Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to address the committee on such an important issue.
I am here today representing the National Airlines Council of Canada, but I also work for one of that organization's members, Air Canada, and so some of my comments will relate to that experience in particular.
Let me at the outset commend the committee for taking the initiative to conduct this study. Certainly Canada's transportation infrastructure can and should be viewed as a powerful engine for economic development, and as such, some consideration of using public funds to build or support that infrastructure isn't inappropriate. So from the start, let me say that I'm not here to condemn high-speed rail or to oppose any idea simply for the sake of opposing it.
However, since a transportation mode that is developed and paid for out of public funds is not in itself a viable transportation industry, we believe we must find a balance among the various modes of transportation. We also believe that commercial air carriers' employees and passengers must be taken into consideration as well.
Consider the following. In 2008, Air Canada alone paid over $130 million to Nav Canada for their services. Excluding Jazz, we paid over $320 million in landing fees. Excluding Jazz again, we paid another $185 million in terminal assessments, and we collected directly from our passengers over $134 million to pay the air travellers security charge. We should also consider the over $300 million the Government of Canada collects in airport rent, for which no value is returned to the transport system, and the airport improvement fees passengers pay at Canadian facilities, which range from $7 to $40, with most being between $15 and $25, depending on the facility.
As you can see, the direction of aviation policy in Canada has enthusiastically embraced the user-pay model for air travel, so enthusiastically that the World Economic Forum ranks Canada a disappointing 122 out of 130 countries in terms of competitiveness on aviation fees and taxes. So we in aviation, who are firmly stuck in a user-pay model, become, I think understandably, concerned as an industry when we hear talk of a need for billions of dollars in public funds to be allocated to guarantee a reasonable return for the operator of a service like high-speed rail, against which we would be called to compete directly in several key markets.
Bluntly, we can't compete with an entity backed by the crown, and no private enterprise or business should be asked to do so. Key parts of our network would likely be jeopardized as a result.
The carriers who belong to the National Airlines Council of Canada currently employ over 43,900 people and carried over 58 million passengers last year, and this generated direct and indirect economic benefits in Canada amounting to several billion dollars.
We would enthusiastically welcome a discussion about how we can grow our business, employ more Canadians, and bring more visitors to Canada by reducing the competitive disadvantage we currently face as a result of having to pass the full cost of aviation infrastructure directly to our passengers. We would also be greatly troubled if public investment were used to create a modal disparity between air and rail, threatening the health of our companies and the jobs of our employees.
I will turn it over to my colleague from WestJet.