Evidence of meeting #116 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was flights.
A recording is available from Parliament.
As an Individual
I don't fly very much. I have taken some of those tour flights to the Caribbean and have always felt the absolute peak of guilt, because there are no alternatives, so I either tell my wife we can't go, or I go and hold my nose.
It's true that they have this rule for some reason; they must make money by keeping the planes flying back and forth.
That's the only thing I can say. We don't take many, but when we do, we are conscious of it. I booked three of them because they landed before midnight.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Otherwise one could fly out of Hamilton, for example, as you're suggesting.
As an Individual
That would be an excellent alternative, but that doesn't exist at the present time.
Representative, Neighbours Against the Airplane Noise
I can add why it doesn't exist: It's because Pearson or the GTAA will fight any expansion into Hamilton because they don't own Hamilton. They get eliminated from those landing and takeoff rights. If the traffic goes to Hamilton, then that $5-billion debt becomes $6 billion.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Very quickly, in the Canada Flight Supplement, which is the document given to all pilots on what airports have what rules, there are a number of very strict rules about noise controls at Pearson. It says that all non-noise-certified jet aircraft are restricted from landing between 8 p.m. and 8 a.m., with different noise levels having different time restrictions. Do you see any effect at all from the different restrictions? Are you aware of them at all?
As an Individual
I think that those non-noise-certified aircraft are few and far between. Many airports now are banning stage 2 aircraft—well, they are banning stage 3 aircraft, while the GTAA and Transport Canada are very proud that they no longer let stage 2 in there.
Liberal
Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
I have very little time, so I'll try to be pretty quick here.
We know that the GTA, the greater Toronto area, is an economic engine for the country. It's continuing to grow very rapidly, and the GTAA in tandem is looking to expand operations and increase its bottom line profitability at a cost to local neighbourhoods. This all gets back to accountability.
It is a regional monopoly, and it appears there is no accountability. It is not interested, as was mentioned, in sharing with Hamilton. It's looking at where it can increase its profitability. One of the things that was mentioned was having it as a nighttime hub for flights out of the Middle East, flights out of other destinations into North America. I assume Hamilton would be able to act as that sort of hub. The passengers aren't people coming to Toronto. They're just transferring on to other planes to go on to Houston, for instance. I assume Hamilton could also handle not just cargo but those kinds of nighttime hub flights, but that would break Pearson's regional monopoly.
What I'd like to get to is the accountability. It appears that the GTAA doesn't have accountability, the federal government is not providing the oversight, and Nav Canada switches around flights in ways that impact neighbourhoods, even though it also is an arm's-length non-profit corporation. What needs to be done to bring accountability to this regional monopoly that is increasing its profits at the cost to the quality of life of local neighbourhoods?
As an Individual
The GTAA just plays in the sandbox that's provided by Transport Canada. I think they're doing what anyone would do: they will operate within the limits that are set for them. If limits are to be placed, I think they have to come from Transport Canada, both on the airport side and on the Nav Canada side, and that applies to airports across the country.
Matt Jeneroux Edmonton Riverbend, CPC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you to the witnesses for being here today and for travelling to come here.
You mentioned Hamilton a number of times. The GTA's Pearson airport has now—we'll use the word “absorbed”—Hamilton.
Are you aware of any other opportunities that Pearson is trying to gain within the GTA at this point? Is Pearson shifting to more cargo-based business than some airports? We had the opportunity to see Hamilton airport recently, and it's a great airport with the opportunity for more cargo. I'm curious as to your thoughts on the vision Pearson has, and if you're seeing it.
Representative, Neighbours Against the Airplane Noise
From what I've seen at the community meetings and the facts that have come up is that further to Borys's comment, you have lack of oversight. Profitability is dictating this whole thing. They are trying to pay down a $5-billion debt by taking business from other areas.
I think Hamilton still is a cargo hub. It was a cargo hub, but it was also a charter hub, which Pearson has taken away over the last number of years. To Richard's comment about whether I would drive to Hamilton to pick up a 5 a.m. or 6 a.m. flight to the Caribbean—absolutely. That's a very logical thing.
As an Individual
I somewhat disagree with that. The market is Toronto. The market is Pearson. That's where they want to be. I don't agree that Pearson is attracting them as much as that they want to be here. WestJet was in Hamilton, and they wanted to grow their business; you grow it where the people are.
I think Hamilton has a role, but I think it has to develop its own role around its own market.
Part of the growth at Pearson and its international hub is the pricing structure that the GTAA has with two major airlines. They pay a fixed sum and they can operate as many flights as they want, including night flights. The more flights they operate, the lower their unit costs.
With respect to night flights, I think there should be a substantial surcharge so that the true environmental and social cost are reflected in the total cost.
As an Individual
In my view, it would be simply be that we not play airport. I've always found you shouldn't stick your nose where it doesn't belong, and you always dance with the one you came with.
We're dealing here with a problem they have, and that is noise. I've always managed to steer clear of all the other aspects of their business relationships, because that's neither my expertise nor my business.
Edmonton Riverbend, CPC
Yes.
I'll end with a comment.
I'm from Edmonton, and the airport there is expanding its commercial business. There's certainly a growing cargo piece to it, but it's about half an hour or 45 minutes away from the first home within the city of Edmonton. I constantly hear that the airport is too far from the city limits. The city is expanding and it's growing closer to it, but it's interesting to hear your perspective from the GTA, because we face quite a different perspective in Edmonton.
Thank you.
Liberal
Liberal
Gagan Sikand Liberal Mississauga—Streetsville, ON
Okay. I'll move pretty quickly.
I represent a riding called Mississauga—Streetsville, which on your map is Highway 40 at Meadowvale and 45 and 48 near Streetsville, so this is definitely a concern to my residents.
We have Hamilton, which is underutilized; Pickering is a bit farther outside the GTA, but we have a lot of land just north of the 407 and the escarpment, and Metrolinx has preliminary plans to get more rail out that way.
Is there a conversation that should be had about whether an airport can go up past the escarpment, up north there?
I'll start with you, Peter.
Representative, Neighbours Against the Airplane Noise
Certainly we need to have a conversation, and when we talk about airports being too far or too close and the centres of communities, if you look at the major centres such as Chicago, you see O'Hare and Midway. They're an hour apart, two hours in traffic.
Toronto is the same way. If you try to get from Whitby to Pearson, it's a two-hour ride at any particular time, so—
Liberal
Gagan Sikand Liberal Mississauga—Streetsville, ON
Sorry; I don't mean to cut you off. It's just because I have limited time.
Is that yes or no?
