Evidence of meeting #51 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.
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
I believe the main opposition members could have done the same thing.
5:15 p.m.
Director, Regulatory Services, Civil Aviation, Department of Transport
We could have done that. We wanted to have the officials here first and then we had all the other witnesses. I think the problem with the other witnesses is they didn't give you the facts in their proper context, because there's much more to this.
On the question of the cancellation of the national audit program, yes, the national audit program was cancelled, but it was replaced by something else. So it's fearmongering. People are thinking there's no inspection and this is simply not true. There is process validation, there is program validation, there is assessment, and it's much more thorough than it used to be under the audit carried out through the national audit program, which was, by the way, only an administrative constraint to take some people from the regions and some people from HQ.
You could have asked the question of Mr. Carson, I believe, who took his SMS course two weeks ago...that yes, there are things that have replaced the NAP. But if you ask the question, was the national audit program cancelled, they will say yes, it was cancelled. You have to put things in context.
Now you're talking about an agenda. We have no choice. You want Canada to respect the international agreements. ICAO has just mandated SMS in all the activity fields in aviation on the international level, and we're following them. But we are, as mentioned by the ICAO witnesses, at the leading edge. We're considered as probably the first country...to have as good an approach with respect to SMS as Canada has. So we are at the leading edge, and we are required by ICAO, so we have no choice.
I don't think it should be pushed. If we had the opportunity to explain to you...and we could, if you wanted. We could take one day and give you all those presentations that we give at the SMS course and explain to you really what it's all about, and you would be impressed and surprised. It's not all those negative things you hear.
5:15 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The government side has no questions for the witnesses, but we do have the amendments that have been proposed, and they're in both official languages. I'd like the opportunity to pass them out, if I could get the clerk to do so, and to give the opportunity for the opposition to ask any more questions they may have of the witnesses.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I'd like to pick up where Mr. Laframboise left off on the subject of private jets. If this sector is not self-regulated, than it must be regulated by someone else. I would assume that regulating body is Transport Canada.
5:15 p.m.
Director, Regulatory Services, Civil Aviation, Department of Transport
Regulations governing pilot licensing requirements, aircraft certification, instrument flight and visual flight apply to everyone. A carrier such as Air Canada is subject to many other commercial requirements. For instance, one requirement is that it have an operations manual. In the past, that was a requirement for private jets, but that's no longer the case.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
I noted that amendment G-2 provided for an improvement over what already exists. I'll have an opportunity to review this carefully when I have a quiet moment. For now, I'd like to understand one thing.
If there were designated organizations, then the regulatory oversight mentioned earlier which is now the responsibility of Transport Canada would remain with the department. Is that correct?
5:15 p.m.
Director, Regulatory Services, Civil Aviation, Department of Transport
Absolutely. I think people have misunderstood and I'd like to explain. SMS complements the basic regulations already in place. There's no question that as part of the process of designating organizations—and this process has nothing to do with SMS—the basic regulations would continue to apply.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
I have a question for a DND official.
Does DND have a safety management system in place?
May 14th, 2007 / 5:15 p.m.
Col Christopher Shelley Director, Flight Safety, Department of National Defence
Yes.
5:15 p.m.
Liberal
5:20 p.m.
Director, Flight Safety, Department of National Defence
The flight safety system in the Department of National Defence has not been assessed by any outside agency. We do internal assessments and surveys of all our installations, contractors—
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
I'm talking here about a safety management system, or SMS. Does DND have an SMS for the aviation sector, consistent with what Transport Canada is trying to put in place?
5:20 p.m.
Director, Flight Safety, Department of National Defence
The flight safety program within National Defence is regulated by the AGA 135, which is the manual. I would say it resembles SMS, but it predates it by many years.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
Have there been evaluations of that system, if you call it that, or whatever it is it's called?
5:20 p.m.
Director, Flight Safety, Department of National Defence
There has been no external audit or evaluation of the system.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
5:20 p.m.
Director, Flight Safety, Department of National Defence
Since the 1960s.
I believe the vice-chief of defence staff evaluated the system a couple of years ago, but I'd have to research exactly when that was.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
Please do.
Recently, I raised some questions about Air Canada and SMS. As I understood it, Air Canada management and pilots rarely get together and their meetings are not attended by the inspectors.
In your opinion, should an SMS policy require the presence of an inspector when the two parties meet? That way, he could at least hear the parties voice their concerns.
5:20 p.m.
Director, Regulatory Services, Civil Aviation, Department of Transport
As you know, SMS is already in place, along with regulations governing large carriers. Pursuant to these regulations, the employer is required to consult with employees. That's already provided for in the regulations. All carriers, including Air Canada, that are governed by SMS have a designated chief transportation inspector who is available at all times to intervene and attend meetings between management and employees.
5:20 p.m.
Liberal
Mauril Bélanger Liberal Ottawa—Vanier, ON
We'll come back to this at some point. In my opinion, this should be mandatory, not optional, but that's another story.
