating on the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway. We completed two initiatives: a project charter was developed to harmonize the inspection regime for the Great Lakes, and, a pilot project was conducted to decrease the number of inspections of vessels preparing to enter the Great Lakes.
We also reviewed and updated the Marine Transportation Security Regulations which were published in the Canada Gazette Part I in April 2013. The regulations will deliver on Canada’s international marine security obligation to further align with the U.S. regulatory regime, a key element of the mandate of the Canada–US Regulatory Cooperation Council; to reduce financial and regulatory burden on industry and to address interpretation issues and regulatory gaps.
Accurate and comprehensive compliance and enforcement data enhance program planning and delivery. We are integrating additional sources of data to improve our planning models to better respond to changes in the industry and the regulations.
| Total Budgetary Expenditures (Main Estimates) 2012–13 |
Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Total Authorities (available for use) 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
21 |
21 |
19 |
14 |
7 |
||||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | ||||||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | ||||||
|
170 |
120 |
50 |
||||||
| Performance Results | ||||||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | |||||
|
Increased industry confidence in marine transportation security |
Percentage of industry indicating confidence in the Canadian marine security system |
80 percent Target date: March 2015 |
No data available |
|||||
|
Canada is aligned with international marine security standards |
Percentage of marine security regulations aligned with the International Maritime Organization standards |
100 percent Target date: March 2015 |
100 percent |
|||||
The FTE variance is due to the reorganization of Marine Safety and Security impacting the Marine Security program and various expenditure reductions exercises. There are staffing actions underway to support the upcoming activities of the program.
With respect to our expected results, we have not conducted a survey of the marine industry on its confidence in the Canadian marine security system as our date to achieve our target is 2015. However, all Transport Canada marine security regulations align with International Maritime Organization standards.
Sub-program 4.2.1: Marine Security Coordination and Collaboration
Description: The Marine Security Coordination and Collaboration program leads on interdepartmental marine security policy through the Interdepartmental Marine Security Working Group; manages the Marine Security Coordination Fund to promote new initiatives among federal marine security partners; contributes to maritime domain awareness as a key partner in the Marine Security Operations Centres; and manages, in collaboration with federal partners, the issuance/revocation of security clearances granted under the Marine Transportation Security Clearance program.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
9 |
5 |
4 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||
|
69 |
46 |
23 |
|||
| Performance Results | |||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||
|
Increased industry stakeholder awareness of potential security threats to their vessels, facilities of the Canadian marine security system |
Percentage of industry stakeholders aware of potential security threats |
85 percent |
No data available |
||
Expected results are not available as the program indicator is under review.
Sub-program 4.2.2: Marine Security Oversight and Enforcement
Description: The Marine Security Oversight and Enforcement program conducts inspections, conducts and/or approves security assessments, reviews and approves security plans, and works with stakeholders to assist them in meeting the requirements of the Marine Transportation Security Act and its regulations and measures. The program conducts promotional, educational and awareness activities designed to ensure that the regulated community is aware of its legislative and regulatory responsibilities. If violations or non-compliance is found, the program uses a graduated enforcement approach and informs stakeholders when a problem exists and provides them with information and the opportunity to correct it. Where appropriate, enforcement actions, including the use of administrative monetary penalties, may be taken.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
9 |
7 |
2 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||
|
87 |
60 |
27 |
|||
| Performance Results | |||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||
|
Stakeholders are compliant with the requirements of the marine security regulatory framework |
Percentage of inspections that show no deficiencies |
80 percent Target date: March 2015 |
No data available |
||
Expected results are not available as the program indicator is under review.
Sub-program 4.2.3: Marine Security Regulatory and Policy Framework
Description: The Marine Security Regulatory and Policy Framework program develops and balances the use of various tools (policies, guidelines, regulations, legislation, standards and measures) to support the Minister’s role as defined under the National Security Policy. The program’s components and their activities promote a secure and harmonized Canadian marine security regime, consistent with International Maritime Organization requirements, and leverage Canadian expertise with our international partners.
| Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
3 |
2 |
1 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||
|
14 |
14 |
0 |
|||
| Performance Results | |||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||
|
Marine industry operators have a high level of acceptance of the need for a Canadian Marine Security program |
Percentage of marine industry stakeholders that accept the need for a Marine Security program. |
90 percent Target date: March 2015 |
No data available |
||
|
Effectiveness of the marine security regulatory framework in promoting increased marine security |
Percentage of stakeholders who believe that the regulatory framework is promoting increased marine security |
80 percent Target date: March 2015 |
No data available |
||
Expected results are not available as the program indicator is under review.
Program 4.3: Surface and Intermodal Security
Description: Guided by the Railway Safety Actlxvii , the International Bridges and Tunnels Act, the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, 1992 and the federal government’s transportation security mandate, the Surface and Intermodal Security program enhances the security of surface and intermodal transportation such as rail and urban transit and international bridges and tunnels. Working with partners to protect Canada and Canadians in a way that respects Canadian values and preserves the efficiency of the transportation system, the program provides federal leadership and develops and enforces regulatory and voluntary frameworks (regulations, codes of practice, and memoranda of understanding).
Performance Summary and Lessons Learned
Transport Canada continued to refine and strengthen the Surface and Intermodal Security oversight function. We developed and implemented a consistent approach in implementing the risk-based Inspection Schedule to ensure national consistency of oversight activities.
We used risk-based analysis to enhance the security of the international bridges and tunnels. We initiated the regulatory development process for the proposed TDG security regulations for rail and road. We defined the scope and details of the proposed regulations in close consultation with industry and their associations, through bilateral meetings, established stakeholder fora such as the Multi-Association Committee on the Transportation of Dangerous Goods, the Task Force (with provinces and territories) and the General Policy Advisory Council. We also initiated and conducted a three day pilot training session for inspectors on International Bridges and Tunnels security, in anticipation of an oversight program once Memorandums of Understanding are signed.
The success of the Memorandum of Understanding approach is contingent on continued consultation with stakeholders to increase their knowledge of security concepts and their agreement to adhere to the current oversight regime.
We worked with industry stakeholders promoting Surface and Intermodal Security and industry developed security Codes of Practices, and the sharing of security guidance material and best practices. The Steering Committee for the Development of Rail and Transit Security Standards took advantage of new webinar technology to facilitate the industry’s development of codes of practice.
| Total Budgetary Expenditures (Main Estimates) 2012–13 |
Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Total Authorities (available for use) 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
6 |
6 |
5 |
4 |
2 |
|||
| Human Resources (FTEs) | |||||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | |||||
|
40 |
32 |
8 |
|||||
| Performance Results | |||||||
| Expected Results | Performance Indicators | Targets | Actual Results | ||||
|
Rail transportation operators (passenger and freight) implement the requirements of the voluntary framework |
Percentage of rail transportation operators adopting the voluntary security framework. |
60 |
No data available |
||||
The variance in FTEs is related to the transfer of positions from the Surface and Intermodal Security program to Internal Services in advance of the creation of a new program in 2013–14 in order to gain efficiencies and minimize operational costs. Expected results are not available as the performance indicator is under review and will be replaced in 2013–14.
Program 5.1: Internal Services
Description: The Internal Services program include activities and related resources that are managed to support all strategic outcomes and program needs, as well as other departmental obligations. Internal Services include Management and Oversight 2012-13 Report on Plans and Priorities, Communications, Legal, Human Resources Management, Financial Management, Information Management and Information Technology, Real property, Materiel and Acquisition.
Performance Analysis and Lessons Learned
Governance and Management Support:
Deputy Minister-approved evaluation plans were implemented to assess the continued relevance and performance of major programs, covering approximately 20 percent of Transport Canada's direct program spending on average each year. Risk-based audit plans were implemented to assess the department’s risk management practices, governance and control processes, respectively. Findings and follow-up on management action plans to address all recommendations were reported to an external Audit Committee and, in the case of evaluation reports, to an internal evaluation committee. The Department’s management action plan follow-up process was further strengthened by more clearly outlining actions expected to close recommendations seeking and assessing evidence in support of management action plan implementation.
We developed additional guidance, training and tools to support our integrated planning and reporting (IPR) process. The IPR supports better decision-making by linking financial and non-financial planning and reporting, including human resources. We reviewed the PAA and Performance Measurement Framework, to improve their usefulness in light of departmental governance, program business and available information, these improvements will be implemented in future years. We modified the methodology used in setting the Corporate Risk Profile to improve risk management practices.
The department improved delivery of its grant and contribution programs by providing departmental program managers access to standard tools and procedures that comply with federal policies, ensuring timely engagement of functional experts to address management issues, and enabling a more risk-based approach to monitoring funded projects as means to ensure that attention is given to those projects where risk of non-performance or non-compliance may be higher.
Transport Canada released a comprehensive report on the state of transportation entitled “Transportation in Canada 2011”, which was tabled to Parliament in spring 2012. It was the first of its kind since the Canada Transportation Act s 52(2) was amended and received Royal Assent on June 22, 2007.
The department has included web 2.0 technologies into its new Intranet website. The department posted approximately 1,000 Twitter and Facebook messages including approximately 170 vehicle safety recalls which reached up to 60,000 people. In addition, Transport Canada social media accounts have more than tripled in popularity over the last year – from 3,916 to 17,420 Twitter followers, 638 to 2,056 Facebook likes, 8,986 to 33,363 YouTube video views, and 11,435 to 41,990 Flickr photo views.
Resource and Asset Management Services:
The department assessed its internal controls mechanisms related to financial reporting to improve its stewardship responsibility as stated in the Policy on Internal Control. Work continues and will be completed in 2013–14 including an action plan to address recommendations from this assessment.
We completed financial system enhancements, such as the Receiver General Buy Button project that ensures compliance with payment card industry security standards for online acceptance of credit card payments for Canadians.
The department strengthened the functional authority of project management by improving internal consultation, procedures and guidance so that capital investments respond better to business requirements and departmental priorities. The department started the consolidation of the IM/IT project and application management functions from the program areas into the Chief Information Officer organization with the goal of rationalizing the departmental portfolio of applications and significantly reducing costs through the adoption of standard processes and the benefits from economies of scale.
Internal Audit conducted four audits and on review that are driving improvements in temporary help services, vehicle fleet management, information technology project life cycle controls, procurement, and people management. Control gaps and weaknesses were found, some of which were significant; management is taking corrective action to address them and the Departmental Audit Committee is monitoring their implementation32.
In response to the IM/IT Project Life Cycle Controls audit, significant improvements have been made through the corrective actions outlined in the Management Action Plan. The IM/IT Strategic / Investment Plan is a key component of the audit’s Management Response and Action Plan as it provides the basis for the governance, planning and subsequent performance measurement for IM/IT initiatives and spending in support of program areas. IM/IT will continue to improve its planning and reporting regime in the coming year. The department worked with Shared Services Canadalxvii to streamline and reduce duplication within government-wide information technology services. As a result, we have service levels in place that we monitor and maintain.
IM/IT has continued to make enhancements in IM/IT level controls supporting improved overall IM/IT management processes and strengthen IM/IT oversight. This includes, but is not limited to, the full implementation of the IM/IT Project Management Framework. The Framework is a structured guide with a repeatable set of tools, processes and best practices for the successful management and delivery of IM/IT projects and business outcome measurement.As Internal Services often develop policies, directives, process and tools used throughout the department, internal surveys that gauge client satisfaction and identify areas for improvement are important tools for aligning our efforts to the needs of our clients and to become more efficient.
| Total Budgetary Expenditures (Main Estimates) 2012–13 |
Planned Spending 2012–13 |
Total Authorities (available for use) 2012–13 |
Actual Spending (authorities used) 2012–13 |
Difference 2012–13 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
180 |
191 |
204 |
186 |
5 |
| Human Resources (FTEs) | ||||
| Planned 2012–13 | Actual 2012–13 | Difference 2012–13 | ||
|
1,445 |
1,315 |
130 |
||
Footnotes
[20] Expected result is an outcome to which Transport Canada is contributing through various activities in its PAA. (Return to footnote 20 source paragraph)
[21] Performance indicator is a statistic or parameter that, tracked over time, provides information on trends in the condition of an activity. (Return to footnote 21 source paragraph)
[22] Target is a specific performance goal tied to a performance indicator against which actual performance will be compared. (Return to footnote 22 source paragraph)
[23] A program is defined as a group of related resource inputs and activities that are designed and managed to address specific needs, achieve intended results, and are treated as a budgetary unit. The program represents the largest identifiable programs that the department manages. (Return to footnote 23 source paragraph)
[24] Sub programs are smaller identifiable programs that are logically part of the program (Return to footnote 24 source paragraph)
[25] Tonne-kilometres are a measure of air cargo demand, commonly used in the industry that is calculated by summing the distance travelled by each tonne of air freight. This indicator measures the demand for air cargo by capturing the volume of cargo shipments and the distance goods are transported. (Return to footnote 25 source paragraph)
[26] Class I – A railway company that realized gross revenues of at least $250,000,000 for the provision of Canadian rail services in each of the two calendar years before the year in which information is provided pursuant to Part II of the Carriers and Transportation and Grain Handling Undertakings Information Regulations. (Return to footnote 26 source paragraph)
[27] The indicator measures the Canadian landside journey/transit time (only) of imported containerized goods originating from the Asian ports of Hong Kong and Shanghai first landing at the ports of Prince Rupert and Vancouver and the time to reach Toronto. (Return to footnote 27 source paragraph)
[28] Ballast is defined as any solid or liquid that is brought on board a vessel to increase the draught, change the trim, regulate the stability or maintain stress loads within acceptable limits. (Return to footnote 28 source paragraph)
[29] Category 3 occurrences include an occurrence with moderate damage, injury, delay, grounded aircraft and/or costs as per Canadian Aviation Regulations. (Return to footnote 29 source paragraph)
[30] Under the Delegated Statutory Inspection program, a vessel where inspection and certification is required by statute, regulation or convention, and where inspections may be conducted by classification societies in place of Marine Safety inspectors. (Return to footnote 30 source paragraph)
[31] Proof of competency is something that shows they understand the rules of the waterway and how to safely operate a boat. The most common proof of competency is the Pleasure Craft Operator Card. (Return to footnote 31 source paragraph)
[32] Internal audit reports can be found at http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/corporate-services/aas-audit-62.htm. (Return to footnote 32 source paragraph)