Transport Committee on March 18th, 2010

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Thank you very much for your question. I appreciate your concern on this issue. You and Mr. Masse have worked for many years on it.

We support SMS. I think it is important that the department do a much better job of working with its inspectors. They are the backbone of the system. I think the deputy and I are on the same page in that we've done a lot more listening. We've done a lot better at explaining the direction we'd like to go in with respect to SMS.

The effort on self-regulation was not an effort of this government. It predated our government's arrival. I'm not critical of that decision to do it. I was concerned.... The group in question is a good one. They have decent people who are well-meaning. But when you have a lobby group being the regulator, I found that to be a bit of a conflict. On the TSB report, with respect to the plane that carried--

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

But don't you find the incidents that occurred with business jets to be of the most concern rather than simply a lobby group handling these safety issues...? We've had major incidents with business jets.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

I don't know about major incidents, but there was an uptake in it. The TSB report on the incident involving Ron Joyce, the Tim Hortons founder, was particularly powerful, and it was one of the reasons, in addition to the eight points you raised.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

There was A.D. Williams in Alberta as well.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Yes. I'm not going to argue with you. That's why we're taking it back. I would rather--

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Okay. So it's not just simply about a lobby group. It's about actual aviation safety.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Yes, that's the whole reason--

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

That is the whole concern we have here.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

That is 100 percent--

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Okay. That's good.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Frankly, I don't mind saying that you can take some credit.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

I can move on now.

But I would like to know whether you're planning a review, because that is the question I asked. Are you planning a review of major carriers to determine the effectiveness of SMS for the 99% of Canadians who travel by air?

[Yaprak Baltacioglu]

As the minister said, for the last number of months we have gone across the country, and my staff and I have met over 500 inspectors. We're talking to our unions. We're talking to the industry. We are already conducting that review, and we have taken steps, the steps that you have mentioned, as a result of that work.

This is an ongoing effort. We have to make sure that industry will comply and can comply, and we, as regulators, are well equipped--and our staff is well equipped--to deal with that.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Then maybe we should get you in front of the committee here and understand exactly the nature of the review that you are conducting.

When it comes to aviation security, I know this issue certainly must be in front of cabinet, because there are some cabinet members who are not very happy with aviation security in this country and who don't view the way we're conducting it.... I agree with you to an extent, and I agree with the assessment that the honourable Minister of State made in saying that the system was ramped up after 9/11 and a lot of these decisions are knee-jerk. We need to go back and look at aviation security to understand what is effective and what works for people.

The frustration that travellers may feel sometimes at the way security is carried out is legitimate, and we need to have some understanding of where we're going with this system. Quite clearly, if you or your department had attended the forum that the Liberals and I conducted during the prorogation, you would have seen that the experts are saying that our system is not correct. It's not working. If I could characterize the aviation security system at airports, it's a Maginot line. It can be gone around very easily. Perhaps when you talk about behavioural identification, you're starting to realize that we need to identify threat, rather than simply provide a public relations gesture when someone enters the airport. That is extremely important, and I hope your review will take that into account.

[Rob Merrifield, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

You're absolutely right in the sense of taking the shotgun approach. It's the international standards that we're trying to keep up with, and we can't be the weak link in that.

Behaviour observation is more of a single-shot approach, in the sense that you're looking at trying to pick out those individuals who could be potential hazards to security. That's one of the reasons we're doing the review. That's one of the reasons we added significant layers since the attack in December.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

I have one last question--

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

We welcome your thoughts and the thoughts of the committee with respect to the review of CATSA and its operations. I want to see us review every single rule we have.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

I have one more question, please, Mr. Minister.

On the Toyota material, you didn't mention the correspondence. What I wanted to see from the Toyota material was the correspondence between Toyota and Transport Canada prior to the press release issued on November 26. There was a press release from Transport Canada indicating they were working with Toyota Canada on these issues. I'd like to see the correspondence not just on the recall, but on all the work that was going on prior to that on this particular issue.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

We will give you everything you're asking for, including all e-mails. That was one of the things I raised in my conversation with Mr. Volpe. We will make it all available to you as quickly as is humanly possible.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Thank you very much, sir.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Go ahead, Ms. Brown.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Merrifield, you've got mail.

The post office comes under your responsibility, and I know that there's been considerable discussion there. You know Canada Post has historically been one of those institutions that has created great connectivity among Canadians. It's really been part of the social fabric that we have had as a benefit of a country. My understanding is that Canada Post still has one of the lowest rates for postal service in all of the developed countries, and it's a tremendous benefit to us.

Mail is changing. Technology has changed. We all receive mail in different means now, but I know the Liberals have a motion in the House that mail delivery has to continue to historic mail boxes in rural areas of the country.

I grew up in a rural area. Mail service was anticipated and anxiously awaited, I would say. We even had Saturday delivery at one time. I wonder if you could tell the committee what steps the government has taken to protect mail delivery in our rural areas.

[Rob Merrifield, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Sure. That's a very good question, and it's a concern of anyone who lives in rural Canada.

We brought in a service charter, as you recall, in September to make sure we have a universal system and that there's an obligation on behalf of Canada Post. It's the first time, actually, in the history of the country that we have an agreement with Canada Post, and they've agreed to deliver on certain criteria according to their charter. When it comes to end-of-lane delivery, and this is the real issue, we have put forward a directive to Canada Post saying that we want every one of those mailboxes retained in their original position prior to 2005, to comply with the law. If they don't comply with the law and they put the mail carrier at risk, and it's not safe as deemed by the Labour Board of Canada, then there's no option there.

Eighty-eight percent of those who have been analyzed stay right as they are, so the 12% have to be changed, moved in some way, because they don't comply with the labour codes. Those are the ones where some people will get a little upset because they may have to travel a little farther, maybe to a community box that is half a mile away or maybe a few hundreds yards away, depending on where you're at in the rural area.

Our objective is to make sure that every safe mailbox is retained, and we hold Canada Post to that. It is something they're complying with. This analyzing and moving the boxes is not cheap for Canada Post. It costs them somewhere between $250 million and $300 million to actually analyze and assess these boxes, so they would prefer to leave them where they're at as well. This is really about safety and making sure that these men and women who are neighbours and friends who carry the mail in the rural areas are protected and are safe.

We've actually had 120 auto accidents since 2005 and we've had three deaths, so this is fairly serious. There's no one who wants to get their mail in the rural communities.... I live in a rural area as well, and I wouldn't want to put my letter carrier at risk, and I don't think anyone in Canada does either. This is something we are working very aggressively at. Actually, only 6% of the population of Canada gets their mail via rural delivery, and 88% of those are not going to change, so we're talking about a very small number. But people habitually get their mail in a certain way and they don't like to get it changed in any way, so we understand that.

[John Baird, Conservative, Ottawa West—Nepean, ON]

Could I just jump in on one quick point to validate? I found it ridiculous that they couldn't continue rural mail for every single house. They've been doing it for years. I thought it was crazy, and it sounded like a lot of baloney. Minister Merrifield had arranged for me to go out with Canada Post folks, not half an hour from Parliament Hill, to see it for myself. There are some areas of the country where, with the topography, these are not small rural roads any more. They're now major thoroughfares and we have cars zooming by. I said we'll just put the mailbox a hundred feet off the road so that we can maintain delivery. When we went out to actually physically do it, they couldn't even get up the road because their road wasn't plowed.

I would encourage all members, if you have any interest in this file, to take Canada Post up on their offer and physically go and see it. I didn't believe it at all until I physically went to see it. Forget the legal consequences and the moral consequences. I couldn't live with myself if some postal carrier was killed because we made some sort of political edict that at all cost this had to be maintained. I would encourage members to do it. When you see it yourself, you really understand it.

[Rob Merrifield, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

With regard to that, I sent a letter to each of you in this committee--I believe every senator and member of Parliament--encouraging you to go on a ride-along, because the more you become informed about this issue, the more you'll understand it and be able to help your constituents.