Transport Committee on May 14th, 2007

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Carrier.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Good day, Mr. Reinhardt. I still have some questions about designated organizations, as mentioned in the bill. The provision in question states that “the Minister of Transport may designate [...] one or more organizations”. The bill says “may”. In your opinion, how effective is this clause? Under what circumstances may the minister designate such organizations? Of what benefit is it to an organization to be so designated? Would it be compensated in some way for taking on this responsibility?

[Franz Reinhardt]

Most certainly it would not be compensated in any way. Take the case of the Canadian Business Aviation Association. It imposes charges on its members and these cover the cost of providing services. Obviously, Transport Canada has nothing to do with all of that. If an organization is designated, it must work out some kind of arrangement with its members. As you will see, pursuant to the regulations, members can turn to the Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada if they disagree with the charges imposed. They can ask to have the charges reviewed.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

I'm going to be using Mr. Carrier's time.

Representatives of a company that employs bush pilots—I believe it was DaxAir— testified before the committee. If I understand correctly, these pilots are not subject to any regulations. Correct?

[Franz Reinhardt]

DaxAir is a 703 company that provides air taxi services. While it is most definitely regulated by Transport Canada, it is not subject to SMS and it does not have to assume any of the related costs at this time, but eventually, it will be.

In terms of commercial requirements, this company must have an operations manual and follow a maintenance schedule, just like Air Canada, although the requirements are not as stringent, since it is a 703 company. However, the fact remains that this company must account for its commercial activities.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

So then, for this type of company, there is no designated organization. Transport Canada has oversight responsibility.

[Franz Reinhardt]

It was never a question of having designated organizations take responsibility in such instances. As you can see, the government's proposed amendment as announced by Minister Cannon talks about taking steps to ensure that this sector of activity does not pose any kind of danger. Commercial passenger carriers that operate fixed schedules are not affected.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Transport Canada inspectors monitor the operations of these companies. When people tell you that their competitors are not subject to any kind of oversight, then you're to blame for this state of affairs. Is it because you lack the personnel, or is there some other reason?

[Franz Reinhardt]

I'm happy you asked that question, Mr. Laframboise. We carry out our oversight activities and the legislation also applies in remote regions, such as Northern Ontario. Many times we have conducted on-site visits with inspectors and everything was fine while we were there. The people knew that inspectors were on site. Occasionally we issued rather minor fines.

We've always made it clear to companies like DaxAir and officials like Ms. Brazier that we need proof and witnesses to back up allegations of serious problems, such as the overheating of an aircraft. We need to produce this kind of evidence before the Transportation Appeal Tribunal. However, these individuals are unwilling to provide us with this evidence.

When we conduct our on-site inspections, there is no evidence of any violations being committed. However, if the information is conveyed to us and people are prepared to testify, we can take certain steps, as we have done in the past. In short, these people will continue to be subject to safety oversight in the future, even in an SMS context. In fact, inspectors will then be on site to ensure compliance with the rules and standards.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

We'll go to Monsieur Volpe for a point of clarification.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

It's just a very brief one.

I know that one of the officials raised this. I'm not sure whether he raised it with me or whether it was done in committee. I just want everybody else to have the benefit of the answer.

Colonel Shelley, I guess if the system you have in place with DND approximates the SMS that's being proposed or that's already being worked on--not just being proposed--you haven't had an opportunity to have it assessed after about 40 years of implementation. If something were to happen in, God forbid, an accident or a crash, the lead department there would be Transport Canada? Or would it be DND, if the accident happened outside DND territory, outside a base?

[Col Christopher Shelley]

Normally, the lead department would be DND. There could be circumstances where the Transportation Safety Board would have the lead on the investigation. In no case would it be Transport Canada because they don't investigate.

For example, right now we have a coordinated investigation ongoing in Trenton. It's a chartered foreign aircraft that had an occurrence in Trenton, so DND has the lead on the investigation. We're assisted by the Transportation Safety Board, and we have a minister's observer from Transport Canada. That's in accordance with the letter of agreement we have between ourselves and TSB.

[Joe Volpe, Liberal, Eglinton—Lawrence, ON]

The reason I asked that question, though, Colonel Shelley, is that DND would essentially be akin to one of the designated organizations that would be responsible for implementing that SMS system and providing the assurances and guarantees that Transport Canada would require as the regulator. The experience that DND would have acquired through the investigation would probably have more to do, or at least as much to do, with ensuring safe and secure travel on board aircraft, at least as much as it would have to do with internal DND issues. Would you not agree?

[Col Christopher Shelley]

I'd certainly say we'd have those objectives in mind. We have specific obligations under the Aeronautics Act, etc., for DND, so I'm not sure it's exactly parallel, but those are the objectives with which we go into the investigation, obviously.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you, Colonel Shelley.

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

A point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Bélanger on a point of order.

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

Have we received the information asked for and promised last Monday when we had the minister here for estimates?

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

No, we haven't.

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

Is it possible to perhaps prod a little bit so that we have this before the end of the week? Then when we're back from the week off, we can deal with that if there's a necessity to deal with it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I hope there's enough people listening in the room for them to get the message that we would like the information before week's end.

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

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

The hour being 5:30, the meeting is adjourned until Wednesday, at which time we will proceed with clause-by-clause on Bill C-6.