Transport Committee on Dec. 7th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you, and good morning, everyone.

Welcome to the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities. This is meeting number 41, pursuant to the order of reference of Tuesday, October 26, 2010, on Bill C-42, an act to amend the Aeronautics Act.

I want to bring to the committee's attention that I've circulated a budget for the extra meetings that we're having. It's to provide for witnesses to get here to present. I need someone to move the budget, if they would, so that we can move on to the rest of the--

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Newton--North Delta, Lib.]

So moved.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you. Mr. Dhaliwal has moved it.

(Motion agreed to) [See Minutes of Proceedings]

Now back to the order of business.

Joining us today from the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness are Kristina Namiesniowski, Caroline Fobes, and Chris Gregory; and from the Department of Transport, Isabelle Desmartis. Welcome.

When we left the last meeting we were discussing amendment BQ-2, moved by Monsieur Guimond. There was some debate taking place, and I'm going to open the floor to further debate or call the question.

Are we ready? Okay.

(Amendment negatived)

We will now move to amendment BQ-3.

Monsieur Guimond.

[Michel Guimond, Bloc, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The intent of this amendment is to recognize in the act the principle of reciprocity between states. That is, Canada must be able to require the same things from states whose aircraft use our airspace as the Americans require. In broad terms, that is the intent of the amendment.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Thank you, Mr. Guimond.

I'm advised by counsel that the amendment is inadmissible. It goes beyond the scope of the bill and introduces a new concept that was not present at second reading.

We will now move to amendment LIB-1.

Mr. McCallum.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Actually, it's Mr. Dhaliwal's.

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

No, I already moved it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Yes, but would you like to explain it?

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

During the testimony, Mr. Chair, we learned that the law requiring that passengers on overflights be notified that the information will be transmitted to the U.S. government is under the American law. I would like to see that in the regulations. It should be enshrined in Canadian law so that if this thing is stopped or repelled by the U.S., we should be able to notify the Canadian passengers.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Is there any comment?

Mr. Jean.

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

Yes, Mr. Chair.

I have had an opportunity to review Mr. Dhaliwal's proposed amendments. As well, after hearing the witnesses and speaking to Mr. Bevington and listening to Mr. Guimond in relation to this particular section, what I would like to do is propose an alternative to Mr. Dhaliwal's motion. I will read that into the record.

The operator of an aircraft that is due to fly over, but not land in, the United States must notify all persons who are on board or expected to be on board the aircraft that information relating to them may be provided to a competent authority in the United States in accordance with subsection (1).

You'll note, Mr. Chair, that motion NDP-1 was ruled out of order by you, with a reference to the United States. But after listening to witnesses and the concerns of the NDP and the Bloc, the government is prepared to move this amendment to replace amendment LIB-1, if it's satisfactory to the Liberals to do so. I think it is, bluntly, consistent with what the Bloc has been pushing forward, and also with the NDP's line of questioning of the witnesses.

I understand what you may do in relation to this, Mr. Chair, but I am proposing that. Depending on what your ruling is in relation to this, we'll deal with it accordingly.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I would ask you to read it into the record one more time, slowly.

You are suggesting that this would be--

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

A replacement.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

--a replacement. So we're talking about removing LIB-1 and replacing it with this.

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

So, again:

The operator of an aircraft that is due to fly over, but not land in, the United States must notify all persons who are on board or expected to be on board the aircraft that information relating to them may be provided to a competent authority in the United States in accordance with subsection (1).

That is what I think I've been listening to from the Bloc and the NDP, exactly along those lines. I understand that.... Well, I don't understand, Mr. Chair. Are you going to make a ruling in respect of this?

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

The amendment proposed by the Liberals is in order, but obviously if they're agreeable to withdraw their amendment and substitute it with this, then we can move forward.

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

I do.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I see agreement.

Mr. Bevington.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

I'd simply say that if the parliamentary secretary takes a look at NDP-2, the notification for the United States is in that under (1.1), so we have that in the NDP motion and it's clear there. This doesn't actually go toward the motion that we had overturned. That motion was to limit this bill simply to sharing information with the United States. Now, if the parliamentary secretary can explain how his amendment limits this bill to sharing information with the United States, I'll be happy to hear that.

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

My understanding of the amendment itself, and possibly the officials will have an opportunity to look at it, is that because the United States is specifically named, it would limit it to the United States. It would give no authority to allow it to share it with any other country, because it's only allowing it to share with the United States.

I'd be happy to provide that to you. I've got a copy of it in French as well, if it would please the Bloc to have that.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Perhaps we could get a ruling from the counsel.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

It's the opinion of the chair that the proposed amendment by the government is in order, and we can open the floor to debate or we can call the question.

Mr. Bevington.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

I'd certainly like to get clarification on whether this amendment will limit this bill to simply sharing of information with the United States. Does that mean that by inserting this clause, it limits the sharing of information with other foreign states?

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Jean.

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

My understanding—and I'm not an expert on this—is that we have no other authority, except for this bill, to share information with any other country. I don't know if the officials.... Ms. Fobes?