Evidence of meeting #36 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 transport.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:45 p.m.
National President, Union of Canadian Transportation Employees
Transport Canada inspects a lot of different areas. My understanding is there's been a reduction in the number of inspectors who are responsible for this particular area, and I believe there's a plan in place to have even fewer.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
But you wouldn't disagree with the argument that there are actually more inspectors now at Transport Canada than there were in 2000-2001.
4:45 p.m.
National President, Union of Canadian Transportation Employees
As I said, Transport Canada is responsible for inspection and the safety of transportation systems across a very broad spectrum. I was only speaking to the aviation side of the house and the air industry in particular.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
Do you have any numbers in regard to the rail industry and the number of inspectors who are currently in the rail industry, from the same dates of 2000-01?
4:45 p.m.
National President, Union of Canadian Transportation Employees
I've committed to provide some numbers to the committee, and I will go back and get the information for you.
4:45 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
All right. Thank you very much.
I want to ask Mr. Wing about the other aspect. Mr. Wing, you talked about how these inspectors are being limited and Transport Canada is pulling away. You're not seeing any decline in the training aspects or any of those aspects of Transport Canada, are you? We still have some of the most highly trained professional inspectors in the world, correct?
4:45 p.m.
National President, Union of Canadian Transportation Employees
I agree. I think that the work our members do is of the highest quality. My concern is to ensure that those types of individuals with those types of skills continue to be used to ensure aviation safety in this country.
It's no mistake that I mentioned in my brief that one of the reasons for moving in this direction to begin with was a view to reducing the number of inspectors who are in the system and the amount that Transport Canada pays for it. That is really one of the driving forces behind this legislation.
February 19th, 2007 / 4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
Mr. Wing, with regard to what you've already committed to getting for us, if you do find that there has been a decline in inspectors, could we ask you to give us some specifics, locations, some of the areas that are being affected the most by this? In which places are we seeing a decline in inspectors, and in which industries are we seeing a decline in inspectors? Because indeed the information I have seen in the past has shown the contrary, and I'm happy to hear that Transport Canada is not decreasing the levels of training.
In my regard, what we're doing with Bill C-6 is only enhancing the role of inspectors within the system itself, so I can only see them playing a larger role in this.
I guess I just have two more questions here. One is for Mr. Stoss. How does this legislation compare with legislation being presented in other parts of the world, such as the United Kingdom or Australia?
4:50 p.m.
Acting Director General, Investigation Operations, Transportation Safety Board of Canada
I'm not familiar with any differences. I just know that they are being implemented in those foreign states.
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Storseth Conservative Westlock—St. Paul, AB
They are indeed being implemented—and they're deemed to be reasonably successful, from what we can see?
4:50 p.m.
Acting Director General, Investigation Operations, Transportation Safety Board of Canada
The information I have, again from general reporting, from general conversations with different safety organizations around the world, is that they are being implemented in some of the countries.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Perhaps, Mr. Chairman, it would be more appropriate—and I'm not suggesting that Mr. Wing cannot do this—if, as a committee, we ask from our government officials the complete statistics that we've been wondering about today, in terms of inspectors in Transport Canada in various modes of transport.
Could we possibly get that, either from our own analysts or from the departmental officials, so that we all have it? If the purpose is to try to say that in 2000 there were fewer than there are now, or whatever the purpose is, let's get the facts on the table, and we can draw whatever conclusions from the facts.
Is that a reasonable request?
4:50 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
I think it would be important, from what I'm hearing too, if Mr. Wing would undertake to do it. I will ask the department also, to make sure that the numbers are the same.
4:50 p.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
Thank you.
I have a little problem with this notion that we're trying to debunk myths that the opposition may be trying to create by asking questions. It is the role of the people on this side to ask questions, and if it is seen as creating myths, well, I'm sorry about that, but that is certainly not the intent. The intent is to have facts on the table, and from facts make a judgment on the legislation that is before us.
Indeed the matter of SMS is being proposed as an addition-to and top-up. There are no changes to the regulatory requirements that have been presented so far. I hope we all agree on that. That's how it's been presented. They have been in place, even though the legislation has not. I think everybody acknowledges that too.
Am I correct so far? Would anybody care to say that was not the case, that SMSs are not in place now? All right. They are in place, not in legislation, but they are in place in actuality.
So if indeed the consequence of those, and that's what we need to ascertain, is a reduction in the number of inspectors, is the link there obvious? Are there fewer inspectors? Let's find out. And if so, is it because we have SMSs? And then in that case, there's a judgment call to be made, and that's the purpose of asking these questions, not to debunk myths or create them.
Does anyone care to comment on that?
4:50 p.m.
National President, Union of Canadian Transportation Employees
I have a presentation that the director general of civil aviation, Mr. Merlin Preuss, gave at the Canadian aviation safety seminar in April 2006. He's talking about organizational review, and he says:
By 2013, 46% of the current Civil Aviation workforce will be eligible for retirement or have already retired. Replacing these employees, let alone adding to the current workforce, to continue the current oversight regime given the current and predicted workforce demographics, is not feasible; therefore, major changes need to be made in the way we work—
There's a recognition that due to the demographics within the department, particularly within this section, they are going to be losing a significant number of inspectors, and they do not plan on replacing these inspectors, with the skills that these inspectors currently have.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
Would you kindly table with the clerk that speech, or give us the reference so we can have it circulated to the members of the committee, Mr. Wing?
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
Thank you.
Does anyone else care to comment?
I don't know how much time I have left, Mr. Chair.
4:55 p.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
I'll skip the 30 seconds and I'll put my name up for another round, if that's possible, Mr. Chairman.
4:55 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Mr. Bélanger is beginning to see the light. It's getting better.
Here is the problem. This whole debate between Transport Canada and the industry started in 1998. Since September 2001, Canadians are more aware of safety issues. Our role as MPs is to make sure that industry and Transport Canada try to find a solution ensuring a certain level of safety while saving money.
That might have been acceptable in 1998 but I do not believe that, today, Canadians would tolerate the government trying to make cheeseparing savings at the expense of safety.
You have told us that the system is already in place, and I believe you because we were told that Air Transat is already using a safety management system.
How long ago did you notice that the system was already in place, Mr. Wing?
4:55 p.m.
Michael Teeter Consultant, Union of Canadian Transportation Employees
I believe the first order in council came into place in the summer of 2005.
4:55 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
It is important for us to get the right data from the Department in order to be able to consider the impact this may have on safety.
Earlier, Mr. Julian made some good points. In the rail industry, the success has not been overwhelming. When you look at the statistics, you can conclude that it has been far from successful. One cannot say that the implementation of the safety management system in the rail industry has provided obvious benefits.
Is that what I should understand, Mr. Stoss, even if you seem to disagree with the statistics? The implementation of the SMS in that industry has not provided evidence of any improvement for safety. On the contrary, for some periods of time, one may wonder why it has been implemented.