Transport Committee on Nov. 29th, 2018

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

All right.

I'll pass the rest of my time to Mr. Badawey.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Hardie.

I want to discuss the comment that you made with respect to regulatory and financial restraints. I think Mr. Eglinski was correct. I also made a comment a couple of meetings ago with respect to the archaic transportation infrastructure and possibly regulations and financial restraints that we do have in place today—hence the reason why we're discussing this today.

I have two questions. One goes to the comment made about the pricing on pollution. Of course, with that, when you come out with a recommendation and a direction, you want to ensure that you're not defaulting the problem to somebody else. Pricing on pollution is very simple. If the polluters don't pay it, the property taxpayer does. It's already there. We're just trying to alleviate that.

To your point in terms of the recommendations that you have at the ready, is it a solution, or is it simply passing the buck onto someone else?

[Cedric Paillard]

No, I think it's really a solution, enabling flight schools to actually use technology, and enabling students to be able to pay for this training program. Some of this technology would use the cost of the training program as well. It's part of an ecosystem that actually is a solution to it.

The problem is that you have to put in a stopgap measure. If those technologies are not available right away, then we are forced to actually ask, for example, for a tax reduction on our fuel, because you can't get blood out of stone. It gets to a point where the students don't have $85,000 or more to pay for it. This is really the constraint. The solution out there is just the stopgap measures that I was trying to define.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Those recommendations that you do have, can you forward those to the committee?

[Cedric Paillard]

Yes. They are actually in the brief that we've provided to the committee.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Okay, great. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Now we'll go to Mr. Jeneroux for two minutes, and then we'll get back to Mr. Nantel for the last minute.

[Matt Jeneroux]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I was a bit surprised that, in the motion, the member from Kelowna—Lake Country makes no reference to the challenges they're facing to get more women involved in flight training. I know that in Edmonton there's a school or a program called Elevate Aviation, run in partnership with Nav Canada. I'm wondering if you could comment on some of those challenges, so it can be included in some of the discussion here today. Thanks.

[Cedric Paillard]

Let's say one thing clearly: Female pilots are usually better than male pilots. I flew with a female captain, who taught me more and was a better pilot. I can confirm that.

The issue with female pilots is the same issue you have for getting female electrical engineers. I don't want to differentiate between pilots and engineers. It's the same issue. Everything that has been written is true.

At OAS, we have a group called Women at OAS. I encourage you to meet with the ladies behind me; one or two of our pilots are here. Please talk to them.

It's hard to be a female pilot in an industry where only 6% are female. We're trying, but it's a marketing issue. It's pushing and advertising.

We're doing this with females and first nations, aboriginals, to make sure that...because they're going to stay in their northern communities. Any help we can get from the government on that front will help; that's for sure.

It's what we're calling a marketing issue....

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

We'll move on to Mr. Nantel for a very short question or comment.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Ms. Domingue, there's no doubt that you did everything possible to reach an agreement with the municipality, airport and flight schools, but that this agreement didn't last because the situation has worsened. What message do you have to convey to the people who will make recommendations and who must take into account both the urgent need for pilots and the need to co-exist with densely populated areas such as this one. The issue has been well documented by a Quebec agency, which confirmed that aircraft flights affect stress levels and that the exhaust generated by the combustion of leaded fuel contributes to air pollution.

[Johanne Domingue]

I think that public consultations should be held to tell communities what's really happening and how to respond. As I was saying, we must live together. Yet things continue to be hidden from us. Journalists let us know what's happening, but we're always the last to know. The airports seem to want to keep us in the dark for fear that the public will react. I think that it would be beneficial to work together, since we need to live together. Can we tell each other the truth and work toward a common solution?

We also need the measurements related to the issue. I can have an idea of the situation. The situation can be improved. However, I won't know this until I can look at scientific evidence and access noise measurements. Show transparency and tell us the truth. We'll come out on top. In addition, please stop establishing noisy air corridors over densely populated residential areas. There are other places for these corridors. After all, car racing circuits aren't built just anywhere. Let's be consistent.

[Pierre Nantel, NDP, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Thank you, Ms. Domingue.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

Thank you to both our witnesses today; we appreciate it very much.

The meeting is adjourned.