Evidence of meeting #40 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 41st Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was aircraft.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
I call the meeting to order.
Thank you, and good morning everyone. Welcome to the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure, and Communities, meeting number 40. Our orders of the day, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), are to resume our study of innovative transportation technologies.
Joining us today from Nav Canada is John Crichton, president and chief executive officer.
Ms. Michaud, on a point of order.
NDP
Élaine Michaud NDP Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
This morning, I propose that we resume debate on the motion, which was adjourned from the last meeting. I would like to take a moment to explain why it is important to do this now. I apologize to the witnesses who are here.
I thought that we had agreed last time to debate the motion on the Aeronautics Act, which had been amended. After a comment, the debate was closed immediately. It is an extremely important motion for Canadian municipalities, not just for the municipality of Neuville, in my riding. I talk about that municipality a lot because it is a prime example of the problem that the Aeronautics Act currently poses.
We amended the motion that you had moved. The government told us about its concerns, and I understand them. With this motion, we aren't trying to harm the economy at all. I can understand that giving the municipalities and provinces absolute power to refuse any airport on their land is problematic. We are willing to negotiate and discuss that aspect. We have also already removed that part from the original motion in order to be accommodating and to compromise. But the essence of the problem remains, and the motion that was amended still does not resolve it.
What we are asking for here is respect for provincial and municipal jurisdictions, meaning that they be able to manage their land, protect the agricultural land and carry out urban planning, as they do. What I'm talking about now will be addressed at the Federation of Canadian Municipalities conference at the end of the week. This issue affects not only a few of my constituents, but also the municipalities across the country. They do not have the power to regulate in their own jurisdictions.
The Aeronautics Act currently allows any private developer to set up in Canada, anywhere they like…
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
If I may say, Ms. Michaud, it's not a point of order but you do have the right to move to the debate. If that's what you want to do, then we can do that. But I think you're actually arguing your point as opposed to—
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
I'm telling you it's not a point of order. If you would like to move to the motion, we can do that. The committee has the ability to do that and then you can place your comments on the record at that time.
Mr. Holder, on a point of order.
Conservative
Ed Holder Conservative London West, ON
Thank you very much.
While I will not denigrate the importance of any subject that comes before this committee, I'd like to remind members that we have a guest here today who has made some effort to be here. There seems to be a growing trend, I've noticed, that we want to argue or discuss these issues at the start of the meeting. As a courtesy to our guests, why don't we honour that respect? Why don't we hear them for the limited period of time that we have them here? Then if a member of any side has an issue to bring forward, I think it's absolutely and genuinely their right to do so.
But I think out of respect and courtesy, which I think we would all like to show, it's appropriate that we hear our guests first. Otherwise, do a different scheduling of our agenda so our guests can respond accordingly. So I would respectfully suggest that this be handled after our guests have left.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
It's not a point of order, but it certainly makes sense.
Monsieur Coderre.
Liberal
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
On that point, because I think it's important, I might trust an individual member of Parliament but I don't trust the government, for one reason. Several times I have exercised that courtesy myself, including at one point if you remember, when there was one witness and I said we should go to the witness first. I don't have any problem with going to the witness first. But there is a tendency on the part of the government that every time we want to settle an issue, especially when it is my time to talk, that we adjourn the debate.
Liberal
Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC
No, it's not personal. That's why I'm telling you this.
Mr. Chairman, I would agree with what you said only if, after the witness, we come back to the motion. And if we are coming back to that motion, I am the first person on the list. If we agree on that, I don't have any problem. If not, we might have a long discussion.
NDP
Olivia Chow NDP Trinity—Spadina, ON
Mr. Chair, I just wanted to ask about your ruling on this. If the motion was adjourned from the last meeting in terms of the debate—I think that was the motion that was passed—technically the motion is still in front of us because the debate was adjourned. So any members who wish to bring the motion back up in order to speak have a right to speak, right?
NDP
Olivia Chow NDP Trinity—Spadina, ON
That can occur any time in the meeting.
So if Ms. Michaud preferred to do it now, she could do so, technically. Am I correct in that?
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
Any motion that's been deferred by a motion can be brought back at any time by any member. If we do that, we go back to the speaking list, which has Mr. Coderre first.
What I was trying to say to Ms. Michaud is that while she didn't have a point of order she's certainly entitled, as a member of this committee, to bring that forward when she has the floor. She cannot do it under a point of order.
NDP
Élaine Michaud NDP Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
I didn't talk about a point of order. I asked to speak. I didn't say “point of order” and you gave me the right to speak.
NDP
Élaine Michaud NDP Portneuf—Jacques-Cartier, QC
I would simply like to clarify why I am doing this now. We had already been courteous with the witnesses who were here. We were told we could debate it and, in the end, we didn't have the opportunity to do so.
Conservative
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
I accept everything that you've said, I'm just saying that for it to come back onto the floor, somebody who has the floor has to move into that motion, and if we do, then it's Mr. Coderre who has the floor to speak on it.
So what I'm going to do is to open the meeting. I'm going to ask our witness to make a presentation, and when you have the opportunity to take the floor, you are certainly welcome to move into your motion.
I will advise the committee, though, that after we hear from our guest, if we move to motions—and I have no objection to that—I will ask our guest to go home, because I think his time is far more valuable doing what he does than sitting and listening to us debate.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Merv Tweed
So we will ask our guest to please proceed.
Hopefully, we'll get to hear everything you have to say in a short period of time. John, please.
John Crichton President and Chief Executive Officer, Nav Canada
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee. Thank you for inviting me to appear before the committee as part of your study on innovative transportation technologies.
I'm pleased to be here to speak of Nav Canada's strong track record in this area and the technologies that we consider to be the most promising game changers in our industry.
Since assuming ownership of Canada's civil air navigation system in November 1996, our aggressive modernization program has been a major factor behind our ability to improve safety and service. In fact, we estimate that when you examine the impact of all the technology and service initiatives we have launched since 1997, customers have saved $1.7 billion in fuel costs, a number that will grow to $7 billion by 2020. This in turn will generate related reductions in greenhouse gas emissions of 20.6 million metric tonnes.
Because of our structure, we are able to make technological investment decisions quickly, and to get investments in technology operational and delivering benefits for customers and the environment. One of the biggest benefits resulting from privatization has been the speed of response and our ability to stay ahead of the innovation curve, especially in the areas that directly affect our customers.
Today I would like to talk about three technologies that I see as crucial to improving the air navigation system and service to our customers. The first is performance-based navigation, or PBN. PBN refers to enhanced satellite-based navigation that includes strict specifications for functionality and accuracy. The application of PBN in the design of departure and arrival procedures, airways, and airspace will help Nav Canada to improve safety capacity and airport accessibility, while at the same time providing for more efficient aircraft operations in terms of reduced fuel being burned and greenhouse gas emissions. It will also reduce the costs of maintaining an extensive network of ground-based navigational aids. In deploying PBN, a great deal of work involves collaboration with customers regarding equipage, and with Transport Canada in relation to regulatory changes.
The evolution of the system requires that regulations be in place dealing with design standards, onboard equipment, and training requirements. I am convinced that this technology has a great deal of potential, especially once we achieve the tipping point with respect to rates of customer equipage.
We are working closely with our customers to identify where the business case exists for implementation in the many different operating environments across the 18 million square kilometres of airspace for which we are responsible. In line with this approach, we are introducing PBN in phases to enable aircraft operators to equip in accordance with the navigation specifications of the airspace in which they intend to fly.
The second game changer that offers a huge payback to our customers is related to advancements in surveillance technologies. Traditionally, air traffic controllers have used radar to monitor aircraft movements. Now there are exciting new alternatives such as wide area multilateration, automatic dependence surveillance broadcast or ADS-B, and even video surveillance. These technologies can be more cost-effective and more suitable for specific types of deployment.
We have invested heavily in ADS-B, a cost-effective alternative to radar that provides surveillance of appropriately equipped aircraft. We first implemented ADS-B in the area over Hudson Bay three years ago. Previously, this vast stretch of airspace, which lies at a crossroads of polar flights and international traffic from North America to Europe, had been managed through less efficient procedural control methods.
Today 15 ADS-B ground stations installed in Ontario, Quebec, Manitoba, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nunavut, and Greenland provide an additional 4 million square kilometres of surveillance coverage of domestic and international oceanic airspace managed by Nav Canada. This has resulted in major gains in customer service, allowing for the safe reduction of separation between equipped aircraft, from 80 nautical miles to five nautical miles, as well as more flexible, fuel-saving routes. Over 1,000 aircraft from 40 airlines are equipped and certified for ADS-B operations in Canada, and the number continues to grow.
Nav Canada is also working with Searidge Technologies, an Ottawa-based company, on promising video surveillance technology called IntelliDAR. This technology has the potential to improve safety and efficiency at airports by providing air traffic controllers with improved situational awareness of aircraft, vehicle, and other movements on the ground.
While advances in surveillance give us a broader picture of who is flying where in our airspace, our improved automated weather observation systems, AWOS, are casting a wider eye on the skies, and giving pilots a more comprehensive weather picture. With flying decisions being so dependent on the weather, AWOS also makes our top-three list of critical enablers.
Although these systems have been in existence for decades, recent enhancements have improved the accuracy and reliability of weather reporting across the country, and the addition of weather cameras allows pilots to use the Internet to see for themselves the actual weather conditions at their destination or alternate airport.
We are currently replacing older AWOS and expanding the use of this technology. As a result, Nav Canada is able to provide additional weather information around the clock. This has the potential to improve safety and allow for more efficient operations, particularly in northern and remote areas.
Nav Canada's adoption of new technologies such as PBN, ADS-B, and the new AWOS go a long way toward addressing specific challenges in our industry, namely: improving safety and efficiency in increasingly congested skies and airports; strengthening operational capabilities in the north; improving the cost-effectiveness of our customer's operations; and reducing aviation-related greenhouse gas emissions.
Our operational personnel manage 12 million aircraft movements annually. I would be remiss, therefore, if I did not mention a few of the emerging air traffic management technologies that help them in this work. A recent example is the introduction of controller-pilot data link communications in Canadian domestic airspace. It's a means of direct electronic communication, or text messaging, so to speak, between pilots and controllers. Because there is no need for voice communication and therefore read-back/hear-back of instructions, there is less chance of pilot-controller communication error.
We are also equipping controllers in our area control centres with a feature called minimum safe altitude warning. This involves the addition of electronic terrain maps to our flight management system so controllers receive alerts when an aircraft's projected flight path places it in a predicted conflict with surrounding terrain.
Many of the technologies we use have been developed in-house by our engineers and controllers. I want to take this opportunity to commend them and all our people for their work in this area. Their efforts have allowed Nav Canada to keep pace with many developments under way in aviation, and indeed to establish a global leadership position in several key areas. We have been selling our ATM solutions internationally for over a decade. Our technologies can be found in the U.K., Denmark, Australia, the U.S., the Caribbean, Dubai, and Hong Kong. It's a reason Nav Canada is regarded as one of the most technologically advanced air navigation service providers in the world.
And because we have no shareholders, revenues from these international sales are invested in Canada and contribute to keeping our air navigation charges in Canada low. I am incredibly proud of our people and our record, but we can't rest on our laurels if we want to stay out front. We need to ensure that our regulations and programs support the development and deployment of promising technologies that can make our system safer, more efficient, and cost effective.
Transport Canada has applied a collaborative method of developing regulations that is valued by stakeholders such as Nav Canada. However, the overall rule-making process can be lengthy and inflexible at times. We support a move to a performance-based model of regulation by Transport Canada that is harmonized with global standards. Essentially, this means drafting regulations so the emphasis is on the performance that must be achieved rather than the method that must be followed to reach the performance goal.
A good example is multilateration and ADS-B. Because the regulations specifically stated “radar”, we could not initially use ADS-B and multilateration for surveillance. After going through a process to prove to Transport Canada that these technologies actually worked even better than radar, we eventually received an exemption stating that we could use them as equivalent to radar for separation of aircraft. We believe a performance-based model of regulation would be more sustainable, giving Transport Canada the ability to create regulation that focuses on safety performance, but does not need amendment to reflect each new emerging technology.
Finally, I would suggest that the standing committee consider carefully the approach used for infrastructure funding programs, and the important role these programs can have in the facilitation of cost-sharing for technology deployments in areas of the country where there may not otherwise be a business case.
A case in point would be the installation of AWOS, the automatic weather-reporting equipment in the north. This equipment would be invaluable for operators in challenging northern areas of the country where it would deliver safety and efficiency benefits for aviation, more reliable air service for northern communities, and improved climatic reporting in the north for all parties. It's expensive technology to install in the north due to construction costs. Consequently, it may not be feasible to deploy on a wide-scale basis without government assistance.
With respect to transportation technologies, the government's approach should focus on encouraging development, facilitating adoption, and supporting deployment in specific cases where the economics might otherwise not be there. In this country, with its vast distances, air transportation is an important and strategic capability that provides a critical link to communities and markets across the country and around the world. In other words, air transportation is essential for the quality of life of many Canadians, and it is imperative for the economic vigour and growth prospects of our country. I certainly credit the committee for examining what can be done in this area.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I would be happy to take questions.
