Evidence of meeting #35 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was information.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:40 a.m.
Board of Directors Member, National Airlines Council of Canada
No. When you go to check in, when we issue a boarding pass, we are checking your name against the U.S. no-fly list. We are executing a simple identification exercise, which is whether we can confirm that you are who you say you are.
11:40 a.m.
NDP
11:40 a.m.
Board of Directors Member, National Airlines Council of Canada
Well, the U.S. transmits to us the list of names that we are to monitor. We don't have access to the U.S. no-fly list—
11:40 a.m.
NDP
11:40 a.m.
Board of Directors Member, National Airlines Council of Canada
We can certainly do it well in advance of the flight so long as information is transmitted to us. For instance, at Air Canada we use the aeroplan number as a differentiator to determine identity, whether you are who you say you are. But yes, it is our intention, absolutely, just for the sake of good customer service, to identify as far in advance as we possibly can that you are not an exact match to that U.S. no-fly list.
11:40 a.m.
Board of Directors Member, National Airlines Council of Canada
Just to be clear, too, under the Secure Flight regulations, you will transmit that data 72 hours prior to, if you have the data. You know people purchase tickets within that 72-hour window.
Just to be clear in terms of the information the air carrier receives, we do not receive any information about that individual and whatever accusations or concerns may arise. We are given the direction that you can either issue a boarding pass, issue a boarding pass requiring secondary screening, or deny a boarding pass. If it is deny a boarding pass, then that reservation is automatically locked out so that individual has to speak to a representative of the airline. For obvious privacy reasons, we are not given the information as to why they have shown up. We then provide them with the contact information for whichever regulatory authority; it could be the TSA, it could be Transport Canada, if it's passenger protect. That individual then deals directly with the appropriate regulatory body.
11:40 a.m.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
Certainly we checked your websites, all the four carriers, and there was a considerable difference in the way you treat disclosure of the information. I think only Air Transat really nailed it and told people exactly what was going on. In fact the other sites are much more difficult. They take a detailed reading to understand what's going on with their information. I think that's something that might be pointed out, because it's not a uniform treatment in the aviation industry towards this information disclosure. It may be that there should be some legislation that really outlines how any of that information is.... It may need more clarification.
Now for the Tourism Industry Association, I have your business plan for 2009. On page 20 you say:
Security considerations post 9-11 have triumphed over the free movement of people with the result that many people in both Canada and the United States have cut back on their discretionary travel. The border is now widely seen as cumbersome, bureaucratic and expensive to traverse.
And we've seen that the number of visitations from the United States to Canada has dropped by half. Do you really think that by continuing to push the security button here, we're going to do anything for tourism in the future in this country? Or do we need to start to open up a different dialogue with our American friends in order to get this border straightened out?
11:45 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Tourism Industry Association of Canada
I think Bill C-42 in isolation is one step towards greater harmonization of rules and regulations on travel back and forth. That's obviously our biggest concern.
11:45 a.m.
NDP
11:45 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Tourism Industry Association of Canada
No, but figuring out—
11:45 a.m.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
It's not going to change anything for the people coming from the United States to Canada.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
11:45 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Tourism Industry Association of Canada
Respectfully, allowing border passage is an important issue. I think the point is that if you'd read on in the document, one of our long-term objectives is to find a perimeter solution to North America, much like they have in the EU, so people can travel freely.
It has had a huge impact, especially in border communities: the 604 area, the Lower Mainland of British Columbia, southwestern Ontario, and eastern Quebec. It has had a huge impact on those tourism numbers. I think what we have to do is figure out a way with the Americans and with other allied countries to figure out what our policies and regulations will be so that we can return to a freer flow of traffic back and forth.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, witnesses, for coming today.
As is known by all the politicians around the table, all politics is local. I have to say, Ms. Pillay, I have a mayor of Slave Lake with the same last name, and I'm wondering if you're related.
11:45 a.m.
Director, National Security Program, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
No, not to my knowledge.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Oh, that's too bad. She's an excellent mayor, second term, and it's very good to work with her.
I do have to say, though, since politics is local, that I would hate to be the politician who stood in the way of my constituents flying through the United States, or going through airspace and having to go that four hours around. I have to tell you that I've heard very little concern about this. But I will say, after listening to your testimony and the testimony of the other witnesses, that I feel like we're talking about different bills.
In essence, I'm a lawyer by trade, as is Monsieur Guimond, and the thing about lawyers is that when you get three of them in the room, you get nine different opinions. And I don't think this is any different. You may ask why, but there are always a couple of opinions I have afterwards.
Certainly what we're talking about is safety versus privacy. You'll agree that Canada is a signatory of the international convention of 1944, the Chicago Convention. Is that correct? We are signatories of that?
11:45 a.m.
Director, National Security Program, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
Yes.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
The United States is a signatory as well, which confirms that all signatories of that Chicago Convention are the masters of their own airspace. They're legislative masters of their own airspace. Is that correct?
11:45 a.m.
Director, National Security Program, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
Canada agrees with that, and so do we.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Yes.
In this case, we're talking about people who are voluntarily taking planes to go over U.S. airspace. So they voluntarily have to comply with the laws, and we have signed on to that. That's why I feel we're talking about different--
11:45 a.m.
Director, National Security Program, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
May I clarify what I think you're getting at?
11:45 a.m.
Director, National Security Program, Canadian Civil Liberties Association
We completely agree that the U.S. has sovereignty over their airspace. We're not challenging their sovereignty, but the issue of privacy also has to be dealt with.
11:45 a.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
I understand, Ms. Pillay. But with respect, all of these people who are taking those planes are voluntarily entering U.S. airspace, so by nature they have to comply with that law.
I want to confirm my position. If I'm getting on a plane voluntarily, and I have decided to take a plane that's going to enter U.S. airspace, which I obviously know beforehand, then I should have to comply with their laws. It seems to make a lot of sense to me.
I want to talk about a few other things. I had a chance to meet with Air Transat, and I'm sure you heard what they had to say. They told me, in essence, that if this law doesn't pass by January they're going to be bankrupt. That's what they told me, right across the table. This frightened me, because our airline industry is currently not in the greatest financial shape.
