Transport Committee on May 2nd, 2016

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Boulerice.

You are right. I made those comments in 2012. Unfortunately, the government of the day did nothing about the situation. It is now four years later, and the landscape has changed. I realize that, unfortunately, workers lost their jobs and were not able to get rehired by other companies. Some, however, were. What we have to do, though, is deal with the situation in 2016 and acknowledge that Air Canada reached agreements with the governments of Quebec and Manitoba. Those provinces chose to drop their lawsuits because they believe that things are going to improve and that the formal agreements they intend to sign with Air Canada will generate new jobs in the long run. Given that both Quebec and Manitoba have decided to accept the agreements worked out with Air Canada, this is a great opportunity to clarify the act.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

It's a shame that you are choosing to pit the aircraft manufacturing sector against the aircraft maintenance sector. Those people have a right to keep working, and it is imperative that the aircraft maintenance work remain here so that those jobs are protected. Bill C-10 does not set out any requirements as to the type or volume of maintenance activities that must remain in the country, or the level of employment in those activities. The government is literally giving Air Canada carte blanche under the pretense of flexibility. The government is telling the airline that it can do what it wants when it wants.

How many aircraft maintenance jobs will stay in Canada once Bill C-10 becomes law?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

I am certainly not trying to pit the manufacturing sector against the maintenance sector. When I said that Air Canada had committed to performing the maintenance of between 45 and—fingers crossed–75 C Series aircraft, I was referring to the maintenance, and not manufacturing, sector. The C Series aircraft being manufactured in Mirabel—and I hope hundreds upon hundreds will be made—is outside the scope of our discussion today. We are talking about creating jobs in Quebec in connection with the maintenance of between 45 and 75 aircraft, and at least 150 jobs in Manitoba.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Are you prepared to accept amendments that would strengthen and improve Bill C-10 by imposing conditions on the level of employment and requiring Air Canada to keep a minimum number of aircraft maintenance jobs in the country?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

We introduced the bill we wanted to, and you are looking at it. Decisions on amendments are up to the committee. The committee is free to use its independence to deal with the legislation as it sees fit. I wouldn't deign to speak on the committee's behalf.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

You have a minute and a half.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

I have a minute and a half.

Great.

In Transport Canada's document on the proposed amendments to the act, it says that Quebec anticipates the establishment of a centre of excellence expected to create jobs. Having a labour background, I tend to view that as good intentions; no guarantees have been made, no numbers have been laid out, and no targets have been set. We are talking in theoretical terms about potential jobs stemming from the maintenance of the C Series aircraft, and it will be years before heavy maintenance work, similar to that previously performed on Air Canada's Boeing and Airbus aircraft, is necessary.

Some 2,600 jobs were lost, and the government hopes to create more but has no idea as to how many. Those aren't reassuring words from a government that claims it wants to foster job creation.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

As someone who has examined the matter closely and had an opportunity to see what Air Canada intends—or has indicated its intentions are—in Quebec and Manitoba, I have no doubt the jobs will materialize. In Manitoba, we will start to see them in 2017 and, in Quebec, shortly after that. It will depend on the delivery of the aircraft and the work will continue for at least 20 years.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Do you realize that those 2,600 job losses were illegal and that all the legislation you are proposing today does is legalize layoffs that were previously illegal?

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much, Mr. Boulerice.

The minister wants to give a very fast answer to that question, otherwise your time is up.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

I'd like to point out that that is precisely why the government waited to see whether Quebec and Manitoba were willing to drop their lawsuits.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you, Minister Garneau.

Mr. Berthold, you have six minutes.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'd like to start by thanking you, Mr. Garneau, for visiting Lac-Mégantic last week. Most of the community really appreciated your visit.

Since we don't have much time, I'm going to get right to the subject at hand, Bill C-10.

I'm going to pick up on what you just said about the Quebec government. At a press conference, the Quebec minister for the economy, science, and innovation was forced to say that the easing of the requirements on Air Canada to keep its maintenance activities in Quebec could hurt the creation of a centre that the air carrier is supposed to establish.

Did you discuss that with Ms. Anglade?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

I didn't speak with Ms. Anglade. My chief of staff spoke with her after those comments were made. My understanding is that Ms. Anglade will be submitting something to the committee and will therefore have the opportunity to share her views on the subject.

Ms. Anglade and I are on the same page. We understand the situation. Bill C-10 is making its way through the parliamentary process, which has a number of stages. The bill will not become law after second reading, and today is proof of that. The committee is holding meetings to study the bill and hear from witnesses, after which, the bill will be referred back to the House of Commons for third reading.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

I know how the process works, Mr. Garneau. But it's very rare for a provincial government, in this case, the Quebec government, to make comments to the media at this stage in the game, clearly calling on the government to put an end to the process because it is going to have a detrimental effect on its agreements and discussions.

The agreement that was reached was subject to a final agreement. The first news release stated that an agreement had never been reached. And yet, since the beginning, you haven't stopped saying that Air Canada and the Government of Quebec reached an agreement. I haven't seen that agreement. The Government of Quebec hasn't seen that agreement, because it hasn't been finalized yet.

Why are you rushing ahead? Why do you insist on putting an end to the discussion with this bill?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

As I mentioned, the Government of Quebec intends to drop the suit, because of an agreement with Air Canada. In the meantime, we feel confident that all of this is going to be respected. The parliamentary process takes some time. It has begun and it will most certainly follow its course.

We are on the same wavelength as Ms. Anglade.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Yes, but what the Government of Quebec is saying is that by introducing this bill, you have deprived it of its negotiating power, as there is no longer any incentive for Air Canada to come to an agreement with Quebec, since the new law will free it from any legal proceedings. So Quebec has no more leverage.

You also mentioned that you have a serious commitment with regard to Air Canada jobs. I am concerned by this serious commitment on the part of Air Canada, since it did not even respect the law.

What makes you think that there is a serious commitment?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

My discussions lead me to think that they are very serious, and the commitment is firm.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Do you have a written commitment from Air Canada? Do you have a letter of intent you could table with the committee, so that we too may be reassured about this serious commitment?

You would like to see this bill pass quickly. In fact, this is the first time your government has limited debate, and for a bill that is rather short. We don't understand why this is so urgent. The Government of Quebec is telling you that this is not the right time to do this.

In addition, we have nothing but the bill to study. You said that the recommendations from Transport Canada were in the bill. They are only one page long; there aren't many recommendations here, Mr. Garneau.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

Let me clarify something for you, Mr. Berthold. There is no agreement between us and Air Canada. The agreement is between Air Canada and the Government of Quebec on the one hand, and between Air Canada and the Government of Manitoba, on the other.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

I am happy to hear it; I just wanted that to be clarified.

In fact, my next question was whether there is an agreement with Air Canada concerning Bill C-10, to have the legislation withdrawn.

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

It has always been clear. Perhaps some people misunderstood. We do not have an agreement with Air Canada. Air Canada is a company that functions independently. Its dealings are with the provinces.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

My question is all the more pertinent.

You said in your presentation that the idea had been raised before you took over the department. Who brought back the idea of passing Bill C-10? Who suggested that it be passed so quickly?

[Marc Garneau, Liberal, Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC]

It was the discussions between Air Canada and Quebec, and Air Canada and Manitoba, that led to this being put back on the agenda.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Very well.

So your point is that this is an agreement between the Government of Quebec and Air Canada. The discussions they held brought this to the fore once again. This means that someone in your entourage or at Transport Canada pointed out that certain matters were being discussed and that it would be a good idea, in order to facilitate things, to announce that these obligations would no longer be imposed on Air Canada.