Evidence of meeting #70 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 passengers.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Helena Borges  Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Transport
Melissa Fisher  Associate Deputy Commissioner, Mergers Directorate, Competition Bureau
Ryan Greer  Director, Transportation and Infrastructure Policy, Canadian Chamber of Commerce
Mark Schaan  Director General, Marketplace Framework Policy Branch, Strategic Policy Sector, Department of Industry
Anthony Durocher  Deputy Commissioner, Monopolistic Practices Directorate, Competition Bureau
Douglas Lavin  Vice-President, Members and External Relations, North America, International Air Transport Association
Glenn Priestley  Executive Director, Northern Air Transport Association
Allistair Elliott  International Representative, Canada, Canadian Federation of Musicians
John McKenna  President and Chief Executive Officer, Air Transport Association of Canada
Francine Schutzman  President, Local 180, Musicians Association of Ottawa-Gatineau, Canadian Federation of Musicians
Bernard Bussières  Vice President, Legal Affairs and Corporate Secretary, Transat A.T. Inc., Air Transat
Neil Parry  Vice-President, Service Delivery, Canadian Air Transport Security Authority
Jeff Walker  Chief Strategy Officer, National Office, Canadian Automobile Association
Massimo Bergamini  President and Chief Executive Officer, National Airlines Council of Canada
George Petsikas  Senior Director, Government and Industry Affairs, Transat A.T. Inc., Air Transat
Jacob Charbonneau  President and Chief Executive Officer, Flight Claim Canada Inc.
Daniel-Robert Gooch  President, Canadian Airports Council
Gábor Lukács  Founder and Coordinator, Air Passenger Rights
Meriem Amir  Legal Advisor, Flight Claim Canada

9:30 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair (Hon. Judy A. Sgro (Humber River—Black Creek, Lib.)) Liberal Judy Sgro

I'm calling to order meeting number 70 of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities. Pursuant to the order of reference of Monday, June 19, 2017, we are considering Bill C-49, an act to amend the Canada Transportation Act and other acts respecting transportation and to make related and consequential amendments to other acts.

This is day four, I'd like to say to the minister, that parliamentarians have been here along with Hill staff to deal with Bill C-49. We're very pleased to see, Minister Garneau, that you and your staff have joined us. I'm going to turn the floor over to you for your opening remarks.

9:30 a.m.

Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount Québec

Liberal

Marc Garneau LiberalMinister of Transport

Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm delighted to be here. I've been looking forward to this for a long time.

Madam Chair and honourable members, I am pleased to meet with the committee today to talk about Bill C-49, the Transportation Modernization Act.

I would like to thank the committee for studying the bill before the House is scheduled to resume. That is very much appreciated. I know that you've had three very busy days.

A strong transportation system is fundamental to Canada's overall economic performance and competitiveness. This bill, once passed, would make amendments to the Canada Transportation Act and other related legislation that would position our country to capitalize on global opportunities and make improvements to better meet the needs and service expectations of Canadians.

The measures included in Bill C-49 reflect what Canadians told us they expect during the extensive consultations we undertook last year. We held more than 200 meetings and round tables across the country with transportation and trade stakeholders, indigenous groups, provinces and territories, and individual Canadians to hear their views on the future of transportation in Canada. Our work is aimed at creating and facilitating the conditions to achieve long-term success, and this is precisely what this bill proposes to do.

Bill C-49 is an important first step, and I emphasize “first step”, towards delivering on early and concrete measures in support of transportation 2030, which is the strategic plan for the future of transportation in Canada. This bill focuses on our immediate priorities in the air, rail, and marine sectors. It aims to implement a series of measures to promote an integrated transportation system that is safe, secure, green, and innovative, and that will contribute to our economic growth and a cleaner environment, not to mention the well-being of Canadians when they travel.

The concerns of Canadians have been highlighted in recent months with the much-publicized cases of unacceptable treatment of air travellers both in this country and elsewhere. Bill C-49 proposes to mandate the Canadian Transportation Agency to develop, in consultation with Transport Canada, new regulations to enhance Canada's air passenger rights. These new rules would ensure that air passenger rights are clear, consistent, and fair for both travellers and air carriers.

Some examples of issues the new regulations would address include denied boarding in cases of overbooking, delays, or cancellations; lost or damaged baggage; tarmac delays beyond a certain period of time; seating children next to a parent or guardian at no extra cost; and ensuring that carriers develop clear standards for transporting musical instruments. Clear information will be provided to travellers in plain language about carriers' obligations and how to seek compensation and file complaints.

Under this proposed legislation, Canadians and anyone travelling to, from, and within Canada would benefit from a uniform, predictable, and reasonable approach. My objective is to ensure that passengers would have a clear understanding of their rights as air travellers while ensuring that this new approach would not negatively impact access to air services or the cost of travel.

I've been clear that regulations would include provisions whose intent would be that any denied boarding due to overbooking is done voluntarily and that under no circumstances someone be involuntarily removed from an aircraft after they have boarded. As Canadians, we expect that air carriers serving our country treat their passengers with the respect they deserve and that they live up to their commitments.

This bill also proposes that regulations be made to require data from all air service providers to be able to monitor the air traveller experience, including compliance with the proposed air passenger rights.

The legislation also proposes to liberalize international ownership restrictions from 25% to 49% of voting interests for Canadian air carriers, with accompanying safeguards, while retaining the 25% limit for specialty air services.

These safeguards limit a single international investor to hold no more than 25% of the voting interests of a Canadian air carrier, and no combination of foreign air carriers could own more than 25% of a Canadian carrier.

The direct impact of higher levels of international investment would be that Canadian air carriers or companies wishing to create new air services would have access to a wider pool of risk capital. Consequently, that pool of capital, from both international and domestic sources, would allow the Canadian air sector to become more competitive, and would lead to more choices and to lower prices for Canadians.

Another improvement in the bill is that it proposes a new, streamlined and predictable process for the authorization of joint ventures between air carriers, taking into account competition and wider public interest considerations.

In Canada, air carrier joint ventures are currently examined from the perspective of possible harm to competition by the Competition Bureau, under the Competition Act. Unlike in many other countries, notably the United States, Canada's current approach does not allow for the consideration of the wider public interest benefits with respect to specific routes. Furthermore, the bureau's review is not subject to specific timelines.

This raises concerns that the current approach to assessing joint ventures may make Canadian carriers less attractive to global counterparts as joint venture partners and may be limiting the ability of Canadian carriers to engage in this industry trend.

The bill proposes measures that would allow the Minister of Transport to consider and approve air carrier joint ventures, where it is in the public interest, taking into account competition considerations. The minister would work in close consultation with the Commissioner of Competition to ensure that he or she be properly informed regarding any concerns with regard to competition. Air carriers that would choose to have their proposed joint ventures assessed through the new process would be given clear timelines for an expected decision.

Globally, airports are making unprecedented investments in passenger screening to facilitate travel and gain global economic advantages. Canada's largest airports have also expressed an interest in investing in this area, and smaller airports have shown interest in obtaining access to screening services to promote local economic development.

The bill would create a more flexible framework for the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority to provide screening services on a cost-recovery basis, supporting efforts to maintain an aviation system that is both secure and cost-effective.

Bill C-49 also proposes significant enhancements to increase the safety of the rail sector in order to build a safer, more secure rail transportation system that Canadians trust. As you all know, rail safety, as I've said many times, is my number one priority.

The proposed modifications to the Railway Safety Act would mandate the installation of voice and video recorders to strengthen rail safety by providing objective data about crew actions leading up to and during a rail accident or incident. Beyond that, the requirement would also increase opportunities to analyze identified safety concerns to prevent accidents from occurring.

This would not only require companies to install the recorders, but it would also limit how the recorded data could be used, within strict criteria. For instance, the Transportation Safety Board would have access to the recorded data for post-accident investigations. Transport Canada and railway companies would also have access to the data for proactive safety management and for following up on incidents and accidents not investigated by the Transportation Safety Board, but under specific conditions. The specific limits on the use of the data are designed to maximize the safety value of this technology while limiting its potential to infringe on employees' privacy rights.

Canada's freight rail system is critical to our economy. Bill C-49 would strengthen that system by enhancing its transparency, balance, and long-term efficiency. Let me highlight key examples.

Under this bill, shippers could seek reciprocal financial penalties for breaches of their service agreements by the railways. They would have fair access to more timely processes for settling service and rate disputes. More shippers would be eligible for the streamlined final arbitration process in particular. Further, new measures would ensure that the agency offers shippers informal dispute resolution options as well as guidance.

The bill would also introduce a new measure, long-haul interswitching, to give captive shippers across regions and sectors access to an alternative railway. Rates would be set based on comparable traffic, with the agency having discretion in determining comparability. The bill would modernize key grain measures, such as the maximum reserve revenue entitlement, to promote railway investments—and that's a key feature—and ensure that interswitching rates are updated regularly and compensate railways adequately.

Further, Bill C-49 would enhance sector transparency by requiring large railways to report some performance, service, and rate data about their Canadian operations. Transport Canada would have the authority to publicly report rate trends.

With these and other measures of this bill, we are taking important steps to ensure that Canadians have the freight rail system they need now and in the years ahead.

These aren't the only ways that we propose to improve trade to global markets. Bill C-49 would also amend the Coasting Trade Act and the Canada Marine Act to enhance marine transportation and to allow access for marine-related infrastructure funding. Specifically, amendments to the Coasting Trade Act would allow all vessel owners to reposition their owned or leased empty containers between locations in Canada using vessels of any registry. This would support greater logistical flexibility for industry. In addition, modifications to the Canada Marine Act would permit Canada port authorities to access the Canada infrastructure bank for loans and loan guarantees to support investments in key enabling infrastructure.

In conclusion, I believe that this proposed legislation advances important actions that will help to bring Canada's transportation system into the 21st century. Ultimately, we do need a system to meet the demands of today's economy so that we can keep Canada's travellers and cargo moving efficiently and safely. Passage of this bill as soon as possible this fall would represent a critical milestone in achieving tangible improvements to our national transportation system that will benefit Canadians for decades to come.

Thank you for your attention. I now look forward to answering your questions.

9:45 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro

Thank you very much, Minister Garneau. We appreciate your being here and giving us such an overview.

We'll move to our questions now, with Ms. Raitt.

9:45 a.m.

Conservative

Lisa Raitt Conservative Milton, ON

Thank you very much, Minister. I appreciate it. Congratulations to you and to the department for bringing forth this legislation. I think it's a good start, as you said at the beginning.

I have a couple of questions that have to do more or less with some of the stuff that may not have been pursued as far as I think we could have pursued it, and I'd like to get your comments. For this round of questions specifically, the first has to do with the bill of rights and the second one has to do with short-line rail.

On the bill of rights, the CTA gave testimony that they will be looking to industry, consumer rights associations, Canadians, and the travelling public for consultation in developing their regs. I guess I'm concerned, Minister, that it doesn't say they'll be consulting with CBSA, CATSA, or Nav Canada, or indeed the other authorities, which could conceivably add to a kind of delay that may cause the airline to be subject to many complaints. Could I get brief comments on that?

Then I have a question about the ability for CTA to bundle complaints together.

9:50 a.m.

Liberal

Marc Garneau Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC

I'm sorry. What was the last part?

9:50 a.m.

Conservative

Lisa Raitt Conservative Milton, ON

The Air Transat inquiry, of course, caught a lot of people's attention, and the only reason the CTA could do this inquiry is that for international flights, they're allowed to self-initiate. They don't possess that ability for domestic flights. I'm wondering what the thought process was in not extending that kind of ability to the CTA in order to self-initiate inquiries that are dealing with domestic flights.

9:50 a.m.

Liberal

Marc Garneau Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC

Thank you for your two questions.

There is no question that when the CTA begins its consultation process with the aim of coming up with a charter of rights for passengers.... As I've said many times before, if you buy a ticket for a particular flight, you are entitled to be able to take that flight unless it is beyond the control of that airline. That will be very explicitly stated in the bill of rights. There are certain circumstances when.... We all recognize that sometimes weather can cause delays. We all recognize that there could be situations where air traffic control, for example, is having difficulties in terms of controlling all of the traffic and that may result in delays. We all realize that there could be a security alert at an airport that immobilizes the normal operations of an airport.

These all will be clearly stated so that we are focusing on situations where a right of a passenger has been infringed when it is within the control of the airline. That will be very clearly pointed out. There are many instances where that occurs. I've highlighted some of those. I can assure you that when the consultations do take place, and they will take place broadly with all of the groups that are involved, we will very clearly identify what it means to be “within the control” and “not within the control”.

On the question of the CTA and the situation that we looked at with respect to “own motion”, if you like, for the CTA, we decided that the current parameters that regulate how the CTA operates are good parameters; that we will reserve the right to decide—the minister of transport can make that decision—whether we want them to engage in additional inquiries; that this mechanism is perfectly satisfactory at this point; and, that we will not change the role of the CTA in terms of its present mandate in order to ensure that we preserve its quasi-judicial role in terms of consumer protection. We feel that the way it's organized at the moment is perfectly acceptable.

9:50 a.m.

Conservative

Lisa Raitt Conservative Milton, ON

Thank you.

As well, there's one of the small, niggling issues that was always a problem with the CTA. Given that specifically because of your awareness campaign from your government, there are a lot more complaints to the CTA.... I don't know if people understand this, but the CTA has to deal with each of these on the basis of one complaint at a time. It is incredibly time-consuming. Every investigator has to pick up the phone and call about that specific complaint, but a lot of times these complaints are actually very similar.

You didn't allow the CTA to bundle them together in a one-complaint process in order to gather up all the different complaints originating from one incident. I'm wondering if you could tell me why.

9:50 a.m.

Liberal

Marc Garneau Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC

You've very clearly explained the way the situation exists at the moment.

Yes, at the moment there is a mechanism for a passenger to make a complaint, but they have to know about that mechanism, and many passengers did not know about it or, when they did know about it, felt it was too onerous. I thank the head of the CTA for highlighting this last fall. Yes, it led to more complaints, because people became aware of the fact that there was a mechanism in place, a mechanism that sometimes took a long time and discouraged people from taking action.

That's the whole purpose of the charter of rights:,that there will be a clear set of regulations in place to identify the situations where a passenger's rights have been violated. Those will apply to all passengers.

I am certainly hoping for far fewer cases where passengers need to have recourse to the CTA, because the processes will be in place, clearly explained, and in the English and French languages. They will be able to immediately deal with the airlines in a case like that and, as a result, there will be fewer requirements for the CTA to get involved. Where the CTA does have to get involved, yes, there will be the recognition that these can apply to more than the person who is specifically having to deal with the complaint through the CTA.

9:55 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro

Thank you very much, Mr. Garneau.

Mr. Fraser.

9:55 a.m.

Liberal

Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Minister, thank you for joining us this morning.

I have three questions and only six minutes, so I'll dig right in.

At home, I do hear about the air passenger bill of rights. We've all experienced the irritants that you've outlined during your remarks. How can the air passenger bill of rights ensure that passengers who experience these ordinary frustrations, and they are frustrating, have recourse to some kind of positive outcome when their rights are infringed?

9:55 a.m.

Liberal

Marc Garneau Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC

Well, that's the whole purpose. The whole purpose is to make them aware of their rights in clear language. When they are aware of those rights, they will be able to immediately invoke their rights when they have been infringed, whether it's on overbooking or other situations that are covered by passenger rights.

The whole purpose at the moment is to make sure that it's clear and in simple language. There are clearly identified compensations in the case where rights have been infringed. I think this is something that has been long awaited, and we're going to make it happen. Our hope is that it will be in place in 2018 and that all passengers will be able to use this if their rights are infringed.

9:55 a.m.

Liberal

Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS

Another issue that I'm particularly interested in is the international ownership changes to 49%. I come from a part of the world, and my colleague Ms. Raitt comes from the same part of the world, where a lot of people would love to travel and take a vacation but can't afford it, quite frankly. Do you think this measure is going to bring down the cost of air travel in Canada? Do you think it's going to extend services to parts of Canada that do not have effective service today?

9:55 a.m.

Liberal

Marc Garneau Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC

For that, my hope is that the change in the rules of ownership from 25% to 49%—and to a lesser extent, joint ventures—will actually end up allowing the airlines to serve more communities at a lower cost. It's not a just a question of trying to create the environment where new airlines are created, but that those airlines, for competitive reasons, actually will offer flight routes that are not presently served because there's a market for them to do it.

It's not just a question of bringing down the cost, but it's also the hope that they are going to serve destinations that at the moment the bigger airlines perhaps are not currently serving.

9:55 a.m.

Liberal

Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS

With the exemptions given to two airlines previously under more or less the same rules that are being implemented through Bill C-49, are you seeing action in that direction already?

9:55 a.m.

Liberal

Marc Garneau Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC

Well, certainly we provided an exemption right away to Jetlines and Enerjet to set themselves up. They have been very active in trying to seek out particular markets they could serve, in some cases from airports that are not presently served. I would encourage you to speak to them individually.

Some of them will be launching in the months or years to come. When this bill becomes law, I'm hoping that in the future there will be others that will find they can get the capital necessary to start their own operations. That's the whole purpose here.

9:55 a.m.

Liberal

Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS

Finally, we have about two minutes to go, and I'm curious as to your thoughts more generally speaking. This bill has a number of measures that impact the efficiency in our national transportation system. We're dealing in an era of international trade. I find that back home in Nova Scotia it's a difficult conversation to have and to say that “these trade deals, these investments in a national transportation corridor are going to make government and the economy work for you”. That's what people care about.

Could you perhaps elaborate on how some of the measures in Bill C-49 are going to create jobs for the fishermen in getting their product to market in my riding and for the manufacturers and the farmers not just in my community, but in communities like mine? How is this going to make a difference in the lives of the people we represent?

10 a.m.

Liberal

Marc Garneau Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC

As the Minister of Transport, I've found that one of the things that is important to communicate, because it's not well known, is how effectively your transportation system works. That applies to all of the country and to all modes of transportation. It has an incredibly important effect on the economy of the country. How well we move and how efficiently we move from all parts of the country that have products that need to be moved has an incredibly important effect on the economy.

I always talk about transport being an economic portfolio, and some of my predecessors felt exactly the same way. It is sometimes a challenge to explain that if you improve the transportation system, which we believe is certainly in part addressed in this bill, you're actually going to improve the economy, and that ultimately will benefit all Canadians.

10 a.m.

Liberal

Sean Fraser Liberal Central Nova, NS

As an example, I'm looking at some of the measures in marine transportation, both the investments in ports and the ability to more effectively get empty containers to those ports. One of the big things we're looking for has to do with the recent trade agreement with Europe and the tariffs coming off seafood. I have two coasts in my riding. Is this going to help fishermen get their product to market and get a bigger return and boost the economy in rural Nova Scotia?

10 a.m.

Liberal

Marc Garneau Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC

You give a good example. From the marine point of view, repositioning containers is an incredibly important part of the whole business of transporting products. We all understand this. We've seen the big container ships. They bring things loaded up with product and then have to go to another place to load up with others, but the containers aren't there.

The repositioning of those containers will definitely benefit the marine industry on the east coast and our agreement with CETA, and I think ultimately the fishermen in Nova Scotia as well.

10 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Judy Sgro

Thank you very much, Minister Garneau.

We will now go on to Monsieur Aubin.

September 14th, 2017 / 10 a.m.

NDP

Robert Aubin NDP Trois-Rivières, QC

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Good morning, Minister. I have an omnibus list of questions to match Bill C-49, so let's try to be efficient. I will ask you short questions that you could answer briefly.

Let's begin with the charter. For at least a year and a half, I have been hearing you speak in some detail about rights that should be guaranteed under that charter. So why is Bill C-49 full of philosophical intentions with regard to a future consultation, instead of a true charter we could vote on?

10 a.m.

Liberal

Marc Garneau Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC

Thank you for the question, Mr. Aubin.

First, I want to clarify that this is not an omnibus bill. In fact, 90% of the content of Bill C-49 has to do with the same piece of legislation, the Canada Transportation Act.

Second, as I very clearly explained, when it comes to the future charter of passenger rights, we decided that a regulatory process would be much more effective. So instead of including the charter's contents in the bill, we have mandated the Canadian Transportation Agency to prepare the charter, which will ultimately be submitted for my approval and will then be published as a regulation.

10 a.m.

NDP

Robert Aubin NDP Trois-Rivières, QC

If I may....

10 a.m.

Liberal

Marc Garneau Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC

Allow me to finish.

It will be a regulation. That way, if we decide in three years to make amendments to that charter, the process will be much simpler. It is actually much less complicated to amend regulations than to come back to the House to amend a bill.