Evidence of meeting #52 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 chair.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Bloc
NDP
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Is that the NDP version or the Liberal version?
NDP
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Perfect. I do not mind withdrawing my amendment. I will simply withdraw it. That is, I will withdraw—
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
Mr. Laframboise, are you suggesting you'll move your motion with the changes that Mr. Julian has proposed on the English translation?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
Okay.
We have Monsieur Laframboise's motion, and it is with the appropriate changes in the English translation. The floor is open for debate.
Mr. Laframboise, do you want to speak to your motion, to your amendment?
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Yes, the amendment serves to make the English version match the French version. Of course, we are discussing only the amendment here, are we not, Mr. Chair?
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
We want the expressed will to be the same in both official languages.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
I would like to hear from the department, as I requested before, in relation to the clause itself.
Director, Regulatory Services, Civil Aviation, Department of Transport
Well, what we saw here is that we have no definition of management system, because the idea was to enable the minister to require other types of management systems, if need be, other than just safety management systems.
What the three proposals are doing here is borrowing the definition of safety management system that is in our current regulations. As you know, usually in an act of Parliament you have a broader definition and you can always narrow it down in the regulations. This is the way to proceed. We think it needs to be broader than what you have here. In the regulations we already have--and you have a copy, I believe, of all the Canadian aviation regulations, series 100, that was distributed today--there is a very detailed definition of safety management system there.
Here we wanted to keep it broader so that if we need other types of management systems, the minister has the enabling authority there. We didn't want to limit it to the specific detailed definition borrowed from the CARs. So that's the reason.
If need be, and if we really want to have the definition in the legislation, we could have a very broad one. I don't know whether you want to talk about that.
Director, Regulatory Services, Civil Aviation, Department of Transport
There's a possibility of having a much broader one. I don't think it's necessary. I think the dictionary definition of management system is sufficient there, because we want to keep it broad.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Are we discussing the amendment still? Can I speak in general terms in relation to a friendly amendment that I would propose to Monsieur Laframboise in both official languages, or would you rather deal with the amendment and get on with it?
Conservative
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
My proposal would be to change it to:
“management system” means a document management process
—so take out “risk” and change “documented” to “document”—
that integrates operations and technical systems with the management of financial and human resources.
That was bounced off the department. Do you want me to repeat that, Mr. Julian?
It's “a document management process”--
Director, Regulatory Services, Civil Aviation, Department of Transport
Documented.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Yes, it would be:
a documented management process that integrates operations and technical systems with the management of financial and human resources.
