We do have a fair bit of jurisprudence on this issue.
The word “maintain” was a very contentious issue when it came to the disposition of constitutional jurisdictions with the operation of various transportation services. In effect, in B.C., for example, the word “maintain” does not appear in the operation of the transfer of railway services. It just simply says that Canada will assume ownership of transportation services. Therefore, that responsibility can be extinguished.
Where the term “maintain” is used in the constitutional language, that has been interpreted by the courts to establish an ongoing operational requirement. So the use of “maintain” in the statutory language of the Air Canada Public Participation Act, if we were to use that legal language as we have in the constitutional interpretation, would imply that Air Canada has the obligation to continue to operate Air Canada-based facilities, if my limited paralegal training would be correct.