Evidence of meeting #140 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 pilots.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Director, Legislative and Environmental Affairs, Shipping Federation of Canada
I used your time.
I think we want to be clear on vision, safety, efficiencies and user needs. We believe that the equilibrium Mr. Pelletier was referring to in the purpose and principles could be strengthened to reflect the user perspective, because safety has always been there. It's not disappearing. We need to start moving on the efficiency side of it as well. That's one point we want to stress very much.
President, Chamber of Marine Commerce
I think again on the vision piece, certainly you're hearing the message that an expanded certification system would be part of our vision. We have to remember that safety is clearly the number one priority for all marine shipping stakeholders. Pilotage is just one element of the safety system. It's a comprehensive system. We also have regulatory oversight, traffic control systems, advanced navigation technology. We've had tremendous change in that area from 50 years ago when this act was first put in place, and rigorous licensing and training of crews. The certification angle, as Mr. Turner referenced, is that we have a very successful system that is potentially even safer today in the Great Lakes in terms of incidents and occurrences. We've done a very good study recently that shows an even better system under certification from a safety perspective. Let's get on with that and syndicate and expand that further where we can.
Capt Michael Burgess
When they talk about expanding certification, it makes me a little nervous. The certification process that's in place in the Great Lakes is there because we had nothing prior to 2012. It was 10 trips, and nobody had to show anybody they knew what they were doing, and off they went on a ship.
It's tightened it up immensely and I didn't want to bring up the numbers, but since the CMC has.... Unfortunately, last year you didn't have a good year. There were over twice as many incidents on the domestic fleet than there were with licensed pilots on board.
Anything that's going to weaken the pilot certification process is definitely a concern to everybody in this country.
President, Chamber of Shipping of British Columbia
If we look 10 years out, the pressures are going to be very different. We're going to have major energy projects that will require the delivery of the service they provide. The pilots are going to look very different and are going to demand different challenges and ways to deliver that service.
As I mentioned in my remarks, our awareness of our impacts on the environment are becoming well known and our ability to mitigate them will require a flexible and adaptable framework.
This suite of amendments hopefully points us in a direction where it will be easier to have that science-based, evidence-based discussion about how this pilotage framework needs to evolve.
Liberal
Ken Hardie Liberal Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC
I have a quick question. I noticed that one of the amendments will take all of you off the boards of the pilotage authorities. Are you comfortable with that? Are there mechanisms that will allow you to make sure that your interests are on the table? Maybe we could have one comment from each group.
Capt Simon Pelletier
As a matter of fact, it's true. There will be no users of pilotage services, or providers of pilotage services, appointed to the boards of directors. We think that has some value. We don't feel that we will be out of the loop or out of the discussions. I think there's some mechanism to replace the expertise that those boards would need—operating committees or whatever—and that they could use to have this operational expertise for themselves. We do agree with the change.
President, Shipping Federation of Canada
I have an additional comment. I think Mr. Grégoire, in his report, suggested the change in the composition of the boards, but he also recommended a national pilotage committee. I think that was meant to cover any issues that came up, with respect to experience on the board.
Conservative
President, Chamber of Shipping of British Columbia
If you're all right with it, I'll jump in, Ms. Block.
President, Chamber of Shipping of British Columbia
I've testified about Bill C-48 at this committee before, and I think you know my feelings about it. Marine policy has to be based on evidence, and I had a concern about that. Having said that, since we're here to discuss pilotage, this is an evidence-based framework that has to support keeping Canada's coasts safe and moving trade. I think the changes in this bill can support that and, hopefully, that will prevail. That's why I remain optimistic, despite some of the comments I heard.
Conservative
Kelly Block Conservative Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK
Thank you very much. I appreciate that.
I do want to go back to one comment you made, Mr. Broad, regarding your concerns about the transfer of the full cost of administering the act. I want to understand what you believe will be the implications of this policy for your industry, if this bill is passed in its current form, without addressing the concerns you've raised.
President, Shipping Federation of Canada
I think our concern is that right now, the responsibility for regulation is with the authorities. That's going to be transferred over to Transport Canada, so one would assume, normally, that you would go where the resources and the authorities are and increase those in Transport Canada, and there wouldn't be any change. We don't think that's going to happen. It's going to take a couple of years for this to move forward. We're not going to see that move on. It's going to end up in the tariff in the future. That's our main concern.
There is a public-good component to this kind of legislation . We have to recognize that.
NDP
Robert Aubin NDP Trois-Rivières, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'm the member for Trois-Rivières, and in my constituency, I'm fortunate to have the magnificent Laviolette bridge. The bridge looks nice, but its construction is a bit fragile.
I want to address my technological concerns. I boarded a ship last year, not too long ago. I'm far from being an expert in the field, but I really didn't see what technology could be added.
Is the technology being developed to replace pilots or to enable pilots to respond more quickly because they're better supported by the technological equipment around them?
Obviously, my question is for the pilots.
Capt Simon Pelletier
Good question.
Technology is everywhere in our daily work. I started my career in 1994. Technology has certainly evolved considerably since that time. As a result of the new technology that has been implemented over the years, the efficiency of vessel movements has evolved significantly, and in the right direction.
Technology helps pilots and sailors make better decisions, which helps vessels navigate more safely. It also brings larger and more hollow vessels into ports, which increases the efficiency of marine transportation. In most cases, the technology aims to enhance the safety, efficiency and decision-making of sailors and pilots, among other things.
