Public Accounts Committee on Nov. 27th, 2012

[Anita Biguzs]

We reported based on our organizational structure. It was not down at the level of the civil aviation program, but I can certainly say, as I think I indicated already, Mr. Chair, we have not reduced any front-line inspector positions in the civil aviation program. There have been some reductions to the program, but these reductions have been done through things like administrative measures, such as streamlining the accounts payable processes.

We transferred some $1.9 million to Shared Services Canada for IT services. We consolidated certain administrative functions. We've reduced some travel expenditures and professional services. While there have been reductions in the civil aviation program as part of our deficit reduction measures, it has not impacted front-line staff. We have not reduced any front-line inspector positions. It has been done through, as I say, administrative measures and streamlining.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Thank you.

Sorry, time has expired. You'll have one more opportunity, Mr. Byrne, in the second rotation.

Mr. Dreeshen, you have the floor, sir.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you so much to our guests for being here today.

I'd like to expand the discussion on the safety management systems. As someone who flies hundreds of hours a year, I do thank you for the safety record we have.

When I look at the report you have presented to us, on page 12 you are talking about our position in the world and things we're dealing with. It says:

The department was later recognized as an early SMS implementer by ICAO. ICAO is now implementing SMS Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) globally, and the close working relationship with ICAO has ensured that....

Then there are a bunch of other acronyms that are associated with that, but basically we are talking about it exceeding the standards that there are globally, and basically that it was a model of what we could expect to see.

I'm wondering if you could expand a little bit on that. I'd like to know as well if this audit, to your mind, offers insights into the utility of the safety management approach used by civil aviation oversight.

[Gerard McDonald]

The audit itself doesn't assess the utility of safety management systems, but I think I can quite readily state that safety management systems are accepted worldwide as a best practice, not only in the aviation industry but also elsewhere in the transportation industry. It's used in the shipping industry. We have it in the rail industry as well, and in other industries. It actually started with the chemical industry, subsequent to the Bhopal disaster in India.

It's definitely seen as the most progressive way forward for improving safety and improving safety culture.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

Could you expand as well on the goals and the intentions so that people really recognize what the system is about, how you are able to monitor what is happening, and the benefits that exist because of the SMS?

[Gerard McDonald]

I think the best way to describe a safety management system is to say it's a way of forcing operators to develop a system to ensure they are meeting a regulatory requirement.

When I'm talking about this, I often use a very basic example of, perhaps, a taxi company. We might have a regulation that says the brakes on your taxi have to be a minimum of five millimetres thick. In the past we might have been able to ensure that by taking off the tire and looking at the brakes all the time. With a safety management system, what we would do now is to say to the operator that you have to have a system in place to ensure that your brakes never reach below that level of thickness. We would go into his organization and say, "Show us you have the system developed, that you inspect your brakes at a given interval, and that you have it inspected by a person who is duly qualified", and we would check all those records. We might even take off the wheel and look at the brakes while we're there, simply to make sure that everything falls into place. If we see anything that is out of place, that gives us an indication that maybe we have to dig down deeper into the system to see what the problems might be.

The other advantage of a safety management system is that it's incumbent upon the company, if there are deviations in their plans from what they're supposed to be doing, to come up with a plan to improve it and to convince us that the plan they're presenting will truly meet the requirements of the regulations.

I don't know if you want to add anything, Martin.

[Martin Eley]

I think the example is a very good one.

The emphasis is on being proactive. In the past the systems were reactive: operators would react to a problem, and we would also react to that. When it came to our level, our expectation is they're proactive in managing safety along the lines of what Mr. McDonald just explained by way of example, to look for problems and to identify solutions so that, generally speaking, they're generally ahead of the problems.

The research basically shows that by doing that, you deal with all the little things. Hopefully, they'll never build up to the point where you get a critical situation. In the past, that level of attention was not being paid to details on a regular basis. The industry people who get it really make a huge difference to us in terms of their performance.

[Earl Dreeshen, Conservative, Red Deer, AB]

How is the stakeholder uptake in this? Are you finding that you have some industry-wide programs that are expanding, and that there's improvement on a year-to-year or a month-to-month basis? How are the industry and the stakeholders associated with it tying into the system?

[Martin Eley]

Where it's already been applied in the sectors, we've had feedback. The companies recognize that it's good for business as well as good for safety. Things like workers' compensation have had relief from payments for a couple of years because their workplace safety has gone up.

If you generally improve the culture of an organization, that gets reflected in other areas, not just in the aviation side. As for the sectors that are not yet regulated, some of those are already asking us to move forward because they do believe it's the right thing. They've seen how it works and they're ready to move forward in some areas. We believe that the industry supports the notion. They just want to make sure we get the right type of solution.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

Sorry, time has expired. Thank you.

We are moving on to Mr. Ravignat.

You have the floor, sir.

[Mathieu Ravignat, NDP, Pontiac, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks for the presence of the witnesses. It's very appreciated.

My question is for Transport Canada. You're saying that about 880-odd inspectors are sufficient to fulfill your mandate, yet you've also admitted that you're short of that 880-odd inspectors.

Can you reassure Canadians who are watching right now that safety hasn't been compromised from the lack of a full contingent of inspectors?

[Anita Biguzs]

I can assure you that we are actually performing the functions that we set out to do. We have robust plans. We mobilize our resources as they're needed. As I say, we're actively recruiting inspectors to make sure that vacancies are filled as individuals retire.

[Mathieu Ravignat, NDP, Pontiac, QC]

On that point about actively recruiting inspectors, in 2008 there were about 130 vacant positions. There are still 100-odd positions that are vacant.

Are you really actively recruiting? If you're not, because clearly the numbers say that you're not, is it because you've been given a directive with regard to the cutbacks that you shouldn't be recruiting?

[Anita Biguzs]

No. As I say, we are actively recruiting inspectors. There is normal attrition and turnover. We try to recruit from the industry in terms of people who are coming in at second careers. I think our demographic is an older demographic, so it is a challenge we have in terms of people retiring and moving out of the system. As I say, we have certainly not ceased our efforts in actively hiring and recruiting new people to come in to fill any vacancies.

[Mathieu Ravignat, NDP, Pontiac, QC]

If I may, are you allowed, with regard to the context of the cutbacks, to actually function at full contingency at 881 inspectors?

[Anita Biguzs]

That's correct.

[Mathieu Ravignat, NDP, Pontiac, QC]

Okay. Then is the lack of inspectors at this point just the in context of it being difficult to find individuals who are qualified?

[Anita Biguzs]

That's correct.

Martin, would you like to add to that?

[Martin Eley]

The comment I'd offer is that the organization is 1,400 people altogether. With a natural turnover rate, it ends up giving you a significant number. In one area, during the course of 12 months we recruited 36 people and we lost 37, so there is active recruitment going on. The baby boomers are part of that trend. We clearly need to staff the positions, and it isn't for lack of trying.

[Mathieu Ravignat, NDP, Pontiac, QC]

Right.

At point 5.63, Transport Canada's response to the Auditor General is: “By July 2012, all current inspectors will have been given surveillance procedures training.”

My question is very simple: have all inspectors in fact been given this training?

[Anita Biguzs]

Mr. Chair, I can advise you that 99.2% of our inspectors have been trained on the new surveillance procedures. All of the new procedures have been documented and distributed, and training has been updated and provided. It's 99.2% because we have a few individuals who have been away on leave, and they haven't received the training. Effectively, however, we have met the target that we had set for training.

[Mathieu Ravignat, NDP, Pontiac, QC]

Right.

I am now going to talk about Transport Canada's work plan for prioritizing safety problems. It seems that the department has not communicated those priorities to the aviation industry or the principal stakeholders.

Could you tell us whether there has in fact been an oversight, and if so, what the consequences have been?

It is at page 13 of the English version.

[Gerard McDonald]

Right.

It's with respect to communicating the risk to industry that you are talking about, is it not? Yes.

I mean, this is an area in which we accept that our risk-based planning didn't have the rigour it should. We have undertaken, as we indicate in our action plan, the steps to develop a comprehensive system, a national-based system, one that assesses various factors consistently across the country with respect to the risk that a particular operator might pose. We then factor that into our surveillance plans.

[The Chair, NDP, David Christopherson]

I'm sorry, time has expired.

We go over to Mr. Allison. You have the floor—no, it's Mr. Hayes. Very good.

[Bryan Hayes, Conservative, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate it very much.

I need to seek clarification, because everybody seems to be asking the question. Can you confirm, please, if Transport Canada has cut any front-line inspector positions as a result of the deficit reduction action plan?