Evidence of meeting #49 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 million.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:55 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Can you quickly remind us which programs the Building Canada Fund will replace?
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Lawrence Cannon Conservative Pontiac, QC
The Building Canada Fund should replace the Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund and the Strategic Highway Infrastructure Program.
May 7th, 2007 / 3:55 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
Thank you, Chair.
Welcome, Minister.
I thought I might change things to Canada Post for a minute, if I may. In the annual report, in the segment on the Canada Post group of companies, when you look at what their revenues were and their income from operations, they made less than the Purolator segment for the first time. I know this has been a focus.
It suggests that Canada Post cannot endure another threat to other revenues, if you see that trend happening, which is evident in the report. As people have discussed, if you're looking at reducing the exclusive privilege to satisfy the concerns of others like the international mail group, we have to take a look at things.
I think in December you told Parliament that you would review the problems of the international mailers and examine what legislative options you had. Just to kick things off on that, what kind of review on the international mail problem have you done? What kinds of legislative options are you looking at?
4 p.m.
Conservative
Lawrence Cannon Conservative Pontiac, QC
First and foremost, the amounts in the estimates total $122 million, on page 24-9.
On the international remailers, I looked at that issue. Without going into any detail, I wanted the corporation to complete its negotiations with CUPW before moving forward on any other issue.
Fundamentally, I haven't put aside the idea of looking at reviewing Canada Post. It's been 11 years since this crown corporation has had a review, and that's something I'm looking at now.
4 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
When people hear you say “looking at a review”, some would say that begs the question of what direction that review will go. What we've heard most often are musings about the exclusivity, of course. When you look at the financial trend of where you're bringing money in versus operations, and if you give up exclusivity and there's a threat from international mailers, many people--taxpayers, Canadians in general--would be concerned if that were to happen, because then Canada Post would have less revenue base to provide service to Canadians right at the time when we're confronted with issues like rural mail service, which people have discussed fairly thoroughly around this table.
I guess that's more of a comment to say that if you are “looking at things” and you are diminishing revenues while wanting to improve service, something has to give there. If you are reviewing, and assuming the review is taking place or that you're going to initiate a review of the mandate, what kinds of impacts are you looking at? Who are you going to be speaking to in terms of the impact of service? Otherwise, the question is, why have the review? We really need to know what impacts you're looking at beyond the obvious one, which is the bottom-line impact.
4 p.m.
Conservative
Lawrence Cannon Conservative Pontiac, QC
You're right, because it's not just the bottom line we have to look at. You are here for the first time, and just as you do, I look at the tendencies. We have the whole issue of rural mail delivery. The Parliament of Canada unanimously said we have to maintain that. We're looking at international remailers, which is a specific issue. We're looking at the publications assistance program. That's another tendency.
As you mentioned, there's the whole global environment to consider when we are asking how we get to deliver mail appropriately and efficiently to Canadians. There are a lot of issues that are out there. The Internet, for instance, wasn't there 11 years ago, at least not as potentially as it is now.
So there are a lot of issues we can look at today. To tell you we're going in one direction or another would be a fallacy. I'm more open to looking at those general observations we've made before, or at least that I can make, and from there seeing what should be done.
So that's what I'm thinking now and where I think we should be going.
4 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
On that note, then, I guess in terms of the review, you're going to be bringing it to either this place or to Parliament to have input, as well as other stakeholders, I would assume?
4 p.m.
Conservative
Lawrence Cannon Conservative Pontiac, QC
No, we don't really, but members of the committee would certainly have input into this, Mr. Dewar.
4 p.m.
NDP
Paul Dewar NDP Ottawa Centre, ON
Of course, people represent quite a vast swath of the country, and I'm just looking around the table to see if we cover it all, but certainly we'd need some sort of opportunity for all Canadians to have input.
So I'd encourage that, and obviously some parliamentary debate and some sort of opportunity for parliamentarians to vote on any change in review, because Canada Post is such an incredibly important institution. As well, it would be important for us to be able to have our input into and debate and vote on any major change in the mandate.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Lawrence Cannon Conservative Pontiac, QC
Yes. I just want to make sure that we understand each other, Mr. Dewar. No decision has been made on that. I'm just telling you that I'm leaning towards that.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, gentlemen, for appearing before us today, especially you, Minister Cannon.
I'd like to talk a little bit about CATSA, the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority. Earlier, Mr. Volpe asked a question about it, and unfortunately we didn't get an answer because I believe Mr. Volpe was more interested in politicizing the process.
I'm more interested in getting things done at this table. As you know, Mr. Minister, since 9/11, the security environment in civil aviation in Canada has changed dramatically. We've had to change everything we do with respect to securing our passengers, our airlines, aviation in generation. I understand that in 2006 the Auditor General did a special examination of CATSA. Is that correct?
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Lawrence Cannon Conservative Pontiac, QC
There were a certain number of deficiencies identified by the Office of the Auditor General. The first one touches on the roles and responsibilities and the need for the organization to focus much more on its security screening applications and operations.
Second, the auditor needed better management tool systems to be put in place. What we did, of course, as any government would do, is, one, recognize the seriousness of this issue, and, second, have a fulsome discussion with the chair, which I did at the time. The chair recognized the importance of making sure that this issue be tidied up, to use that expression, and felt it was maybe time to pass the task to somebody else.
I asked Margaret Purdy, who is a person with a great deal of experience in this sector particularly, to take on the task as interim chair. I appointed her on January 26 of this year and asked her to make sure that the Auditor General's special examination of CATSA be put into place. She has developed an action plan--if I'm not mistaken, deputy--and she will be making sure that those specific recommendations are put in place.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Are you able to share with us the specific recommendations she has made in that response plan?
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Lawrence Cannon Conservative Pontiac, QC
Not at this time. My understanding is that we are now examining the action plan she has submitted. Maybe the deputy can add to that.
4:05 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Transport
They've been submitted to Transport Canada. We're very close to agreeing on what we believe needs to be done. Frankly, once we've had a few more discussions, I see no reason why we shouldn't share it. I think we should.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
I assume the recommendations involve the expenditure of money in some cases.
