Transport Committee on May 8th, 2008

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Masse is next.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Minister, for being here.

I have a question on the Auditor General's report to start; then I'm going to move to my favourite topic, the Windsor-Detroit corridor, as usual.

With regard to the Auditor General's report, I find Mr. Ranger's comments really naive. To expect business people basically to have the best mechanics and pilots and leave it at that is not acceptable. There are other employees who use those planes as well. Unfortunately, there is a record in Canada; that's why we have a national day of mourning, and there's an international one. It's because workers are sometimes put at risk because people cut corners. Tragically, we've had some business aircraft crashes that have actually lost the lives of employees. I'm not suggesting that corners were cut there, but it's a significant problem.

You're right--the Auditor General did not look at safety management systems. I've never been naive enough to believe that alone is what's needed to be the best system. There has to be oversight. That's what the Auditor General identified. What I'd like to know from your department is why the national audit program was cancelled as we move into transition to a new program of safety management systems. Why was the old traditional model broken and discarded before we knew what the real risks were?

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

Thank you.

At the outset I'll offer a comment. I don't think the deputy minister was suggesting that other people who are involved in safety management systems within the industry are not implicated in sustaining and supporting that. I think it's unfair to say that the deputy minister was only looking at one class of people in the business community as the only ones who should be looking at it and that it excludes other individuals within that industry. That's not the purpose of the safety management system.

As you know, Mr. Masse, the safety management system that we're pushing and that we want to be able to put in place is one whereby we add an additional layer of protection and security. We are not taking anything away from the existing rules and regulations. We are not downsizing and we are not deregulating; we are indeed maintaining one mission.

What is that mission? That mission is that Canada and Transport Canada and aviation still maintain their number one spot in the world as the safest organization and operation. That's the challenge we're facing.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

But why was the national audit program cancelled?

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

Merlin Preuss is here, and he'll pick up that question gladly.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Go ahead, Mr. Preuss.

[Merlin Preuss, Director General, Civil Aviation, Department of Transport]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The national audit program was an administrative construct to create teams across the nation to deal with the major organizations, whether large airports or large carriers. That centralized administration of the major audits was what was cancelled, not the audits themselves. On a required basis, the same audits that were done while that national audit program existed will continue today.

For example, there's a--

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

I have documentation saying that it's been cancelled.

I want to move on--

[Merlin Preuss]

The national audit program as an administrative construct has been cancelled, absolutely.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Yes, thank you.

I'd like to move on to the Windsor-Detroit corridor, please, Mr. Minister. There are news media reports today that the location of the next border crossing in the plaza has been sited on the Canadian side; the decision is made. Do you wish to confirm that situation? News media reports out of CBC, and now actually other news wires, are saying that the decision has been made on the Canadian side. Is that correct?

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

That is not correct. No decision has been made. That's of course a rumour, with unfounded sources. What I can say is that basically our intention....

You know, the environmental assessment taking place is somewhat different in the United States than in Canada. In the United States, the completion of that environmental assessment will be within the next couple of weeks, I'd say. Hopefully by the end of June, or maybe by the beginning of July, we'll be in a position to announce the location for the crossing.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

For the record, Mr. Minister, I recently held a meeting in Sandwich Towne on the border site crossing location. Consistent with what I've been saying for a number of years, nearly 200 people showed up and not a single person supported the plaza location and the actual bridge location that's in Sandwich Towne, by Sterling Fuels.

For those not aware of it, one of the locations has been narrowed down to a spot next to a fuelling depot for the Great Lakes, which is actually going to be potentially expanded. It also crosses over to another fuelling depot in the United States. I think that's a significant security risk. Second to that, it's in Sandwich Towne, so it would cost more, and it would actually disrupt the community. There is a consensus to support a crossing downstream, toward Brighton Beach. We're hopeful that this will be taken into consideration. It's important for the history of the fabric of that community and also national security.

I'd like to move toward a question. We do know that you have ministers out there right now; Minister Prentice is actually in the United States drumming up...or he's over there talking about the border. But the Auditor General's report yesterday actually brought up the concern over immigration and refugee safety issues. That story made the Washington Post and a number of Associated Press news wires in the United States. It raised the issue of security of Canada.

Now, Bill C-43 has been tabled by the Minister of Public Safety right now. That's also going to affect the customs process. How much money or how much consultation is involved with your department to ensure the free flow of traffic, goods, and services if we're going to be changing our inspection process as well?

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

What I can say is that clearly the officials in our department work with the officials in Minister Day's department. He, of course, as you know, has the lead on this specific issue. I can address questions that deal with transport, but on the very specific....

Deputy Minister, do you have any comments to formulate on Mr. Masse's question? Or does anybody...?

[Louis Ranger]

I certainly can say that we have an ongoing relationship. We consult each other on our mutual legislative proposals with CBSA regularly, weekly.

Our ADM of policy is Mrs. Burr, whose responsibility it is to maintain that relationship.

[Kristine Burr, Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy Group, Department of Transport]

Mr. Chair, the department is working closely with CBSA on a whole host of issues involved with the border. We are in regular communication. That doesn't mean we're always party to every element of what the agency is doing, but we're working closely on the DRIC process and on issues around border facilitation.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

What I would suggest is that, apart from this, you actually engage on Bill C-43. We know very well it doesn't matter how many booths you open; if you can't process, it actually costs jobs. So this is important, not only in terms of trucks that are entering Canada from the United States but also our own vehicles, and just-in-time. I would suggest that the department has to be very active on this. It doesn't matter how many bridges we build; if we don't actually have the processing down right, nothing will get through.

Minister, with regard to the office of P3, the last time you were here you said that this office would be developed and set in the first quarter. I'm concerned about that. It could delay the process more. In your speech here you actually note the Blue Water Bridge, where they actually didn't require any funds. That is a system right there where they do public bonding, where we own and operate the bridge in a public entity.

Why not drop the P3 concept for this border crossing and go with a successful model like Sarnia and Blue Water?

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

Let me come back to a couple of comments you made previously, Mr. Masse. Because you alluded to this project, I just want to reassure you about this project in particular in terms of job creation.

In the phases of construction, particularly the link between the 401 and the new crossing, this project will engage between 10,000 and 15,000 jobs in that area. As well, with the construction of the bridge we're talking about another 10,000 jobs that are going to be involved. So in that area of southern Ontario we're looking at 25,000 jobs over the next several years to be able to construct and to develop this new border crossing between Canada and the United States.

The question you're raising is a question we did discuss the other day. It's our opinion that when we seek to build this project, for instance, we are seeking public funds, of course, but we're also seeking a mechanism through which we can leverage private funds to be able to complete it.

We have examples. I've noted in my comments the Confederation Bridge, for instance, 30% of which is owned by a pension fund in this country. It is a private initiative whereby there is a leveraging of funds to be able to help and support and sustain new infrastructure in the country. Philosophically speaking, that is the direction and the intent that this government wants to take. We believe that's the right course of action.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Go ahead, Mr. Fast.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Mr. Minister and staff, for appearing.

I'd like to follow up on the questions that Mr. Volpe and Mr. Masse asked about the Auditor General's report. The Auditor General made a number of observations and recommendations regarding the implementation of safety management systems in the aviation sector.

First of all, what has been your response to those observations and recommendations? Have you accepted the recommendations? Have you responded to the observations?

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Fast.

I'll ask Merlin Preuss, as they change his name tag from Kris Burr to Merlin Preuss, to respond to that question.

[Merlin Preuss]

Thanks very much for the question.

The Auditor General's report and the recommendations that came from it have been accepted totally by the government. In many cases they were reinforcing things that we were already aware of in terms of weaknesses in our approach to putting the system in place.

I should note also this time that the Auditor General also took note of the fact that there's time to make the changes that she recommended. I can reinforce that because the SMS implementation is in its early stages, except for the airline sector and the large AMO sector, in relation to which we've now been at implementation for three years. We've learned a lot through that process, and we're applying those lessons learned as we go along.

Yes, the audit report is very helpful to us, and yes, we're going to do everything we can to put those recommendations in place--but no, we're not in a situation in which we've allowed anything to get away from us at this point.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

In her report, does the Auditor General ever challenge the underlying usefulness of SMS in improving aviation safety in Canada?

[Lawrence Cannon, Conservative, Pontiac, QC]

Absolutely not. There's no challenge on that. Indeed, she's saying that we're going in the right direction.

[Merlin Preuss]

Absolutely, Minister.