Transport Committee on Oct. 25th, 2018

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

In Tuesday's testimony we heard solutions and suggestions that perhaps we could shift commercial operations like air cargo to airports further outside a city's perimeter. I'm wondering if you would speak to the economic feasibility of moving operations like air cargo to a place like Hamilton, for example.

[Tom Driedger]

I think that's very challenging, because the cargo companies have established major facilities at Pearson. FedEx has a huge facility. Vista Cargo is there. Also, a great deal of cargo comes in the belly of passenger aircraft.

The other point is that they moved from Hamilton to Pearson not only for economics but because it's closer to the market. The business wants you to be close to the market.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Mr. Hardie is next.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

An issue raised in our earlier session was land use decisions by cities that allow for development in areas where there is the potential for noise and disruption. One thing we need to consider is that you have an airport there, and it's probably not going to go away, or replacing it with something would be quite expensive and wouldn't happen overnight. When we deal with overnight, are there some things that could be done for homes along the flight path?

Consider that open-office concepts in buildings often have noise suppression devices that reduce the amount of ambient noise so that people can conduct their business in a cubicle somewhere. Would those same devices not be available for homes to at least do some noise suppression over the nighttime hours to help people sleep better? Are there any thoughts about that, or has anybody looked at that possibility?

[Peter Bayrachny]

With all due respect, Mr. Hardie, I invite you to my home when we have night flights. You tell me whether or not any noise suppression can drown out an aircraft and shaking windows, etc. Markland and the other areas around the airport were there as communities before the airport expanded. As Mr. Boehnke has said, it's time to at least have a control on the effects of this.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

In that respect, then, we also know that people have various tolerances to noise. Some people can sleep on a picket fence and some can't.

Would there not also be some utility in looking at real estate transactions and have some notice on a house listing that says that is on a flight path and that the people need to be aware of that? Far too often, people will move into an area without really understanding the dynamics of noise, be it from a rail switching yard to a truck route to a fly-over. Should that not also be part of the mix, as we look to try to mitigate the existing situation?

[Peter Bayrachny]

Mitigating that would mean decreased property values. At this point, we would be sitting here talking about noise and people's net worth and value as a result of making it public in a listing. Most real estate agents know where the flight paths are in Toronto, for example. It's the same thing with Montreal, and I'm sure Calgary—

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Would they disclose that to a potential buyer?

[Peter Bayrachny]

Well, I think so. They wouldn't be much of a real estate agent if they didn't.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

One never knows.

What role can Toronto and the surrounding communities play in trying to mitigate the existing situation?

[Richard Boehnke]

I would suggest that when you have a standard, you can then make that kind of determination. Until we actually have a measurable, scientifically based, human-health-focused standard of what is acceptable and what is not in Canada, you can't really make that decision. You're making it just on the basis that it's noisy. Well, “noisy” doesn't tell you a hell of a lot.

That's why I keep pushing this simple little thing that we all go skating around, because it would start to tighten things down. When people phone in a complaint, the airport could then say, “Well, it was within the standard.” That's legitimate.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

I believe, sir, that the next time a city close to the airport decides to take out some industrial land to build more townhouses, somebody should raise this point.

[Richard Boehnke]

I agree, but the point is that we will not have a change in people's circumstances, either the Torontonians who will live there or the people out west. We still need that factor to actually make a determination before you publish anything as though it's a warning, a dark sign.

[Ken Hardie, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Did you have anything to add, Mr. Driedger?

[Tom Driedger]

Many of the newer homes around the airport already have a noise warning on their titles, particularly the ones to the west. There are sections of Mississauga that were taken to the OMB, and the GTA lost and houses were built.

Going forward, it's developed. Some tinkering can be done maybe for infilling or redevelopment, but what you see is what you have. On Tuesday, Dr. Novak talked about the NEF contours and how they were out of date and they no longer reflected the standard. He said they were out of date in 1976.

That creates a problem for the government, because new standards may come out that may identify certain areas that are already developed that are inappropriate for housing. What does the government do? On the flip side of that—

Okay, thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you. We're running out of time.

Mr. Aubin is next.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I thank our guests for joining us.

I will get right to the heart of the matter because time is running out.

Transport Canada is asking airports to have noise management committees made up of citizens. Perhaps you have even sat on such a committee in the past.

Here is my first question. Is that essentially a public performance or does it lead to concrete results for those who live close to an airport?

You can take turns answering.

[Tom Driedger]

I would like to comment on that.

I believe you used the word “facade”, and I don't think that is inappropriate. These committees are not committees that will take action, and there are no concrete results.

By way of example, the GTAA has just come out with its noise management action plan, and with respect to helping our neighbours sleep at night, what are they going to do? They're going to publish a report outlining the economic necessity for night flights. They are also going to look at increasing landing fees specifically for night flight slots while they develop quieter fleet incentive programs. They're going to take money from the airlines for flying in at night, it seems to me, and give it back to them for retrofitting the aircraft, which seems bizarre. They also talk about immediately exploring changes to night flight restrictions.

It's a debating society. It's meant to placate the public, but I don't think the committee as it is now structured is an effective means of managing noise. That is the prerogative of the government, Transport Canada and the industry, and they do not have a mindset to manage noise.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Bayrachny, do you want to add anything?

[Peter Bayrachny]

Yes, I have a comment on that as well. Your description of “facade”—I think I agree with the previous speaker—is accurate. That noise committee, when you look at the members of it—and I've met some of them—are from Whitby, Ajax and Scarborough, many areas far away from the GTAA. At the formation of the committee, taking Markland Wood as an example, there was not one member on that committee from Markland Wood or Tom's area.

[Richard Boehnke]

In the 30 years that I've worked with the noise management committee of the GTAA—and this is in their minutes—I asked in several sequential meetings whether they had ever reduced by one decibel any aircraft noise from the work they had done in the 30 years that I had brought this up. The answer was no.

[Robert Aubin, NDP, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you.

Concerning the standards you were talking about, I agree that an attempt to resolve an issue must be evidence-based. We have the example of an airplane that generates a noise of 80 decibels, while the WHO says that the average should be around 55 decibels. There is a massive discrepancy there.

We have data on pure noise. As for health effects, that is a more tenuous matter. In your opinion, would it not be appropriate for this committee to recommend to Health Canada to conduct a concrete study that would provide us with evidence on the impacts of noise pollution on health?

[Peter Bayrachny]

Yes, absolutely I agree 110%.

[Tom Driedger]

On Tuesday, Mr. Novak commented and said, “Look, it's sleep deprivation.” He emphasized that this was a key cause of annoyance.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

You have one minute.