Translation of "Train passing in the opposite direction " (English → French) :

(Return tabled) Question No. 130 Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia: With regard to rail safety in Canada: (a) for the period of 2006-2012, which railways were permitted to operate with a single operator; (b) for the period of 2006-2012, which railways had permission to leave trains unattended for limited periods of time on main lines with or witho ...[+++]ut an idling locomotive(s); (c) for the period of 2006-2012, which railways had permission to leave trains unattended for limited periods of time on side lines with or without an idling locomotive(s); (d) with regard to the railways in (b) and (c), under what specific conditions could the trains be left unattended; (e) what legislative or regulatory framework governs local emergency preparedness plans in the event of a rail accident; (f) with respect to the plans in (e), (i) who is responsible for creating and executing such plans, (ii) by whom are they audited, (iii) how often are they audited, (iv) against what criteria are they audited; (g) by whom and how often are municipalities through which freight trains pass provided with regular reports on (i) the state of local emergency preparedness in the event of a rail accident, (ii) the state and maintenance record of the railway lines within their borders, (iii) the materials, hazardous or not, that are transported through their jurisdiction; (h) if reports referred to in (g) are not provided, why not; (i) how many of the DOT-111 railway tank cars and the DOD-112 tank cars are in use in Canada, for each year since 2006; (j) for each year since 2006, how many rolling stock and track safety inspectors were employed at Transport Canada, broken down by (i) province of work, (ii) oversight responsibility; (k) for each year since 2006, how many rolling stock and track safety inspectors employed by Transport Canada were responsible for inspections in (i) the Greater Montreal Area, (ii) the municipality of Pointe-Claire (iii) the municipality of Beaconsfield, (iv) the municipality ...

run the train safely according to the specific modes of operation: apply special modes if instructed, temporary speed restrictions, running in opposite direction, permission to pass signals at danger, switching operations, turns, running through construction sites, etc.,

—run the train safely according to the specific modes of operation: apply special modes if instructed, temporary speed restrictions, running in opposite direction, permission to pass signals at danger, switching operations, turns, running through construction sites, etc.,

It is my position that the government's legislation is incompatible with the sensibilities of the majority of Canadians in terms of both process and substance and that the bill presented by the government should not be supported (1640) My fear, as others have said, is that should the bill pass in its present form in the face of reasonable, continuing opposition from across the country, Canadians will emerge as just a little less tolerant and a little more cynical at a time in the history of both our country and our global community when we should be going in exactly the opposite ...[+++] direction.

[Translation] Mr. Paul Crête (Kamouraska-Rivière-du-Loup, BQ): Mr. Speaker, will the minister also admit that the human resources investment fund goes in the opposite direction of where Quebec wants to go regarding job training, since, instead of withdrawing from this sector, the federal government plans to infringe more and more on Quebec's jurisdiction?

What I want to illustrate with my comments on this is that, concretely, when safety improvements are involved, relating to a railway line which passes through a municipality—trains being unlike planes, this cuts the road in half to let the train pass—it is normal, logical, reasonable for the one responsible for blocking the road traffic to pay for improving the safety of level crossings.