Transport Committee on Nov. 16th, 2010

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Certainly I do, but I'm also very concerned about where this is leading us to in terms of other arrangements that may be made between the U.S. and other countries.

Is there any sense that this information, once in the hands of the United States, could be passed on to other countries? Is there any guarantee that Canadian information...? As far as Canadian passengers who have their names on those lists or are put forward to U.S. Homeland Security, will the U.S. vet those names against other countries' international information systems? Will that expose Canadians to other risks in other countries?

[Vic Toews, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

All I can say at this point is that the Americans do apply their privacy laws to the information that has been compiled in this fashion; that the purpose of the information is for aviation security and terrorism purposes; that there are restrictions on their use of it; and that the privacy protections that are in place have been in place since the prior government first started providing that information to the Americans back in 2002.

On the privacy issue, nothing has changed. The only thing that this legislation changes is the fact that instead of only providing that same information, essentially the same information, when the plane lands in an American city, that same information is now provided when we cross over their airspace.

So the same protections apply. The same information is provided. The only difference is that there is no touchdown in an American airport; it is in another foreign country's airport. That's the only difference.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you.

Ms. Brown.

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will be sharing my time with Mr. Jean.

Minister, I think all of us are concerned about air travel and safety. Coming from a riding that's just north of Toronto, I know that a number of my constituents regularly travel to Buffalo now in order to access American flights.

So I guess this is my question. If we don't implement this, what will be the impact on our own airlines? Do we know what will happen to Air Canada or Air Transat flying out of Toronto, for instance?

[Vic Toews, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Right now, for example, your constituents, when they're travelling from Toronto to Buffalo, are already providing that information. What this will require is that same air flight going from Toronto...that same airline going from Toronto to a third country, whether it's Cuba, Mexico, or another country, if it crosses over airspace, that information has to be provided.

So we're not providing any substantially different information to the American authorities as a result of this legislation. The only difference is that there will be no touchdown in an American airport.

We can argue about whether or not that should be the case. We were able to obtain a very important exemption, in my opinion, for a Canadian travelling from Toronto to Winnipeg, for example, crossing over American airspace: that information is exempted.

Mr. Bevington might suggest that maybe we shouldn't exempt them; maybe we should include them, to be logical. Quite frankly, I think there are good reasons to exempt them, and we're very pleased that the Government of the United States has provided us with that exemption. I think it will be of great assistance to our transport industry.

[Lois Brown, Conservative, Newmarket—Aurora, ON]

So that being the case, why would anybody object to this, then?

[Vic Toews, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Well, in fairness, the providing of personal information to a foreign government is always a concern, and the providing of additional personal information in different circumstances is of concern. So I think it's legitimate for this committee to examine this, in much the way you have been. Are the privacy concerns met? Have the purposes for this information been clearly established? Under what circumstances is it provided?

Those are legitimate questions for this committee to ask. We, as the government, in fact have raised all of these questions with the Americans, and we have come to the conclusion that we obtained the concessions that we could. Now the Americans are saying, come the end of this year, the final rule is going into effect; if you don't comply, your planes do not cross our airspace.

So that's a trade-off. And we can say as Canadians, well, we're going to travel around the United States to go to Mexico. Well, you can imagine what that would do to the cost of airline tickets, the cost to the economy, the cost to all kinds of things. So this is an issue we have to weigh off. It's not something we control. We've been diligent. We worked hard, but this is the ultimate position we've been placed in and that's why we brought this bill forward.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I'm going to interrupt for one minute and recognize Mr. Bevington on a point of order.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Respectfully, on the minister's comments, I did not say that, and in fact I clarified myself very clearly about that. I would appreciate that witnesses do not put words in the mouths of us in our work here. It's difficult enough, the work we do, taking on these very complex issues, so I would appreciate that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you.

It's not a point of order but a point well made.

[Vic Toews, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

I think it's a good point.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Jean, you have three minutes.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First, I'd like to offer my congratulations, Minister, for a great job negotiating with the United States to ask for that exemption. I think it's great work indeed that you did that, and to take off exactly on what Mr. Bevington said, the very instance of that put forward by Mr. Bevington in relation to what's provided means that you did great work and your department did great work on that.

My first question is really a comment. I had a chance to meet with Air Canada and WestJet a couple of weeks ago, and they advised me that if this was not implemented, there would be somewhere in the neighbourhood of an increase in tickets of 40% to 50% for Canadians who are travelling to Mexico or to points in the south. I know when I look at an airline ticket, I'm very cognizant of how much it costs, so I think most Canadians would agree that this is a very necessary thing to do and very necessary, in fact, to get done before the end of this year.

So I want to congratulate you on that as well, and I think it's very important, especially in regard to what's taking place in Plattsburgh, New York, with Air Canada, and what's going on in Montreal and in Vancouver in Mr. Dhaliwal's riding. A lot of people are travelling by cars to south of the border and getting cheaper airline tickets. My comments would be that, indeed, Air Canada and WestJet have both identified to me that if this law is not implemented, that is going to accelerate far beyond what it currently is and I think that would be a real cash drain on our economy and certainly be an inconvenience to Canadians.

Now, my understanding also, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that we are actually going to be providing less than what is currently being provided on a passport. Is that fair? The law actually states, except for the airline information, the name, the birthdate, and the gender of the person are actually going to be provided and that's all that's going to be provided. But that is actually less than what is currently provided on a passport. Is that fair to say?

[Vic Toews, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

I'll let the official explain that. She knows the area better than I do.

[Kristina Namiesniowski]

Mr. Chairman, the mandatory information that must be provided is the name, date of birth, and gender of the individual. However, if the airline has information that the individual has provided to them related to their passport, passport number, as well as itinerary, among other bits of information that I think have been shared already with the committee, then the airline would be required to provide that as well.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

Okay.

And in fact these amendments that are being proposed are in relation to a bill from 2002 and implemented in 2004 by the previous Liberal government and actually only add 18 words. Is that fair to say?

[Vic Toews, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

As I've tried to make clear here, we aren't changing any of the privacy protections that were put in place by the prior Liberal government. Whatever privacy protections they negotiated with the Americans and the assurances they got are still in place. The only thing that is different is that we are now providing the information in respect of individuals who are crossing American airspace. This is a sovereignty issue for the Americans. It's their airspace. So we're providing this, as their law requires, by the end of this year.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you.

Mr. Dhaliwal.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the minister and his associates. Welcome.

Minister, did your government consult the Privacy Commissioner before bringing in this legislation?

[Vic Toews, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Yes, we did. We've had extensive discussions with the Privacy Commissioner. I think the Privacy Commissioner has expressed some concerns but ultimately recognized that this is an American law, not a Canadian law.

One of the officials could perhaps provide you some detail with respect to those conversations.

[Kristina Namiesniowski]

Yes, Mr. Chairman, I could offer that discussions took place with officials from the Office of the Privacy Commissioner back in April. Both Transport Canada as well as Public Safety had those discussions. We talked to them about the efforts that Canada had expended to try to secure the type of exemption that we have in the Secure Flight final rule and the number of discussions that we had with the U.S. government about our privacy concerns.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Thank you.

Minister, you mentioned you have received an exemption from Secure Flight from one Canadian destination to the other destination. When did you get that exemption, and is that implemented by Air Canada and WestJet? I recently ran into someone in Montreal who was complaining that this had still not been implemented.

[Vic Toews, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Remember, Secure Flight has not been implemented yet. It's going to be implemented at the end of this year. I don't know what the individual you spoke to would have been talking about other than it could have been associated with a flight from, let's say, Montreal to an American city. As of today, the airlines are not required to provide that information in overflight situations. As a result of the final rule coming into effect sometime at the end of this year or early next year...and I don't have an exact date, I should be clear on that, but that's what the Homeland Security Secretary has made clear to me, that it would be in that time.

So that's all I can provide on that. The individual must be mistaken in terms of his or her concerns about that.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Okay.

On another note, the European Parliament told the commission to renegotiate its overflight data-sharing with the U.S. because there weren't enough privacy protections. Will the EU receive additional privacy protections that Canada did not or will not?

[Vic Toews, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

I'm not aware of any concessions that the Europeans would have received that we did not receive. In fact we would have received the concession of the Canadian-city-to-Canadian-city exemption.

The law itself, the final rule, is a law of the United States. I don't really see how the government, the administration, the White House, or whoever could provide any further exemptions in that respect.

Perhaps some of the officials might respond to that.