Transport Committee on March 8th, 2011

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

Well, let's talk about what happened at Marine Atlantic, then. Is it true that Fleetway and Ocean Engineering Consultants were hired to figure out a strategic model for the fleet configuration?

You talk about life support. I want to ask you a question. Why was the Transport Canada and Marine Atlantic decision to actually build four new vessels in Canada overturned? I'm going to refer to specifics.

On May 24, 2006, the president's report to the meeting of the board of directors of Marine Atlantic reads, and I'm quoting:

Representatives of the Canadian Shipyards were in North Sydney on March 14th to attend briefings with John Lochhead and Alan Leonarduzzi. These representatives of approximately five shipyards in Canada have expressed interest in bidding on our new fleet.

On April 17, 2006, in the minutes of the meeting of the board of directors of Marine Atlantic, Mr. Flood, who was then president, suggested that the board make a recommendation to Transport Canada that Marine Atlantic require four vessels and that these four vessels be identical, 175 metres in length, not two football fields. There was a resolution that reads:

BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Board of Directors recommends to the Department of Transport that Marine Atlantic Inc.'s fleet replacement consist of four new vessels [made in Canada].

MOTION: Moved by Don Warr and seconded by Robert Sampson. Motion carried.

On August 3, 2006, sir, this is from the minutes of the board of directors again. It reads:

There was then a general discussion about Transport Canada's expressed wish that the refits and the new construction be completed within Canada, probably at significantly greater cost to the Corporation than if performed in Europe. Four shipyards within Canada had been identified as possible sites for this work to be undertaken. It was agreed that this was a public policy decision that the stakeholder was entitled to make and that the Board [of Directors] would be guided by instructions.....

These vessels are not the first choice of Marine Atlantic or Transport Canada. They're the second choice, Mr. Minister. How do you explain that?

[Rob Merrifield, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Let me help you out with that, because you left Marine Atlantic on life support--

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

I quoted the minutes of the board of directors to help me out with that--

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Order, order.

Thank you.

[Rob Merrifield, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

It's unfortunate, because of what happened there, the time to build a new vessel.... Can you imagine what would have happened? Do you realize that when we first got Marine Atlantic their on-time performance was about 10%. That's how ridiculous it was.

We brought in the Atlantic Vision, which, thank goodness, we were able to do within two years after we took office. If we hadn't had that, Marine Atlantic would not have been able to supply the service at all for the people of Atlantic Canada.

And then we're bringing in two new vessels this year, which actually revitalized their entire fleet, as well as the Leif Ericson, which is actually an $18 million retrofit this year.

So if you had gone with the Liberal decision--

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

Our original decision--

[Rob Merrifield, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

--it would have been a disaster, and worse than what it already was. And thank goodness for the people of Atlantic Canada, we didn't follow that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

All right. Thank you.

[Rob Merrifield, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

We followed something that dealt with the problems there immediately.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I have to advise members to please address your comments through the chair. I would ask that you please respect the chair when he asks for order.

Monsieur Gaudet.

[Roger Gaudet, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister, do you believe that Air Canada is one of the safest airlines in the world?

[Chuck Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC]

It has a very good record and it is one of the best companies in the world when it comes to safety. I think they have a very proud record. And of course we work closely with them, as we do with all airlines in Canada, to make sure they maintain that.

[Roger Gaudet, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Earlier, you said there was a wonderful shared future for Aveos and Air Canada. If both are privatized, on what basis will the country demand that the new Air Canada/Aveos consortium—or Aveos/Air Canada, it makes no difference—comply with the Official Languages Act and keep the jobs we have in Montreal, Mississauga and Winnipeg? What power would the government hold in that situation?

[Chuck Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Do you mean when it comes to respecting the official languages policy? On what part of it are you...?

[Roger Gaudet, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

I am talking about all of the repercussions of a merger of the two companies. I repeat what you said earlier. You said that Aveos and Air Canada have a rosy future together, that the two companies go together well.

I am thinking of what will happen two years down the road, in 2013, when the contract ends. What will happen to the 4,500 employees, the Air Canada machinists? What will happen to the indirect jobs? You have to remember that, in Canada, if you add the indirect jobs to the 4,500 people who work for Air Canada, that adds up to 50,000 or 60,000 people. If the company moves to another country, what will happen to our jobs?

You have been telling me for some time now that they have been privatized. I want you to explain to me what power we have in this context. If memory serves, we invested a great deal of money in Air Canada, when the company resorted to bankruptcy protection. I would like to know what we will get back from all that.

[Chuck Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC]

It has not been a government entity for decades. Air Canada, although “Air Canada” is a crown-corporation-sounding name, is not a crown corporation. It's a private company, publicly traded, that has to adhere to all the rules just like anybody else does in Canada, any other airline in Canada, with the additional requirements that come under the Air Canada Public Participation Act. They know that. They respect that. When I speak to them about it, they have every intention of respecting the act. They want to adhere to it and understand the historical reasons behind it.

But you know, I have every faith. I don't buy into this story that Canadian workers can't compete. I've heard this in many industries, and I just don't think it's true. Time and again the Canadian workers have shown, whether they're unionized or not unionized, that they can go toe to toe with anybody.

Just down the road from my riding at Abbotsford Airport, for example, Conair has put in a maintenance facility. That maintenance facility services 737s from around the world--around the world. They come in there. They do everything from complete rebuilds to whatever work might be necessary. That shop is busy. It's so busy that the local university has put on a full stream to help train technicians to work at that shop. They say the only thing that's holding them back is...they build more and new facilities. The workers compete. They are getting great jobs. As you mentioned, they are great, well-paying jobs, and they woo business. They attract business from around the world to come to Canada to get their 737s...they're very good at 737s, and that's what they do.

I don't buy this argument that we should all run around like Chicken Little saying the sky is falling. We have a proven contractor in Aveos. You might want to bring them in; I don't know. I can't really speak to them and their business plan. It's a private company. But they've been very successful in Canada. They talked in their most recent web posting and press release about the fact that they've actually hired more people. They're not offloading; they're hiring more.

I think the future is very bright. I would be very surprised if Aveos says it's a doomsday scenario.

[Roger Gaudet, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Minister...

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I have to stop it there. I'm sorry. We're over the time.

[Roger Gaudet, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

Mr. Minister, I do not want you to...

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

Mr. Trost.

[Roger Gaudet, Bloc, Montcalm, QC]

…speak for Canadians.

[The Chair, Conservative, Merv Tweed]

I'm sorry.

Mr. Trost, five minutes, please.

[Bradley Trost, Conservative, Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Just a quick follow-up to Minister Merrifield. Did I understand that exchange between you and Mr. Byrne? What you were saying is if we'd gone with the boats that he'd been suggesting we want to go with, we still really wouldn't have any service. We'd probably be waiting for those boats, and service would continue to have been inadequate. Did I summarize what you were saying fairly well?

[Rob Merrifield, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Marine Atlantic was a disaster when we got it, when we formed government. It would have been a worse disaster today under that plan.

We dealt with the plan. We put almost $1 billion not only into new vessels but also into onshore facilities in the time period that we've been a government.

The people of Atlantic Canada deserve better than what they were getting, and we delivered it.

[Bradley Trost, Conservative, Saskatoon—Humboldt, SK]

So that has caused service to improve, and it helps the general economy because it's a core infrastructure sort of issue and helps to facilitate trade and movement of personnel for the region.