Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to extend a warm welcome to Mr. Dee and his colleagues.
You said that Air Canada should be treated like a federal institution, and I fully agree. I would be in full support of the government buying back and nationalizing Air Canada. I have never supported privatization, and did not agree with the government decision to sell CN. You cannot even travel across Canada by train anymore. The rail tracks have all been dismantled.
When Air Canada was privatized, it accepted the conditions related to bilingualism. Yet now, all these years later, you come to tell us that you are struggling to get by and ought to be treated like the others. But the private sector accepted the fact that Air Canada had obligations. The Canadian government said that it would sell Air Canada provided that certain specific conditions were respected.
That being said, in light of what it costs to provide training, I agree with you that the government ought to provide assistance. Allow me to explain why — it does not specifically relate to Air Canada. Phase II of the Employment Insurance Act provides a special skills training program. This program has a $50 billion dollar surplus. Training people does not only entail showing them how to use equipment and machinery. The fund can be used as readily for language training as for helping people to find jobs.
Allow me to give you an example. A few years ago, a company called Noranda received $2 million through Phase II of the Employment Insurance Act to avoid layoffs.
You are right to say that this idea came from one of our reports. I was a member of the committee when that recommendation was made. If I am not mistaken, I was the one who suggested that the government provide assistance. In the case of Air Canada, the responsibility does not lie fully with the government, as the conditions of the agreement were clear. Nonetheless, I have a responsibility to set the record straight and recognize that the government can provide financial assistance to a private company for training and skills development. It is done through Phase II of the Employment Insurance Act.
However, I have my reservations when I hear, as was often said, that Air Canada was forced to keep its unilingual anglophone staff because of the collective agreement. That is incorrect. In my time as a union representative, I was never able to negotiate a collective agreement that conflicted with the law. Labour law always takes precedence over collective agreements.
I would like to know whether you are comfortable with the new bill or whether certain provisions are of concern to you.