Finance committee  I think it's fair to say that there's a great deal of uneasiness about the powers that have been written into that part of the language. Again, it goes to unintended consequences. As I testified, we don't believe that this minister wants to turn back the clock on the national airports policy.

Finance committee  We certainly will follow up with some actual language to suggest to the committee. Thank you.

Finance committee  As it relates to this particular language, no.

Finance committee  I would prefer not to go into what motivated the minister. We were told that there was a concern with private aerodromes generally. There may have been a project or two that were of particular concern, but I really think it's probably best left to the minister's office to testify on her motivations.

Finance committee  The question you've asked is really about a non-physical change to the airport. Again, I don't have the language here, but I don't believe it's covered by that. You've asked about aircraft noise. Those complaints are often related to changes in flight paths. Certainly our airports work very actively in the community to consult on changes with Nav Canada, which is the authority that is usually involved.

Finance committee  I think what's tough is that there is no threshold date. With the aerodromes it's writ large. If this language was intended to deal with just the private aerodromes, we would like to see some language that constrained the airports that were captured by it. We've had lawyers review the language in question.

Finance committee  Yes. Thank you, Mr. Caron. We could look at the wording and suggest some sort of an amendment over the next few days.

Finance committee  I will answer in English. In terms of the exact language, we hadn't seen it, but as I said, certainly we knew of the issue that drove this proposal to amend the Aeronautics Act. We were aware of the issue in question, and we were given a heads-up that language was coming, but the language itself we saw after it was introduced.

Finance committee  We have no quibbles that additional regulatory powers over private aerodromes may be needed. Certainly we consulted with the department on that. There were concerns about some private aerodromes that were under development. We had discussions with the government on that. Certainly there are safety and security considerations.

Finance committee  If I may, sir, certainly we're not so familiar with the problems, or the perceived problems, that led to the language. I'm more familiar with the concerns about the unintended consequences. Certainly there are a great number of rules around safety and security in aviation today.

Finance committee  It's a bit more than one line; it's a couple of paragraphs.

Finance committee  The language is written pretty broadly. I don't have the text right here, but my recollection is that it doesn't actually get into differentiation or any sort of threshold, which I think is part of the concern. As I said, the intent, as we understand it, is to deal with private aerodromes, if, say, somebody wants to start an aerodrome and just starts building one.

Finance committee  That's not something I've tried to do, but my understanding is that the department, the minister, feels there is an insufficient level of—

Finance committee  —exactly, in terms of the ability to have a role or a say in the building of private aerodromes.

Finance committee  I'm not an expert on the environmental requirements for an airport, so I don't really want to comment on that, but certainly airports comply with all the requirements in various elements of federal law today, in terms of what they need to do.