Evidence of meeting #37 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 sms.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:30 p.m.
National Chair, Canadian Federal Pilots Association
Yes, they are inspectors at Transport Canada.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
In your role acting as their bargaining agent, as their advocate, it's as inspectors, not as airline pilots. Is that correct?
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Is it safe to say that you'd be concerned about the loss of jobs for your members, quite aside from the safety concerns?
4:30 p.m.
National Chair, Canadian Federal Pilots Association
This isn't a concern about the loss of jobs. There's way more work to do now than our members are capable of handling. Even by redirecting their activities from the audits and inspections, which traditionally they have done, over to SMS assessment activities, there's still going to be way more work than they can handle.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
I find that interesting. We heard testimony at our last meeting from the union that in fact they believe that the number of inspectors has already decreased and that would continue if SMS were implemented.
4:30 p.m.
National Chair, Canadian Federal Pilots Association
If you turn to tab 9 of our presentation brief, you'll see what our membership numbers indicate for Transport Canada inspectors. They are on the decline, but I don't get a sense that it's about a departmental program to specifically eliminate wholesale sections of people. But the demographics are what they are; people are going to be leaving on an ongoing basis. The question is, are they going to be replaced?
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Is it safe to say that you'd be concerned about attrition from your particular organization?
4:30 p.m.
National Chair, Canadian Federal Pilots Association
I'm very concerned, and I've raised this issue with the department. Our numbers indicate that we are now down to the same levels as a number of years ago, when the department had major initiatives about recruitment and retention and was very concerned about inspector shortages. I raised the concern, saying that I'm concerned because our numbers are back in that range again, and there is no discussion about shortages.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Our time is short, so thank you for that.
Your primary role as a bargaining agent is not airline safety in the first place; it's representing your members. Is that not correct?
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
All right, so your role is not like the TSB, which focuses on safety.
February 21st, 2007 / 4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
The reason I ask those questions is that I'm surprised because of the witnesses we've heard. We've had the Transportation Safety Board and Transport Canada here. We've had Mr. Boucher here representing Air Canada pilots. We've had the other pilots association representing some 60,000 pilots across North America. We've had Mr. Jenner and Mr. Boag here. All of them speak very positively about Bill C-6. Some of them have minor reservations, as Mr. Jenner did, but I think we can address some of those concerns.
However, the industry as a whole sees this as a huge step forward. In fact what I'd like to do is quote from Captain Dan Adamus of the Air Line Pilots Association, who really put it quite succinctly. He supported this legislation. Why? It's “the next great leap forward in advancing aviation safety”. He was strongly supportive of SMS. He referred to establishing accountability for safety at the highest levels within a company, and the fact that the reporting of safety occurrences can be done without fear of retribution. He refers to an umbrella framework over the existing safety regulations.
This is not as you have suggested: removing regulation, leaving a vacuum, and then replacing it with SMS. It's a blending of the two, and almost all of the other witnesses—
4:30 p.m.
A voice
All of them.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
—focused very much on the fact that this is an overall improvement in airline safety.
So I would suggest that you've raised some concerns, but they don't focus on the net result. The focus here is not whether there's going to be a reduction in the number of inspectors in your particular bargaining unit. The concern is—
4:30 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
On a point of order, Mr. Chair, this is a committee hearing where we're supposed to be asking questions. If Mr. Fast wants to make a speech, he can do it in the House of Commons. We're here to ask questions of the witnesses, and I hope, Mr. Chair, you'd direct him to do that.
4:30 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
With all due respect, Mr. Chair, we've heard Mr. Julian wax eloquent many times and monopolize hours of our time giving speeches. I'm not giving a speech; I'm clarifying questions that I asked and answers that were given. I've asked numerous questions of Mr. Holbrook, and I believe we've gotten to the point where I understand his perspective.
I don't blame you for that. You're representing your members.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
Mr. Fast, I'll just say that it is not a point of order. Please, continue, and perhaps move to your questions.
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Thank you.
I'll just wind up by saying this. Ultimately the role of this committee is to ensure that we enhance and improve airline safety—air safety as a whole—in Canada. Most of the evidence we've seen at this table makes it very clear that Bill C-6 actually achieves that. With the greatest of respect for your members, I want make sure that we don't look at things such as the actual number of inspectors who will retain their jobs but that we focus on the net effect on public safety.
Those are my comments, Mr. Chair.
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
Paul Zed Liberal Saint John, NB
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I'm trying to understand the nuances here, and I appreciate that Mr. Fast comes to the table with a lot more experience, having been on this committee. I'm a new member to this committee, so if I ask a stupid question, you can help me.
You used an interesting split. You used the words “acceptable” and “affordable”, Mr. Holbrook.
4:35 p.m.
Liberal
Paul Zed Liberal Saint John, NB
I want to ask some of the other witnesses how they reacted to the information that was presented.
Mr. Boucher, Mr. Boag, or Mr. Jenner, when you heard Mr. Holbrook say that, did that concern you at all?
4:35 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Aerospace Industries Association of Canada
I will certainly be pleased to answer that question.
Yes, it did, because certainly from our perspective, safety is safety. Our industry is a highly competitive industry, and a key component of that competitiveness is safety and reliability of aviation products. It's not in the industry's interest whatsoever to go on the cheap and put out products that are less safe, because ultimately, that's just not in their business interests. So safety and reliability are a key component of the product quality that industry members must produce if they're to remain in business.