Passenger Trains Get Priority Over Freight

Summary#

This bill would change the Canada Transportation Act to require rail companies to give passenger trains priority over freight when there is a conflict on a shared rail line. It creates an enforceable rule, adds fines up to $250,000 per violation, and clarifies who can issue and manage those fines. The bill does not include new funding or detailed operating rules.

• Requires passenger service to take priority in any operating conflict on a rail line (Bill s. 139.1).
• Makes a breach of this duty a violation with fines up to $250,000 per incident (Bill amending CTA s. 177(2.11)).
• Lets the Minister of Transport or the Canadian Transportation Agency issue notices of violation; the Minister may assign (delegate) these powers to the Agency (Bill amending CTA ss. 178(1), 180.8(2)).
• Sets no timelines, metrics, or reporting rules; enforcement uses existing violation procedures (Bill ss. 179–180).
• No stated coming-into-force delay; absent a clause, it would take effect on Royal Assent.
• No appropriations or tax/fee changes.

What it means for you#

• Households (passengers)

  • Passenger trains would have legal priority over freight when dispatchers face a conflict on the same line (Bill s. 139.1).
  • If a rail company does not give priority, the regulator could fine it. This may create pressure to reduce passenger delays in such conflicts (Bill amending CTA s. 177(2.11)).
  • Start date: No specific date in the bill; standard practice is on Royal Assent.

• Workers (train crews, dispatchers)

  • Dispatch and operating decisions would need to give passengers priority when conflicts arise. Companies may change schedules and operating plans to comply (Bill s. 139.1).
  • Violations could lead to fines on the company, which may prompt new internal rules and training (Bill amending CTA s. 177(2.11)).

• Businesses (freight shippers, rail customers)

  • In conflict situations on shared lines, freight movements could be held to let passenger trains pass. The bill does not provide exceptions or compensation rules (Bill s. 139.1).
  • Penalties target rail companies, not shippers, but rail companies may adjust service terms to manage risk. Data unavailable.

• Railway companies

  • Must prioritize passenger trains in any operational conflict and face fines up to $250,000 per violation if they do not (Bill s. 139.1; Bill amending CTA s. 177(2.11)).
  • The Minister or the Agency can issue notices of violation; the Minister can delegate powers to the Agency (Bill amending CTA ss. 178(1), 180.8(2)).

• Governments and regulators

  • The Canadian Transportation Agency and the Minister get clear authority to proceed with violations and set fines for non‑compliance with the new priority rule (Bill amending CTA ss. 177(2.11), 178(1), 180.8(2)).
  • The bill does not add resources or mandate new reporting. Enforcement would rely on existing processes (Bill ss. 179–180).

Expenses#

Estimated net cost: Data unavailable.

• No direct appropriations or spending in the bill. Data unavailable.
• Potential penalty revenue: up to $250,000 per violation; number of violations unknown (Bill amending CTA s. 177(2.11)).
• Possible administrative costs for oversight and enforcement are not stated. Data unavailable.
• No official fiscal note identified. Data unavailable.

Proponents' View#

• A clear legal duty to prioritize passenger trains will reduce dispatch decisions that delay passengers during conflicts on shared lines (Bill s. 139.1). Assumes enforcement changes behavior.
• Significant fines (up to $250,000 per violation) create a deterrent and give the rule “teeth” (Bill amending CTA s. 177(2.11)).
• Allowing both the Minister and the Agency to issue notices, and enabling delegation, should speed enforcement and reduce gaps in oversight (Bill amending CTA ss. 178(1), 180.8(2)).
• The bill uses existing enforcement mechanisms (ss. 179–180), avoiding the need to build a new system. Assumes current processes are sufficient.
• No new spending or taxes are required, which limits fiscal impact. Assumes regulators can absorb workload.

Opponents' View#

• Key terms are vague. “Conflict” and the use of “traffic” versus “passengers” are not defined here, which could spark disputes about when the rule applies (Bill s. 139.1).
• The bill sets a priority but no performance metrics, exemptions, or dispatch standards, making it hard to know what counts as a violation in complex operations (Bill s. 139.1; ss. 179–180).
• Freight movements could face more holds in conflict situations, which may affect supply chains. The bill includes no mitigation, dispute‑resolution timelines, or compensation framework (Bill s. 139.1). Assumes conflicts are frequent enough to matter.
• Fines up to $250,000 per violation could be applied repeatedly, raising compliance costs that might be passed to customers or lead to service changes. Assumes enforcement will be frequent.
• The Agency and Minister get more to enforce without added resources, risking uneven enforcement or backlogs (Bill amending CTA ss. 177(2.11), 178(1), 180.8(2)). Assumes no new funding will follow.