Evidence of meeting #27 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was report.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Charles Hubbard Liberal Miramichi, NB
Mr. Chair, I have the same difficulty. It seems to be a common thought that everybody wants to be in a central place. Ottawa, of course, is our capital, but with the technologies we have today you can work almost anywhere in the world, not just within Canada.
My other thought is, why would the agency be in Ottawa? Of all the places in this country that have a small amount of transportation, whether it be in goods or services, it's Ottawa. Mr. Julian talks about Vancouver. We talk about Windsor. Why do we have in our minds that the agency has to be located here? Maybe that's a question the government has to decide, but somebody in their wisdom some time may see some of these agencies somewhere else in the country, whether it's Miramichi, Vancouver, Quebec City, or Windsor, so we shouldn't fix our minds here.
I brought this up originally and heard back that it costs a lot of money to fly these people to Ottawa every week. I don't know what the pay scales are, but we want to attract good people to take these positions. With that, you're going to give up an occupation back home, whether you're a lawyer or somebody involved in transportation. You'd have to make a fairly attractive offer to someone to change their life for five years and move somewhere. The part the government has in about residence and where the agency is located is certainly to the detriment of the commission.
I think some retired person would have to take this. Who would disrupt a career to spend five years at something that would take away from his overall career?
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Mr. Chair, it's very simple. In Mr. Fast's riding a couple of years ago we went through the issue of the avian flu outbreak. Decisions were being made in Ottawa, which constituted one of the chief reasons why the avian flu outbreak spread throughout the eastern Fraser Valley. When decisions are made in Ottawa, there is not necessarily an understanding of the geographical realities of the regions.
Here we have a clear case of it. The government is saying it's not a problem; we'll take anybody who applies and is qualified from British Columbia and wants to move to Ottawa. The reality is that most British Columbians don't want to move to Ottawa, and many qualified people who might want to be involved in the Transportation Agency aren't going to be because they do not want to have to uproot their families and everything, as Mr. Hubbard said, and move to Ottawa. That is a reality: 5,000 kilometres and three time zones--people don't want to uproot themselves and come to Ottawa.
The bill says that all those members--it doesn't say where they come from, so they could all come from Carleton Place--have to stay in the national capital region. That's in the bill before us--nothing but. If by accident once in a while somebody from British Columbia gets involved in the Transportation Agency, that's wonderful. But the reality is we are eliminating many qualified people across the country from Atlantic Canada, the north, the Prairies, and British Columbia, who don't want to leave their regions, aside from travelling occasionally, and who want to contribute their expertise to the country as a whole.
So we have a dilemma in front of us. We can take what the government is presenting that all members would remain in the national capital region, all members could be from one tiny city, or we can provide some guidance on how the government should be appointing the best possible people from across the country who understand on the ground what the transportation realities are.
That's why I think this amendment is important. It provides for people who are on the ground, have the expertise, and understand the realities of Atlantic Canada, the north, the Prairies, and British Columbia. I don't understand why the government is so opposed to that and keeps saying, “No, they have to be here in Ottawa. They can be from one little limited sector of this vast country, and that's fine with us.” I don't understand their reasoning and their logic.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Mr. Chair, if this were a private business and I was trying to pick my team, I'd be picking based on skill first, not on regional representation. When we're dealing with these kinds of agencies, it's good to have regional representation. However, staff has already told us there is no problem. We do have regional representation; it is not a problem. Now we're going to enshrine in our legislation restrictions that may in the future prevent us from actually appointing people who have the skill sets we need at that very time.
By the way, this is not an avian flu situation when we're talking about location. No, the problem with the avian flu, because I lived it, was an issue of the testing facility not being in Abbotsford or close to our area. It was in Winnipeg. If CFIA had been in Abbotsford and avian flu had hit in Toronto, you'd have the same problem, under your scenario.
I'd like to also point out two other points. We're talking about five versus six members. Typically, you'd want to make sure that you don't have a hung jury. You don't want to have a stalemate, so you'd want to have an uneven number, unless you're going to give one individual an extra vote, which certainly increases that individual's vote.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
On a point of order, Mr. Chair, I would just like to clarify this. Clause 5 is a chairperson living in the national capital region and clause 3 is six members living in each of the diverse regions of Canada. The total would be seven.
Alain Langlois Legal Counsel, Legal Services, Department of Transport
The current act, in section 7, reads:
7.(1) The agency known as the National Transportation Agency is continued as the CTA.
(2) The agency shall consist of
(a) not more than seven members
The amendment proposed on motion 9 is going to reduce the numbers to six. The chairman is appointed as part of that number six, so by putting a number six under your motion 9, in NDP-7, the total number of members, including the chairman, will be six.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Let's not lose site of the focus here. This agency makes very, very important decisions that affect the whole country. When we're looking for appointees to this agency, we want to make sure we're focusing on skills and experience that can be brought to the table. At any given time we may not have that particular skill set available in a particular region where a seat is vacant. We need to have that flexibility, especially in light of the fact that we haven't had a problem with regional representation.
I want to ask a question of staff. What are the salaries of these members? I know the answer, but I want you to tell us that.
Legal Counsel, Legal Services, Department of Transport
I don't know the exact figure, but it's anything between $150,000 and above to--
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
It certainly makes it worthwhile for someone to move to Ottawa to perform these services.
Those are my comments.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
Mr. Chair, if the legislative drafters made an error, we can certainly change the clause or the subamendment to say seven members. My understanding from the legislative drafters is that the two amendments work to create a seven-member board, but that's easily amendable for the subamendment.
The reality is we are disadvantaging very qualified people by insisting that they move to Ottawa. The very best in British Columbia, people who don't want to come here, are then not in the mix and not able to apply for these jobs. That is a fundamental reality that I certainly thought members of the Conservative Party understood--they obviously don't--that people can't uproot their families, can't uproot themselves from their communities, and travel 5,000 kilometres to come here to work.
The question of salary is not the only factor that anybody takes into consideration when they're applying for a new position. So this idea that somehow having to have a person from British Columbia means that we are diluting the quality of the people who would be involved in the transportation agency is absolutely ludicrous. We're diluting it now through this process. We're diluting it because we're saying to those folks who don't want to move, who don't want to uproot their families, who are the most qualified people.... If you read any research into the job market in Canada, that is a fundamental obstacle to people. Moving out of their region, moving to new jobs is one of the reasons why.... Some regions have difficulty attracting new workers because the issue of uprooting one's family and moving away from a community is pretty fundamental.
What we are doing now is actually disadvantaging the federal government by eliminating from the pool of potential workers in the transport area, in the transport agency, people who are very qualified but who refuse to come to live in Ottawa. I find it absolutely inappropriate that the government continues to insist that work has to be done here, everyone has to live here, and the only people qualified to work for the transport agency are people willing to uproot their families, leave their communities, and come to Ottawa. Obviously, that has an impact on the skill level of the people we ultimately attract.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Well, they do have 230 employees in the region, do they not, that they--
Director General, Surface Transportation Policy, Department of Transport
In total.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
In total.
As well, I point out, Mr. Chair, that there are other groups, such as the Supreme Court of Canada--I don't know of anybody who's turned down that particular appointment--that have to move here. The Federal Court appointees have to move here. So do members of the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission. I don't know if you're suggesting that their quality is not good, Mr. Julian, but it seems to be working. For the most part, the key here is to get the job done for Canadians and get the job done properly.
They're paid a significant salary to move and to relocate here and get that job done, instead of spending their time travelling, like we seem to do. Both you and I are from jurisdictions far away from here, and it's not a lot of fun and it causes a lot of stress.
I would suggest that this is the best way to get the job done for Canadians. That's why the government is supporting this and not supporting your motion.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
We'll have a vote on the amendment, NDP-7.
(Amendment negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
On a point of order, Mr. Chair.
When we move to the actual clause after the discussion of the amendments, I would appreciate it if you would pause briefly--