Evidence of meeting #4 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 toyota.
A recording is available from Parliament.
10:45 a.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Mr. Chair, I was going to suggest to Ms. Crombie that if she did want to get answers to those questions from Canada Post, she should write a letter to Minister Merrifield, and I'm certain the answers would be forthcoming.
10:45 a.m.
Bloc
Luc Desnoyers Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
I'd like to come back to the subject of CATSA. Who is responsible for CATSA?
10:45 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Transport
Actually, we are responsible for CATSA, as it's within our portfolio. I am the portfolio deputy minister, but I am not the accounting officer for CATSA, and I'm not the manager of CATSA. We have a regulatory function for which Mr. McDonald is responsible. Our view of aviation safety and security comes from the regulatory side, but we also answer for them because we have the portfolio responsibility.
10:50 a.m.
Bloc
Luc Desnoyers Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Basically, you're responsible for all security considerations. This issue always worries me a great deal.
I touched on the various complaints from people about security, about the lack of personnel and about the frustration that people experience. A while ago, I asked some questions about the number of subcontractors. I was told that this information would be provided to me. I would like to know how these contracts are awarded to subcontractors. Do the same rules respecting subcontractors apply from coast to coast?
I'm also interested in how these subcontractors are managed, in terms of security at various locations, not only strategic ones but also on bases across Canada. I'd like some assurances that this information will be forwarded to me as soon as possible.
Finally, I'm interested in body scanners. Earlier, some questions were raised about body scanners. Apparently, an American company was awarded the contract. I'd like to know the name of that company and who runs it. When these contracts were awarded, were steps taken to ensure that there would be some Canadian spinoffs from these contracts? Or, will equipment maintenance also be done by the same American company? What kind of maintenance costs are we looking at? Why can't the maintenance be done in Canada? I would imagine that the cost of servicing this equipment is quite high, if the scanners are not replaced every six months. I would like answers to these questions in writing.
10:50 a.m.
Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Safety and Security Group, Department of Transport
Certainly, Mr. Chair, we'll make that available in writing.
I can answer a few of the questions posed. For others, I think the answers should probably come from CATSA itself.
First of all, with respect to the number of companies that are subcontracted to provide screening services, across the country CATSA has contracts with 11 companies to provide screening services at the 89 airports at which they're supposed to be providing that service.
With respect to the contracting, CATSA follows standard Government of Canada contracting rules, and I'm sure they can provide you with more information on their exact processes for the letting of those contracts.
10:50 a.m.
Bloc
Luc Desnoyers Bloc Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC
Earlier, mention was made of a 20% to 25% cost saving. I'd like to know what comparison was made to arrive at this figure? Is the figure based on the number of employees in Canada who used to handle security services?
How did you arrive at this projected cost savings of between 20% and 25%, as Mr. Merrifield stated earlier? I'd also like to see that document.
10:50 a.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Transport
We will get you the information from CATSA.
10:50 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
Thank you.
I'm going to end the meeting now and thank our guests for attending. I'm sure we'll cross paths in the future. Thank you very much.
Just for the committee's interest, on Tuesday we will be holding a subcommittee meeting. It was requested of all members to submit their priorities. Please submit them before 5 p.m. today for discussion on Monday.
Mr. Volpe has a motion that is on the record.
10:55 a.m.
Liberal
Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
Mr. Chairman, you know that my motion's been before the committee for several days. It is very specific. I don't think you need me to read it again.
For all honourable members, especially those on the government side, we were given an indication by the minister that he would make available any and all information. He enumerated a compendium of information. I believe I heard him say as well that he would provide all of the material that's in that motion. I think it should be fairly easy for us to simply accept the motion, because the minister has already included it in the spirit of the information he's willing to put forward. I think we can agree to it by consensus.
10:55 a.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
As always, whenever Mr. Volpe brings up issues of such importance the government of course will agree. In this case it's no different. So we agree with his motion.
10:55 a.m.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
As the minister indicated, the helmsman of the committee here has put forward a motion that covers a number of particular areas. “Helmsman” is a concept that I'm still trying to grasp. If it means that he's at the back of the ship looking forward, I hope that's good. I hope that his information will follow.
10:55 a.m.
Bloc
Roger Gaudet Bloc Montcalm, QC
Will we receive a translation in both official languages? Will everyone receive it at the same time?
10:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
I know that the motion reads that the report will follow in French. Based on the timelines that were provided by the minister today, we will wait until it's in French and English to present it to the committee.
Is that reasonable?
10:55 a.m.
Bloc
Roger Gaudet Bloc Montcalm, QC
So then, versions in both official languages will be tabled to the committee at the same time. Otherwise, I will object. We've already had a bit of a problem on that score.
10:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
I would ask Mr. Volpe if he would consider a friendly amendment that the report arrive at the same time in French and English.
10:55 a.m.
Liberal
Joe Volpe Liberal Eglinton—Lawrence, ON
It's always the intention of every member of this committee that all information arrive to every member simultaneously. Last week the Bloc members accepted information by the department, even though it wasn't all translated. Some of the documentation was in French, some of it was in English. I think the intent at the time was to receive information as quickly as possible, and they accepted it. I hope that the same spirit will prevail while we accept that the government is trying to make sure that everything is available in both official languages.
10:55 a.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
I would like to propose a friendly amendment that the document be in both French and English. I hope that Mr. Volpe will accept this friendly amendment. I certainly don't think we should treat our friends in the Bloc, or just French-speaking people, any differently. We should wait until it's translated properly according to the rules of all parliamentary committees.