Evidence of meeting #32 for Public Accounts in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was authority.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
Terence Young Conservative Oakville, ON
What do you do if you catch a repeat offender, someone who's unqualified, who's a deck watch officer?
Chief Executive Officer, Great Lakes Pilotage Authority
What we've done in the past when we have spotted ships without the proper qualified individual is we've informed the St. Lawrence Seaway authority. They control the system. And that ship has been tied up until a properly trained individual is put on the ship.
Chief Executive Officer, Great Lakes Pilotage Authority
Correct.
Every time they come back, for the next 100 years, we verify everything they do. So yes--and that's happened once in my 24 years.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Thank you, Mr. Young.
That concludes our time, colleagues.
I'm going to ask—
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
I'm just going down the list that we're following, David, and I'm not going to get to the end of the list because we only have a one-hour instead of a two-hour meeting. We'd normally have a second round if we went the two hours.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I don't want to make a big deal of it, but we've always apportioned the time equally. We've had the first round, the second round, and now you've changed it.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
If you'd given two and a half minutes to each, then that would have been equal. I'm just having trouble understanding why suddenly I'm being carved out.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
You have a minute. I'll allow you to go, but on the second round that's not the way we go.
Go ahead.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I have one question. Thank you very much, Chair. I appreciate that.
My question is back on the licensing. Here's what I'm having some trouble understanding. It's been over 30 years that we've been trying, to one degree or another, to bring in these regulatory changes, and I can't get past the notion of public safety. Your mandate is public safety—it's in your mandate, and I can read it if you want, it's here—and the issuing of the licences.
Back when I was an MPP in Ontario, when we were dealing with driver's licence issues for a car, we weren't talking to the trucking companies about what they wanted or didn't want to see in the licensing procedure, or the car rental agencies, or the people who built the cars, or the taxi cabs. We were concerned about public safety.
What I'm hearing is this veto power that the shipowners or somebody seems to have that's preventing you, in my view, from doing what's in the public interest. You made proposals some time ago and you said they weren't acceptable. I don't understand. What do you mean by not acceptable? They're based on the safety of the citizens and the environment that these ships are in, and yet there seems to be this hidden hand somewhere that has the ability to just veto anything that's in the public interest. I'm having trouble understanding this skewed version of public safety first.
Chair, Board of Directors, Great Lakes Pilotage Authority
My experience with this--and prior to becoming chair of the board--was that when Robert said it was unacceptable, one party found that whatever was proposed was unacceptable. It might have been the shipowners, or it might have been the pilots, or it might have been the government minister. But in any case, whenever there was one person who found it unacceptable, there wasn't a will to go ahead in spite of that. So there have been a number of attempts to get this done, and they all failed because either Parliament was prorogued and a new election was called and it got lost in the shuffle and we started all over again, or someone would influence someone to say, “Oh, there needs to be more work done; they haven't done all their work yet.” And we would go around the circle and do more work.
Chair, Board of Directors, Great Lakes Pilotage Authority
Depending on what their objection to the proposal that was on the table was, it might be the Canadian pilots, it might be the Canadian shipowners. They've both been active influences--
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
I'm sorry, but if that's supposed to make me feel better, it doesn't.
Chair, Board of Directors, Great Lakes Pilotage Authority
No, but they've been active influences in the political process.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
Thank you, Mr. Christopherson.
Thank you, Mr. Smith.
That concludes the rounds, colleagues. We're going to ask now for any closing remarks, first of all from the auditor and then you, Mr. Lemire.
Auditor General of Canada, Office of the Auditor General of Canada
Thank you, Chair.
I'd simply like to point out that this is a serious issue. It's been going on for some 35 years. There have been a number of studies and reports that have raised this issue, not only us, so we think it's really important that this be resolved. This doesn't necessarily mean that people have to sit down and write exams, but the pilotage authority should have some assurance that when those corporations tell them that these people are competent, they know that they are actually competent.
Chief Executive Officer, Great Lakes Pilotage Authority
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I agree with Madam Fraser. It is a priority for this authority and it has been for the last three or four years, certainly with the appointment of the new chairman, and we will do the best we can, as fast as we can.
NDP
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Shawn Murphy
On behalf of all members of the committee, I want to thank you for your appearance here today. As I said, this is the first time this committee has had a special examination, and I found it very worthwhile.
We'll now suspend, and then we're going from sea to rail, and we'll have VIA Rail. We'll suspend for one minute for the witnesses to change.