Evidence of meeting #54 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 vote.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
Now we're going to move to amendment L-3, on page 15 in your program.
Mr. Julian.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
4:10 p.m.
Some hon. members
Oh, oh!
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
High praise indeed; I'm very proud to be born in B.C., yes.
Indeed, Mr. Chair, I just want to advise the committee that I don't have any idea when this session is going to be done, but I hope we can finish Bill C-6 in a timely manner. Otherwise we will not have it finished before summer.
I just think it would be to the advantage of all parties if we could move along at not a hurried pace but a good strong pace. We're here to work for the Canadian public, and I think this would be a good piece of legislation to bring in.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
I think we're all on that wavelength today.
We have in front of us Liberal amendment 3, page 15. I would ask Mr. Volpe to bring that motion forward. I do want to advise the committee that there are some concerns around the amendment.
Mr. Volpe, I would ask that you present your motion.
4:10 p.m.
Liberal
Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
I note that there are others who have presented other amendments in this regard. From our perspective, it's simply that we wanted to have an establishment of a program for oversight and surveillance to achieve an acceptable level of safety. From our perspective, whatever the minister is going to put in place is going to have to be acceptable to him. Whether it is the highest or whether it is acceptable, it's going to be acceptable to him one way or the other. So we did have trouble with the language.
I see that there are other amendments that add “achieve the highest level of safety established”. In the context of the previous government amendment just accepted, I think Mr. Laframboise has an amendment that's the same thing but is more consistent with that amendment just passed.
So I'll withdraw my amendment in favour of his.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
Mr. Volpe has taken amendment L-3 off the table. There's agreement to do that, I'm sure.
We will move to BQ-8. I will just advise the committee that very similar concerns have been pointed out to the chair.
I'll wait for Mr. Laframboise to make his presentation.
4:10 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Thank you very much. I move that Bill C-6, in clause 4, be amended by adding after line 16 on page 5 the following:
(1.1) The Minister shall establish a program for the oversight and surveillance of aviation safety in order to achieve the highest level of safety established by the Minister.
Obviously the purpose of the amendment is to have a program for the oversight and surveillance of aviation safety in order to achieve the highest level of safety established by the minister.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
Are there any other comments?
I will advise the committee that the Bloc amendment and the NDP amendment are identical.
Mr. Julian.
4:10 p.m.
NDP
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
4:10 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
There's just a two-word difference. I certainly support the Bloc amendment
put forward by Mr. Laframboise, if the following words are added to the French version: "and maintain a surveillance program". So I would suggest we add two words. I hope this could be accepted as a friendly subamendment. I support the Bloc's motion, because I think it will further improve the bill.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
The concern the chair has is just in trying to determine whether there are existing procedures taking place or whether we're adding new establishing and maintaining. If we are, it would be seen as something that is going to involve new spending, which would then require royal recommendation.
That's the debate around admissibility at this point.
Mr. Julian.
4:15 p.m.
NDP
Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC
If I may, Mr. Chair, it is an obligation. The minister has a program in place. We're simply suggesting through the Bloc amendment and the NDP amendment, which is similar, that this is something that has to be maintained. My sense of the amendment is that it is very much in order. It maintains that obligation, which is the concern we've heard from witnesses as they've come to this committee. They've said that in theory SMS would work if in practice we have that oversight.
Those are the principles that have been brought forward to this committee, that we're not taking away or detracting from safety programs. I think that's the effectiveness of the Bloc amendment. It puts that front and centre as an obligation that the minister has.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
4:15 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
Mr. Chairman, if the minister is required to establish a program, he or she must maintain it. So I have no objection to accepting this friendly amendment stating that the oversight and surveillance program must be maintained. This can be changed. A number of changes can be made in the way this works over time. However, once the program is established, it must be maintained. I would be inclined to accept Mr. Julian's friendly amendment. So I would like to hear from the officials on this.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Mr. Chair, you suggested that it requires royal recommendation, so are you ruling it out of order at this stage?
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
I'm actually going to ask the department about the words “establish” and “program”.
When you suggest it's a new process that would require.... I'm trying to get clarification.
Mr. Reinhardt.
4:15 p.m.
Director, Regulatory Services, Civil Aviation, Department of Transport
I was listening to Mr. Laframboise. If it is to maintain oversight and surveillance of aviation safety, it doesn't seem to the department that there would be a problem. We already have our program. It's already there. It's the minister's responsibility and it is a confirmation that the minister shall maintain.
Now, with respect to the use of “shall”, here we're talking about the responsibilities of the minister. The numbering will have to be looked at. I think it will have to be, instead of (n.1) as in LIB-3—We're now in BQ-8, right? I just want to make sure we have the right numbering of the sections. It would be just before the proposed subsection(2). It would be subsection (1).
4:15 p.m.
Legal Counsel, Department of Transport
The previous provision becomes subsection (1). There is an amendment.
4:15 p.m.
Director, Regulatory Services, Civil Aviation, Department of Transport
We want to make sure we have the proper numbering.
As for the wording, we think the government can live with this wording.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
If I interpreted what he's saying, I think Mr. Laframboise has made the suggestion that the program currently exists. You're not asking the government or the minister to increase any expenditures to “maintain”. You're just saying that he does it. Am I correct in saying that?
4:15 p.m.
Bloc
Mario Laframboise Bloc Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC
That is correct. This is new legislation; so this has never been in the act before. The idea is that the department would establish a program, but if one already exists, I have no objection to it being applied. However, I do want it to be maintained. I am not expecting a new program to be introduced, provided the oversight and surveillance program that already exists is adequate. The words "in order to achieve the highest level of safety" mean that the minister must ensure that the oversight program will go hand-in-hand with the appropriate level of safety.