Transport Committee on Feb. 12th, 2007

[Mauril Bélanger, Liberal, Ottawa—Vanier, ON]

Are they not on the website?

[Franz Reinhardt]

I believe that some are still on the website, under CARAC.

[Merlin Preuss]

There are all the dispositions from all the committees that were used to build this up. All that information is available.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

That won't go against your time.

[Robert Carrier, Bloc, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Good afternoon, Mr. Preuss. Earlier on, you stated that Canada was one of the safest countries in the world. That is quite an assertion, but I would like to see statistics to that effect. On what do you base your statement that Canada has a very good safety record? You can perhaps give us a partial answer, but I would also like to receive written documentation.

[Merlin Preuss]

Certainly I can provide that. I obviously don't have it with me. There's comparative information available, probably even on our website. I'm not sure.

[Robert Carrier, Bloc, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

You are saying that we are one of the best in the world. Would we be in second or third place?

[Merlin Preuss]

That's a very complex question. If we just talked about Air Canada, I could give you some very concrete numbers.

[Robert Carrier, Bloc, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

No, you were talking about Canada.

[Merlin Preuss]

For Air Canada or the major airlines, when you compare statistics from one country to another vis-à-vis major airlines, that's relatively transparent. You'll find that data at IATA. You'll find that data at ICAO. More generally, though, you run into trouble. For example, if you wanted to look at the air taxi segment, not the large aircraft segment, and you compared, for example, FAA data with Canadian data, you'd have some difficulty, because it's not counted the same way. So we'd have to do a fair amount of work if we wanted to compare say, the G-7 nations' record vis-à-vis some of the smaller types of operations.

But certainly at the airline level it's relatively simple to see the comparison. You can even go to the IATA or ICAO websites and you'll find countries in the world colour-coded. We are green, as is America. It's not even the same in some countries in Europe. It's not the same in Africa. I have no doubt that we are at the top, or very close to the top, in terms of our current performance. Of course, our worry is how we maintain that.

[Robert Carrier, Bloc, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

If I understand correctly, your information on safety in different countries allows you to state that we live in one of the safest countries. I would like to see the documentation that supports that statement, for the committee's information.

The purpose of the bill before us is certainly to improve safety, not to weaken it. We want to remain the best of the best. Do you believe that what you are proposing as a safety management system, that would be controlled in part by Department of Transport inspectors, would be a better solution than increasing the number of inspectors who report directly to the department?

[Merlin Preuss]

As I mentioned before, the collective wisdom of the experts in this area has indicated to us that doing more of the same will not give us the next step. Of course, our fear is that as the activity increases, we are going to end up with more events. Therefore, it's important to reduce the accident rate, and that simply cannot be done just by throwing more resources at the problem.

Our industry is as compliant as any in the world. In other words, they're generally well-behaved. We don't have to do a lot, especially with the high-risk operations like Air Canada and Air Transat. Those companies are very compliant. They are very knowledgeable and responsible companies. But they can't go to the next level. They can't delve more deeply into the problem areas without an infrastructure or a framework that will allow that to happen.

We're regulating that additional framework with the fervent belief that as a result, we'll be able to deal with the problems better and therefore increase our performance and reduce the rate.

[Robert Carrier, Bloc, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

That's good.

You expect the system to increase performance, and you seem confident that it will improve our safety. Is this because countries like Australia and New Zealand are already using it? What level are these countries at on the safety scale in terms of performance or efficiency ? Are they doing better than we are because they are using this system?

[Merlin Preuss]

I don't have that data with me, sir, but I do have Canadian data. Air Transat's occurrence numbers have been reduced substantially since they've started to implement this. I would invite this committee to invite Allen Graham, the president of the company, to talk about what has happened with his company since they have started down this road.

Don't quote me, because I don't have the numbers for sure, but three or four times as many reports are now being generated by their company. We're seeing a 50% decrease in the number of reports that indicate something bad happened--somebody got hurt or something got broken. We have our own experience to rely on. I can't quote you statistics from other countries, but I can certainly tell you that the oil industry, the chemical industry, and the nuclear power industry will tell you this is probably the only thing they have that works at the very high-risk levels.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Fast.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to shift gears a bit from a broad view of this legislation to something more specific. I was pleased to see that clause 17 of the bill addresses the whole issue of the removal of natural growth. I believe it's going to affect sections 5.82, 5.83, 5.84, and 5.85. This certainly affects my community, which is home to the Abbotsford Airport. They've raised the issue of trying to get the removal of trees and other growth that impairs air traffic movement done on a timely basis.

They raised three concerns.The first was having a legislative framework that actually provides a clear mandate to do that; the bill does that, and I'm very pleased with that.

The second is that it also gives clarity as to who covers the cost. Obviously the airports don't want to pay for it, but the legislation makes it clear that it's the airport's responsibility.

The third aspect is the issue of how we're going to actually get this done. We have a significantly large bureaucracy that is already probably somewhat overburdened and has some very serious issues to grapple with--security and safety. Are we now going to have federal bureaucrats continually monitoring and engaging in negotiating agreements with owners of properties that are adjacent to airports, getting those agreements signed, and giving notices where required? Is there a better way, perhaps by devolving some of those authorities by way of delegations or by way of a memorandum of understanding to the local airports themselves, so that when they have a problem, they've been given notice? That way, when they've got a problem, they can act immediately.

My experience has been, especially with some of the smaller and community-owned airports, that the members of the airport authorities have relationships with the property owners around the airport. They have relationships with the individuals who would do the tree-topping and the removal of trees. Is that something you have given some thought to--how we can make this more efficient and allow the local community to take some ownership in this and get it done in a timely fashion?

[Franz Reinhardt]

It's already provided for in the proposed changes. There's some sort of delegation to the municipalities to handle this with Transport Canada. It's already covered.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

I'm pleased to hear that.

What process will that take? Is it going to take an order in council, or is it going to take simply a ministerial directive to actually get that done?

[Franz Reinhardt]

I'll ask our official legal counsel to answer this.

Joan.

[Joan Knight, Counsel, Legal Services, Department of Transport]

The minister might be using his authorities under the act in order to delegate to other people, to the community, to do that. The actual process has not yet been worked out, as far as I know, but the ability to do it is certainly there currently with what we have. The minister has the authority to delegate most of his powers. He can't delegate legislative powers, but anything else he can, and that authority could be used.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Is that something the department is anxious to do? We're eagerly awaiting that.

[Joan Knight]

The department obviously is going to be relying on the airport authorities themselves to give them the information, because that's where it's going to come from normally. Yes, I believe the department would want to work this out with the small authorities, where possible, if the authority itself is willing to take on the responsibility, to take on the delegation.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

That's encouraging to me.

I have a different question that has to do with the ability now, under this bill, to regulate aircraft emissions. Did the previous Bill C-62, which died on the order paper and was brought forward by the previous Liberal government, have a similar provision?

[Franz Reinhardt]

Yes, it did.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

And it's in response to some of the issues we're facing today regarding climate change—