Industry Committee on March 25th, 2021

[Helena Jaczek, Liberal, Markham—Stouffville, ON]

Is there anything else relating to training? You mentioned the number of engineers, etc.

Are there any other aspects, specifically, that are possible for government to assist you with? You mentioned timelines. Is there some regulatory issue, something you could point to that could be changed?

[Gilles Labbé]

You have different demands for a hundred different things for which you have to make a choice. You're the government.

However, I think the most important thing for our industry is going back to building a program like we had in the past, and at the same time, developing green technology with this program. It could be on a hydrogen engine, developing composite products to be lighter on the airplane to save fuel and all this.

[Helena Jaczek, Liberal, Markham—Stouffville, ON]

Thank you.

Now I'd like to turn to the Canadian Air Traffic Control Association and Nav Canada.

It's good to see you again. I am member of the transport, infrastructure and communities committee, and you've certainly made very similar points.

In terms of public safety, obviously that's absolutely paramount. I can assure you and the members of this committee that at transport committee, we took it very seriously. We had assurances from Transport Canada that they are reviewing all the potential layoffs, etc., in terms of ensuring public safety.

I would also like to ask, perhaps starting with you, Mr. Best, in terms of the training of air traffic controllers, do you see the need for any changes?

We heard at this committee of the need for changes in terms of pilot training. It is a two-year course at the moment. Do you have any recommendations on online learning, some redundancies? Would you have any recommendations as to how to accelerate ensuring additional air traffic controllers...as they obviously will become necessary?

[Doug Best]

It's very difficult to speak about the training. We've attempted, I would say over the last 20, 30 years, to increase our success rates. We've tried many ways to do many things. We continue to reinvent the wheel.

I don't have any suggestions right now, if that's what you're asking, but I'm sure we'll look into it and get back to you.

[Helena Jaczek, Liberal, Markham—Stouffville, ON]

I would really appreciate that. I know we're running out of time for my questions. If you could submit a written brief to the committee, that would be valuable.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Best, if you could make sure to send that to the clerk, we'll make sure it's circulated in both official languages to the committee members.

Mr. Lemire, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

My question is for Mr. Bohn from NAV CANADA.

Mr. Bohn, I sincerely thank you for accepting our invitation to appear today.

The aeronautical studies that you are required to provide are necessary. They are done by NAV CANADA, which is both judge and jury. That seems a bit of an aberration.

To facilitate a process with integrity, transparency and credibility, shouldn't these studies be conducted by an independent firm to avoid NAV CANADA being the sole decision-maker and, more importantly, to regain the confidence of air traffic controllers and airport authorities?

[Ray Bohn]

From our perspective, certainly we believe that we have the appropriate consultation with all stakeholders in terms of system development at Nav Canada, with our largest customers and other stakeholders, and we'll continue to do so.

The governance structure that has been set out at Nav Canada includes representation and consensus amongst our four founding members: the air carriers, the Government of Canada, business in general aviation and our employees. We believe it's the appropriate structure to ensure appropriate governance with respect to investment in technology.

[Jonathan Bagg, Director, Stakeholder and Industry Relations, Nav Canada]

If I may add to that as well, just to clarify, when we complete an aeronautical study, there is an independent review by Transport Canada, which is our safety regulator. Nothing is implemented until our safety regulator has reviewed and approved any aeronautical study.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you.

According to a survey commissioned by the Canadian Air Traffic Control Association, in which 1,400 of the 1,800 qualified controllers in Canada participated, 89% of air traffic controllers believe that the closures and cutbacks being considered by NAV CANADA could be detrimental to the recovery of the Canadian aviation system when air traffic returns to normal.

Since then, the International Air Transport Association has estimated that a return to 2019 levels of passenger traffic will not be achieved until 2024.

Mr. Best, the president and CEO of the Air Transport Association of Canada, has just challenged you by suggesting that any funding for NAV CANADA be reviewed. As a result, he is also calling for a moratorium on layoffs, to assure the travelling public that this is the priority.

What would you say to him?

[Ray Bohn]

Certainly I can comment on that.

We understand that CATCA is concerned about potential job loss. Changes to our workforce are always a very difficult decision, but the fact of the matter is that our safety culture permeates not only our air traffic controller employees but all the teams at Nav Canada and all levels of the organization. This is not something new or something that we're going to sacrifice during the pandemic. Safety will remain paramount as we look at reshaping our workforce to deliver the services that will be required through the recovery and beyond.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Bohn, as you know, security is a very worrying aspect in the regions, especially in a region like mine, in Abititi-Témiscamingue.

I am thinking particularly of the Rouyn-Noranda Regional Airport, which is of direct concern to you. We want you in Abitibi-Témiscamingue; we want to maintain the NAV CANADA service. This heartfelt cry can be heard in all regions of Quebec and Canada where you offer services.

To do this, you must provide an impact study. Such a study makes it possible to see the economic consequences of closing a service like yours in the development of a regional economy like ours. It also demonstrates the limited impact on economic development. Of course, the studies show the opposite. We feel that there is a lack of predictability, we feel that this has consequences. Airports and cities are investing a lot in Quebec to be able to improve their airports, but they are still waiting to be reassured by you.

Can you send a clear message to these cities, like Rouyn-Noranda? Can you tell them that you will maintain a service there? Personally, I think there should be a five-year moratorium. This would be an intelligent solution that respects the regional economic reality. It would allow us to maintain expertise and jobs in the region. What do you think about this?

[Jonathan Bagg]

I will gladly answer the question, but I believe Mr. Bohn wants to add something.

[Ray Bohn]

Let me take a moment to talk about our aeronautical studies and the process to evaluate our service. We understand that they can generate a lot of concern by stakeholders. That's why our stakeholder input, which is central to our process, is so extremely important.

In order to further support awareness and effective input from our stakeholders, I want to let the committee know that we will be adding an additional step to our process to communicate our findings and allow stakeholders to make representations in regard to specific recommendations. This has not been part of the process historically, but given the circumstances, we believe it to be an important step before any studies are submitted to Transport Canada.

We also know that there has been a fair bit of narrative by some stakeholders that our outcomes are predetermined. While I'm not in a position today to tell you about the outcome of the studies, as we continue to work on them through our very stringent process, I can certainly say that we're listening to stakeholders and I expect the results of many of our studies will prove this narrative to be, in fact, false.

We will continue to review the input, and as I said, introduce this extra step of consultation. While we have said before that the studies are warranted, we are listening.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Thank you very much.

Our next round of questions goes to MP Masse.

You have the floor for six minutes.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair; and thank you to our guests for being here.

I'll continue with Mr. Bohn.

At the transport committee, when I asked you questions about the situation there, about accessing government programs to extend the employees, you couldn't guarantee that if a government program of support were provided to keep the employees, it wouldn't be used for bonuses for managers and executives. Is this still the position of Nav Canada, or is there not some type of system in place now or a compromise whereby we could protect the jobs as we try to build back the airline sector, not undermine trained positions in public safety right now and also provide some fairness?

I think Canadians have shown their support for protecting jobs and protecting individuals in our economy but less tolerance for bonuses from their money.

Is that the same position you have today from when it was provided a few weeks back?

[Ray Bohn]

Certainly we would look at any government funding, by way of a grant, as something to consider as we look at plotting our future within the organization and determining our financial plan.

On the issue of what you referred to as bonuses, I want to clarify a few things. Management employees have a base amount of pay and what we would call or what I think you're referring to as bonuses as variable pay. Both of those elements have been reduced significantly due to the pandemic. Management regular pay has been reduced by up to 20% depending on the level of the manager.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I'm sorry. I have limited time. That wasn't my question. You didn't pay out as much in bonuses, basically, at the end of the day. That's what it really is. I appreciate that. We can go back to that testimony if we want.

I'm going to go to Mr. Best. You have a survey from your workforce there. I proposed a bill on Tuesday in the House of Commons. It was tabled to allow the minister to suspend the Nav Canada studies. The government really has no excuse right now. They can do it through an order in council or they can take my legislation and make it law and stop this from happening right now.

As we know, we have heard from many community partners about public safety. In Windsor, we share Detroit airspace. Other communities across the country are concerned about economic development and building back.

I'm worried about if these continued layoffs.... It's interesting because they had hundreds of layoffs and they can still do the evaluations under this format. Now we're hearing that the format has been adjusted, so the original one obviously wasn't sufficient. It's good news that they have admitted that their current one is not enough.

As we start to lose some of these trained professionals, how difficult is it to keep them around, keep them relevant and keep them trained if we have growth like we had before?

[Doug Best]

Mr. Masse, I can't stress enough the fact that layoffs and service reduction go hand in hand. It's beyond me right now as far as some of the requests that have been made by our members regarding the safety study. I believe we did provide this all to you before committee today. I think that literally speaks for itself.

I have just heard that we're concerned about job loss. Of course we are. We're a union. That's what we do. We represent our members very well. This is only part of the issue. We're worried about the staffing levels that are going to be left behind. Currently, we're 18% short of our pre-pandemic numbers. When we go to an economic recovery, we all know there's pent-up demand. We can all crystal ball or look into the future where air travel will be in the aerospace industry, but nobody knows.

We're hearing from Nav Canada that it could be three, four or five years, but the reality is all you have to do is look south of the border. All you have to do is look over to Europe. As the vaccinations roll out, the common sense says.... Look at Air Canada and WestJet. They are now resuming service everywhere.

Staffing, of course, goes hand in hand with service delivery. The less staff you have, the less service delivery you can provide.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I remember at one point there was an attempt by the industry—and it was blocked by Peter Julian and myself in the House of Commons—going back to 2008. We did a hoist motion when the airline industry wanted to go to its own safety management system, which was their own self-reporting. That's another story in itself.

I think that the Canadian public is going to have a lot of issues over travelling by air at first. There are going to be barriers. I think adding additional burden and barriers doesn't make any sense right now. It's another anomaly of trying to go back, but at the same time it adds instability.

With regard to your members, though, if they do not have job security here, will they potentially seek job security elsewhere? Is that something we have to worry about? In my region, people get plucked into the United States all the time if there isn't the proper employment here. Do we lose Canadians internationally if we don't have the employment here?

[Doug Best]

Madam Chair, I will be very quick.

Absolutely. In the testimony I had at the transportation committee.... We call it the brain drain. We're already losing some of our members who have received layoff notices. We're losing them to Europe and to other areas. The United States is actively looking for air traffic controllers. It's difficult to staff.

I will end it there.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I know I'm almost out of time, Madam Chair. Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sherry Romanado]

Thank you very much, MP Masse.

We'll now move to our next round.

We will now have our first round of questions.

Mr. Généreux, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Bernard Généreux, Conservative, Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I thank all the witnesses for being with us today.

My first question is for Mr. Labbé.

Mr. Labbé, first, let me congratulate you on your impressive career as an entrepreneur and developer in the aerospace industry. I have no connection to your company or shares in it—I regret that, by the way—but this is quite an achievement to add to what you have accomplished in your life, Mr. Labbé.

Earlier, you used the word “broken” to say that the federal government has let down the Canadian aerospace industry. What exactly did you mean by that word?

On the other hand, I know you've gone from $10 million to $600 million in sales, but, in practical terms, what have these programs allowed your company to put in place that has allowed you to accomplish what you have?

[Gilles Labbé]

Thank you, Mr. Généreux.

The programs that existed at the time were sectoral programs. So there were funds allocated specifically to the aerospace sector, that is, the aeronautics and space sector. There was money set aside for us that allowed us to see far ahead. In other words, even if the governments changed, these programs gave us the certainty of having the necessary funds to develop our products, our services and so on. That doesn't exist anymore. There are new programs, but they are not sector-specific. They are accessible to everyone. Also, there is not enough money available for an industry like ours.

I don't know if that answers your question.