Evidence of meeting #123 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 actually.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
Borys Wrzesnewskyj Liberal Etobicoke Centre, ON
Madam Chair, there seems to be an issue with the response that came back to my question for Transport Canada about the increase on the night budget, compared to the answers given before the committee. Perhaps in the next meeting we could set aside five minutes or so to discuss how we might deal with that particular issue.
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
I don't believe the committee is aware of the discrepancy you're trying to get clarified, between the testimony that was given and some documentation that has been received and that is inconsistent with the testimony.
Leave that with me, and we'll see how we can do some magic to make it all happen from that avenue.
9:45 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
I have to suspend this part of the session so we can move on to our M-177 discussion.
Thank you very much to the witnesses for sharing their time and their recommendations with us.
9:50 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
I'm calling the meeting to order. Would our witnesses please take their places, and the other conversations exit the room?
Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we are now commencing our study of the subject matter of M-177.
Mr. Fuhr, as the person who introduced the motion, would you like to speak for a moment before we introduce the witnesses?
9:55 a.m.
Stephen Fuhr Kelowna—Lake Country, Lib.
Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I won't take much time, but I want to thank the committee for taking this up so quickly. I don't think this motion passed more than about 19 hours ago, so this is—
9:55 a.m.
Kelowna—Lake Country, Lib.
I'd have to check to see if there's one that's gone to committee faster.
I thank my colleagues for their support on this motion. It's a very important issue. Air travel, aviation and pilot production are very important to this country. It affects us in a major way. If it's not healthy, it will have economic impacts that I think all of us agree would be very negative.
I'll leave it to you, and hopefully I'll get to answer a question or two. I have to chair the defence committee at 11 a.m., so I'll go back to you.
9:55 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
We'll do what we can.
As witnesses, we have Johanne Domingue, President of the Comité antipollution des avions de Longueuil; and Cedric Paillard, President and Chief Executive Officer of Ottawa Aviation Services.
Mr. Paillard, would you like to go first? You have five minutes only.
9:55 a.m.
Cedric Paillard President and Chief Executive Officer, Ottawa Aviation Services
Thank you very much. Thank you for your time.
For expediency, I'm going to read my notes. That way will be most efficient.
9:55 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Ottawa Aviation Services
Good morning. Thank you for inviting Ottawa Aviation Services to be part of the committee's study of flight training schools in Canada.
Our school of professional pilot training is specifically designed for our students to succeed in this industry. The quality of our programs has been recognized by Canadian airlines such as Porter, Jazz, Air Georgian and Keewatin Air. They have formed close partnerships with us now as a result of the quality of the training we're providing.
Thanks to our program, successful graduates who meet the required standards and benchmarks of the course can be put into fast-track paths to a job on the right seat of an airliner, from the CRJ aircraft to Q400 and Boeing 737, a fairly large piece of equipment. I am immensely proud of the graduates and the staff who have actually achieved this training for them. Over the past seven years, we're proud to say, we've had 100% of our graduates employed in the sector as pilots.
OAS is dedicated to good Canadian corporate citizenship. We understand the importance of the aviation sector and its tight link with the socio-economic fabric of Canada, particularly in our northern communities, where aviation is at the centre of their economic development.
I encourage you to review our written brief. It outlines ways in which the federal government and flight training organizations such as OAS can work together to address the pilot shortage to the benefit of our national aviation sector and the Canadian economy as a whole.
No one in this room needs to be convinced of the realities of the impending global pilot shortage. Last year in Montreal, at the ICAO summit of next-generation aviation professionals, the secretary general noted that in 2036, worldwide, 600,000 pilots will be needed to meet the global demand. Within our borders, we are actually talking about an acute pilot shortage that is already creating some issues in specific regions by cancelling flights, and in certain sectors, with some medevac, cargo, and charter flights being cancelled.
For many industries, economies and people, air travel is a necessity, a must. While 2036 seems like a long time from now or a distant future, the reality is that these pilots need about two to four years to be trained and, once they are trained, another three to five years to become captains. The flight schools are uniquely positioned to help face this challenge head on—we see it every day—as long as we are given the tools and the resources to do so.
The first thing we need to focus on is support for our students. Higher education can be expensive, and students want to know that their investment will pay off with a rewarding career. Given the impending labour shortage in the aviation sector, we believe that the federal government has a role in providing leadership in order to encourage more students to choose flight training. This includes taking steps to allow students access to greater financial support through various means, which the Air Transport Association of Canada, of which OAS is a member, is working on. I believe you will be hearing from them sometime next week.
Currently, as an example, time spent in an aircraft, which is what we call “flight time”, is a requirement for all flight training programs, yet this flight time does not qualify towards instructional time. Therefore, students are not able to qualify for as much financial support as they could. While this is somewhat a provincial issue, by amending the terms of the Canada student loan program, the government will show leadership and encourage the provinces to follow suit.
Experienced flight instructors are the next part of the issue. School like ours across the country are reporting backlogs of students wishing to begin their flight training. Today at OAS, we are approaching 55 students who are waiting for flight training, but we are not able to do that due to the shortage of instructors. The reality is that experienced flight instructors are often scooped up by air carriers after only a few months of instructing. The issue of instructor retention needs to be addressed. It's at an all-time low today. Some of my colleagues in the flight training industry are reporting a turnover of way above 100%.
10 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Thank you very much, Mr. Paillard. I have to move on to our other witnesses.
10 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Hopefully, you can get in your remaining comments.
Ms. Domingue, you have five minutes, please.
10 a.m.
Johanne Domingue President, Comité antipollution des avions de Longueuil
Good morning. I just want to make sure you can hear me.
10 a.m.
President, Comité antipollution des avions de Longueuil
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Members of the committee, good morning.
The last time I was here, you told me that the effort to train pilots would continue given the severe shortage of pilots going forward. Rest assured, we fully appreciate the situation.
What we have an issue with is not pilot training, but rather the sites chosen for that training. We are concerned about the compatibility between flight schools and their locations, which tend to be densely populated areas.
The increase in aircraft movements in flight school areas generates excessive noise, in our view. It's not that we don't want flight schools in our backyard. We simply don't want all of them.
Right now, pilots are being trained for the Asian, African, European and Canadian markets, all in the same place. In 2006-07, the Saint Hubert airport was ranked fourth or fifth busiest airport in the country in terms of flight training. In 2008, when the airport was able to provide international flight training, it climbed to first place, where it stayed for a number of years. Since then, the Toronto-Buttonville airport has been its main rival.
What makes the situation unique is that, when the Saint Hubert airport reaches 199,000 flights, and the Dorval Airport reaches 212,000, the summer season is in full swing. The busiest time for flight school training is usually between April and September. In January, we might have 2,000 or 3,000 local flights versus 10,000 to 15,000 a month in the summer.
That means touch and go landings are happening every 60 seconds, day and night, over our homes. A touch and go landing is when an aircraft lands and then takes off without stopping. An aircraft merely touches the ground briefly before taking off, so the motor continues to run at full force. It's an awful noise that never ends.
It's nice in Quebec in the summertime. We are told that, when the weather is nice for us, it's nice for others, as well, and we have to share those months of good weather. Flight schools run from 8 a.m. to 11 to p.m. What part of the day do residents have to enjoy the good weather? I'll spare you the details, but suffice it to say that cargo planes, helicopters and wide-body aircraft use the Saint Hubert airport as well.
In the summer, going outdoors to enjoy an activity or a meal is almost unthinkable. Some days, there are 800 aircraft movements, and they take place at a rate of every three minutes. We are talking about a noise level of 70 decibels. That's far from negligible. It was all measured and included in a 2009 report. The health impact is significant.
The government has a public health responsibility. In Canada, we should have the right to live in a healthy environment. We protect our wetlands and our wildlife, but do we care about protecting our citizens from noise pollution? Noise is an invasive factor causing residents distress because they have no control over the aircraft flying over their homes or the noise they generate. Not only does this create anxiety among residents, but it also disrupts their sleep.
The last time I appeared before the committee, I submitted a public health report listing all the repercussions. I believe the World Health Organization took a stance on the issue as well. I'll spare you the details, but more and more, these small aircraft are running on leaded gasoline. For the past decade, then, we've been in a dispute with the Saint Hubert airport.
Since 2008, when the number of flights increased, 500 complaints have been filed with Transport Canada and a petition containing 2,000 signatures was presented in the House of Commons. It described the problem as well as the effects. A public consultation process was then held. Finally, in 2011, we launched a class action suit, ending in a court settlement in 2015. Now, consider this: the city then decided to spend $300,000 to have mufflers installed on flight school planes. Taxpayers were the ones who paid for that. We paid for mufflers just so we could get a bit of peace and quiet.
The settlement also set out a second requirement: the creation of a soundscape committee. It met once in 2018. It held a few meetings in 2016 and 2017, but just one in 2018. There is no set plan outlining the priorities, the problem, the ways in which it must be managed or the measures to be implemented. Would it be possible to conduct studies?
In 2018, after all that, we had to file a motion for contempt of court, because the time frames and agreements weren't being respected. The city wants to expand the service, and the schools want to fully develop their training capacity.
The airport really wants to be profitable but we just want to be able to enjoy a peaceful environment. We know very well that we will live together, but how? I think it takes transparency.
10:05 a.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro
Excuse me, Ms. Domingue. I'm sorry to interrupt, but the five minutes are up. Perhaps you could get in your comments in responses to questions.
10:05 a.m.
Liberal
10:05 a.m.
Conservative
Jim Eglinski Conservative Yellowhead, AB
Thank you.
I'd like to thank the witnesses for being here this morning. I'll start with Cedric.
Cedric, I just want to follow through with what the lady was just speaking about, the noise of the training schools and stuff like that.
I haven't done a lot of flying in eastern Canada, but I've been flying since 1968—so I'm dating myself—mostly in western Canada. But in the major flight schools and major flight areas, such as Vancouver and Edmonton, we have training areas where the schools go to do their flight training, such as manoeuvres, as I think you fully know.
Maybe you can explain it to the committee, but most of these areas are designated and are usually fairly far away from urban centres.
10:05 a.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Ottawa Aviation Services
That's correct, yes.
10:05 a.m.
Conservative
Jim Eglinski Conservative Yellowhead, AB
Would you explain a bit why that is, and the cost to you to transition to and from those?