I think the question we're wrestling with here is the nature of the relationship between you, Air Canada, and Aveos.
It would appear to me, in my paralegal mind, not my lawyer-like mind, that you've assigned an agent to fulfill your obligations under the act, and this is where it gets murky. You have an agent now who's doing the maintenance, not Air Canada. The Air Canada Public Participation Act only applies to Air Canada; therefore, Aveos cannot be held liable or held to any standard within that responsibility. Aveos does not have any responsibility.
I'm trying to bridge the gap as to whether or not you structured a relationship with your agent in terms of fulfilling your commitments. It appears to me that you did not.
So I would agree with Mr. Jean that's it's a terribly drafted law, in that it's not inclusive of the intent of Parliament at the time. You're leaving me with the sense that we need to amend the law and actually hammer down how you deal with your agents, so that this confusion or ambiguity can't be allowed to continue.
Do you have anything you could offer us as to how you structure your relationship with your agents so that we can feel confident, above and beyond your simple statements about being in compliance, that there are mechanisms to make sure you're in compliance?