Transport Committee on March 3rd, 2011

[Gerry Byrne, Liberal, Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, NL]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

On the point of order itself, it seems to me there's absolutely no doubt there is a federal jurisdiction involved in a matter of federal governance over the Canadian transportation system. The federal government provided opportunities for the Greater Toronto Airport Authority to enact, to the benefit of all Canadians, an effective and efficient airport system. For all practical purposes, it is Canada's largest airport, handling the greatest number of aircraft, passengers, and freight cargo in the entire country.

There's a dispute that stems in part from the approach that airport authority has taken in dealing with some of its suppliers. I say “in part” very deliberately. As a member of this committee, I would like to analyze and determine if there is cause for further study.

There is a very broad motion before us, and you will determine if it is in order or not. It's very targeted in terms of the timeframe this committee is prepared to allot to investigate it. But it seems to me that in its scope and general application, it's totally in keeping and consistent with other studies this committee has undertaken.

I would caution you as chair about ruling that because a quasi-judicial function will be conducted some time in the future, it is inappropriate for this committee to hear witnesses involved in that.

I'll raise a hypothetical example. Say, for example, that during the conduct of the study on rail safety there was a dispute between railway personnel and the company over a serious safety issue and as a result there was a work stoppage. We would effectively be suggesting that we would be unable to draw in, as witnesses, those who were involved in that issue while we were conducting the study on changes, amendments, or proposed amendments to the Canada Railway Safety Act. That would not be a very healthy situation for this committee to find itself in.

From that point of view, I would simply say we're not studying legislation or any particular matter; we are studying a situation that is understood and known to be under way at an airport authority that has been granted certain rights and privileges as a result of a decision of the Government of Canada.

I would like to know, as a member of this Standing Committee on Transportation, Infrastructure and Communities, whether or not our fiduciary responsibility as a government and a committee is being acted upon to determine whether or not those powers, rights, responsibilities, and privileges granted to the airport authority are acceptable.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I have two more names on the list, and then I am prepared to make a ruling.

Mr. Warkentin.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. You're probably talking about the general motion at this point. I don't want to speak to whether or not it's in order, except to ask a question.

Mr. Byrne spoke about the necessity of investigating airport authorities, but I recall from Ms. Dhalla's comments that it's McIntosh who is the owner of the company in dispute right now. I don't know if McIntosh is a subsidiary of the Toronto Airport Authority or if it falls under provincial regulation, or even city regulation, as it applies to these permits and labour laws. I'm not sure where the federal aspect comes into this. It seems very tenuous, at best.

Maybe if there were a motion that asked the committee to review the application of transportation by airport authorities across the country, that might be a bit more in line with the mandate of this committee. If that were the case, I have some issues I'd like to bring up from my own airports.

There was another case that the City of Calgary recently dealt with relating to the cabs and limousines at that airport. I looked into whether there was federal involvement in that, and I was hard pressed to find any issue the federal government could be involved in as it relates to those transportation sectors. Once people are outside the airport, there is nothing that the federal government regulates.

I really don't see how this could possibly fall under the federal jurisdiction, unless I'm missing something. Maybe the federal government owns McIntosh, or maybe the airport authority owns McIntosh. Or maybe the federal government has given McIntosh some money. If that's the case, then I think we better follow the money, and maybe my committee of government operations and estimates would do that.

I don't know if McIntosh is owned wholly or in part by the airport authority or if it's owned in part or wholly by the federal government. That's the only way I could see that the cab companies would fall under review of this committee or a committee of the federal Parliament.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I'm going to ask Ms. Dhalla to respond.

[Ruby Dhalla, Liberal, Brampton—Springdale, ON]

McIntosh is not owned by either the GTAA or the federal government. The responsibility does stop with the GTAA, which is ultimately the responsibility of the Government of Canada and the Department of Transport in terms of the manner in which they're issuing licences to these individuals or employers.

[Chris Warkentin, Conservative, Peace River, AB]

Mr. Chair, I thought Ms. Dhalla spoke about the dispute being between the drivers and McIntosh. It relates to the purchasing and selling of cars without any paperwork, the dispatching fees the drivers are being charged by McIntosh, and the exorbitant fees they're having to pay for the refurbishment of cars.

I see that as a dispute between the drivers, who are independent business owners, and the company, which is obviously a private commercial entity. The federal government owns no part of it, nor does the airport authority.

I still don't understand how the federal government would get involved with this. Should the federal government step in to say that the federal government should now own all of those cars? Or should the federal government get involved to say that the government would now regulate how much the company could charge its independent operators for refurbishment of cars? Or should the government regulate the dispatching fee?

I don't know what the end result would be, or what this committee could recommend. If it's simply to say we're going to be a peacemaker, I don't know of any time that the federal government has been involved and the end result was that they said “Okay, we'll make peace because you guys make a lot more sense than we do.”

I just don't see where the federal involvement is.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

The list is continuing to grow.

I would like to take the time to get more legal advice on this. I will rule at the beginning of the next meeting, if that's suitable, which would be Tuesday. Okay?

Are there any other comments?

The meeting is adjourned.