Mr. Chair and other members of this committee, we are here today to call for an independent inquiry into Transport Canada's validation of the Boeing 737 Max. Because our government didn't fully understand what they were validating, Transport Canada was essentially rubber-stamping a doomed plane. Eighteen Canadians perished, and our government shrugged.
I want to begin this testimony by stating that I am speaking on behalf of the family of Danielle Moore, my daughter, whose life was snuffed out after flight ET302 crashed into a farmer's field in Ethiopia. She was on her way to the United Nations Environment Assembly, representing Canada through a federal government youth program. Her loss will always remain a devastating shock to her family and friends. Her death has left a gaping hole in Canada's sustainability communities.
Danielle lived her life full of hope and believed in creating great change for a more just and environmentally sustainable planet. In her 24 years, she touched the lives of countless people across Canada and around the world. She was a courageous leader, champion for justice and environmental activist always keen to carry the hard work of sustainability forward. Although she accomplished so much in her life, she had so much more left to give. My daughter was one of 346 incredible people who lost their lives because of political expediency, broken government regulations and criminal negligence.
On October 29, 2018, Flight JT610 crashed into the Java Sea due to a number of factors documented in the final congressional committee report on the Boeing 737 Max. Consider this scenario. If the FAA qualified the flight controls plan for the Max, stating that the hazard category may be catastrophic but Boeing was working on a fix, would Transport Canada validate the plane? I think the answer is no, because it would not be airworthy. We need to know why Canada issued only a memory aid when they didn't even understand what they validated.
Canadians have a right to know why Transport Canada issued a concern letter about the anti-stall system before the crash but didn't use their authority to take effective action when they stated that they did not agree with the FAA interpretation.
Certification should have been deemed null and void. There was no redundancy or fail-safe mechanism for a critical system that resulted in the deaths of our loved ones. Did any engineer recommend grounding the plane? Did Canadian and American authorities feel superior in their knowledge and downplay the Lion Air crash because it occurred in a developing country? Would Canada have grounded the Max if the crash had happened in Canada?
There was enough data, information and evidence to ground the plane after the first Max crash. In fact, after the airworthiness directive was issued following the first crash, the FAA performed an analysis, which concluded that if left uncorrected, the MCAS design flaw in the Max could result in as many as 15 future fatal crashes or 3,000 deaths over the life of this fleet.
Transport Canada cannot in good conscience defend their lack of action by saying they might have grounded the plane in hindsight. They neglect to acknowledge the first crash. Boeing and the aviation agencies had six years to get it right. However, flight crews only had four seconds to diagnose the problem and to take action.
Furthermore, the minister's response to Canadian operators followed the FAA in lockstep, but modified it to a memory aid for simplicity. He knew the crew needed more time to react. Since the minister prides himself on making decisions based on facts and data, we demand to see the risk analysis he used to support his issuance of a memory aid in lieu of grounding the plane in Canada.
Like the appointment of the FAA administrator, the appointment of the Minister of Transport in Canada is political. Safety directives should be recommended and implemented by those who know the technical information best, and not for political optics. Safety should be apolitical. Was there any discussion whatsoever within Transport Canada regarding the grounding of the Max? Transport Canada's process of safeguarding travellers must conform to its mission statement.
The minister did not even follow his own tenet of action based on data after the first crash because he did not fully understand what his own department validated. The validation was premature. This evasion of facts and complicity with the United States was further evident after the second crash. Two days after 18 Canadians were killed on this plane, the minister doubled down on his position by stating he would board a Boeing 737 “without hesitation”. This was one day after he said that he doesn't want to make any premature decisions. His actions do not match his words; they match industry's objectives.
On behalf of my daughter and the concerned flying public, we demand that the actions taken by Canada's transport minister and civil aviation agency be examined as they pertain to validation and continuous operational safety of the Max. Only a thorough independent inquiry can achieve this.
Thank you.
I look forward to your questions.