Transport Committee on March 19th, 2024

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Hope, BC]

Thank you very much.

The final question I have for you is this: When will you be reporting back on the progress of all these initiatives you have? Obviously, we've heard that the desire of this committee is to have information provided to us on some of the progress, some of the investments and spending that you've made. How do you report back internally and publicly on whether these initiatives are actually meeting their goals? We heard today from the Auditor General that well-meaning programs are fine but that the reporting and the measuring of the impacts are also important.

How are you reporting back to Canadians on whether or not the things you're putting in place are actually making a difference for passengers with disabilities?

[Michael Rousseau]

Thank you for the question. It's a very interesting one.

Internally, certainly, our senior leadership group, including me, gets data on a regular basis on how we're doing in terms of the initiatives being put in place, adherence to those initiatives and, of course, the number of complaints, which is hopefully declining as a result of these initiatives. That's internal.

Regarding external reporting, we haven't talked about it much internally. It's a good reminder to me to look at that situation as part of an annual report, or part of a proxy, or part of an AIF or all the other public documents we provide, so the public knows we are doing better. We certainly have some literature in some of our public documents now about accessibility, but it does not include many numbers, if any. I think your point is well taken. It should be enhanced as time goes on with some numbers, as well.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Rousseau.

Thank you, Mr. Strahl.

The four minutes remaining are yours, Mr. Badawey.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm going to start off with a statement, followed by a question, Mr. Chairman.

What I'm most interested in, Mr. Rousseau, is the harmonizing of procedures based on the harmonizing of standards. Frankly, it's not just about the airlines. It's an end-to-end experience for the customer. That includes all partners, from the time the individual gets to the curb until the time they land and get to their destination. With that said, there's an expected level of service. All providers are going to be at the table with that. Once again, harmonizing those procedures based on harmonized standards is extremely important.

Although Mr. Muys and the Conservatives don't value public consultation and consultation with the partners, we do. This is the reason why, on May 9, we are going to have that consultation. Call it whatever you want—an accessibility summit or public consultation. The bottom line is that we're going to be discussing, with all partners, the level of service expected and, with that, reaching for those outcomes we want to establish.

Mr. Rousseau, do you feel that this process—for airports, CATSA, CBSA, international partners, airlines and, of course, most importantly, the disability community—would be an opportunity to, in fact, work towards harmonizing those procedures based on the standards established, having a strategic plan and action plans and, of course, executing the deliverables established out of those action plans?

Do you think this will in fact accomplish that?

[Michael Rousseau]

I think it's a good start. A lot of work is going to come out of that, because, as you said, it's complex. Certainly, better coordination among the partners will result in a better experience for customers with disabilities. I firmly believe that.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

How much time do I have, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

You have two minutes.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Great.

I want to emphasize this. This is about two things: caring and respect. At the end of the day, we want to ensure that, before the iron fist comes down with respect to decisions that can be made—like the motion that was just brought forward—we consider the consequences of decisions and recognize that mobility aids are not just luggage. Rather, they are extensions of one's body, as well as independence.

My second question, Mr. Rousseau—and I'd like to get a bit granular—is this: What have you moved forward with now that is tangible, and what can you bring to the table as part of your sector, with other partners, in order to move forward with reaching those outcomes expected by the disability community?

[Michael Rousseau]

First, in terms of mobility aids, what we've done recently is change our policy. We are allowing as many mobility aids as we can into the cabin, so the customers have them close by. That's in place right now. Second, we built a technology application through which customers can monitor where their mobility aid is and ensure it's in the cargo bay.

Within the cargo bay, there are two important aspects. One, mobility aids will be treated as priority. They'll go on last and come off first, so they're available for the customer when the customer comes off the plane. Two—and this is an important area—we have changed our internal processes to try to isolate the mobility aid so it does not get broken or damaged. As you know, planes hit turbulence once in a while, so we want to make sure the mobility aid is strapped into the cargo bay, either by itself or away from any other cargo that exists, in order to minimize the risk of damage.

I think those are four strong initiatives we've already put in place. We'll continue to look at more, while working with our partners and experts.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Rousseau.

I would like to thank you, Mr. Rheault, Mr. Stevens and, of course, Ms. Wilson for your testimony today on this very important study.

I'm going to suspend the meeting for two minutes to allow for our team to set up the next round of witnesses.

This meetings stands suspended.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

I call this meeting back to order.

Colleagues, for the second panel, we have appearing before us, from Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act Alliance, Professor David Lepofsky, who is the chair. Mr. Chair, I want to thank you for being here. From the Council of Canadians with Disabilities, we have Ms. Heather Walkus, who is the national chair. She is joining us by video conference.

We will begin with opening remarks.

I'll turn the floor over to you, Mr. Lepofsky. The floor is yours.

[David Lepofsky, Chair, Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act Alliance]

Thank you.

I want to thank the excellent team of law students from the law school at Western, who've provided tremendous support for what I'm going to say. Anything that's wrong is my fault. Anything that's right is their fault.

Enough is enough. As a blind person, I dread entering Canadian airspace. I never know whether the service I'm going to get—for basic accommodation needs that are well known and easy to provide—will be reliable or pathetic.

We heard from Air Canada today that they're doing a good job, that they've put in place measures that are needed to fix this, that the problems are few or infrequent, and that all they really need is more education or training for their staff. Every single one of those statements is wrong, and the fact that Air Canada's leadership said this is proof that we need far more systemic solutions. Let me offer you some.

Number one, the U.S. has the Airline Passengers with Disabilities Bill of Rights, so why don't we? It is absurd that, on a flight to Atlanta three weeks ago, my email from Air Canada told me about the American bill of rights, but nothing about the services available to me as a blind passenger in Canada, even though I'm on record and file as a blind passenger.

We need a new regulatory agency to oversee accessibility of air travel. The Canadian Transportation Agency has had this mandate not for years, but for decades. They have failed, and they are failing, and it's because they're too close to the airlines. Keep leaving it with them and you're going to keep getting the same results. How surprising is it that so few of us file so few complaints with their process? If you read the accessible air travel regulations they passed in 2019, they are more loopholes than rules. The fact of the matter is that they read like they were written by the airlines.

How about another basic solution that's easier than changing the regulatory agency? How about requiring airlines to automatically tell us passengers with disabilities what services they offer so that we're not having to go running around their websites, one airline at a time, hoping we can find it, hoping it's up to date? That's assuming we have a computer and can afford it, and have adaptive tech and can use it.

How about mandatorily requiring something like the U.S. bill of rights for passengers with disabilities? How about telling us, in every notification, whom to call for support, whom to call for curbside assistance? This is not rocket science, but they don't do it.

How about having one-stop support? How about having a fast-action, fast-service disability hotline at each airline? You phone it and you don't wait on hold for an hour, and you don't have to listen to miserably nerve-racking music; you just get someone who can route you through to the solution. It could be the way to request services and to file complaints. How about requiring the airlines on our flights and the airports in their announcements to regularly announce the availability of that hotline? If more people knew how to complain, the CEO of Air Canada wouldn't be coming here telling you how few complaints they get.

How about requiring the regulator to deploy secret shoppers so we have independent monitoring of how their services are? You heard from the CEO of Air Canada that they now announce pre-boarding for passengers with disabilities—not on the Air Canada flight I was on last night to come here.

How about having an assured front desk check-in at a large airport, like at terminal 1 in Toronto, where you don't have to try to brave a phalanx of stanchions and check-in machines, and other confusing signage and so on, so you can check in right inside the door? Air Canada didn't have it. Let's just say somebody got an interesting idea, and eventually they did have it, but then they killed it. I asked them to restore it. They didn't. I then heard that they did, but only for some flights and not others. If you can't figure it out, imagine how I feel.

How about requiring that one person will guide you through the whole airport, rather than being passed from one person to the next—sometimes as many as three or four—like you're a baton in a relay race?

We heard about the need for training. Can I tell you—I'm just giving you my experience; lots of people with disabilities can tell you the same—how many of their ground assistance persons assigned to guide me I have had to teach how to guide a blind person?

Did I mention this is not rocket science? These aren't bad people. They're in a bad system that needs to be fixed.

Let me wrap up by telling you there are a lot more things we can require. How about standards for new aircraft design?

I was on a plane just two weeks ago. Do you know that call button to let the flight attendant know you need help? It's always been a physical button, but more and more, it's a touch screen that blind people can't operate. Did they just invent blind people? This is ridiculous.

Now, I don't want to make it sound like it's all Air Canada. These things need to be done and measures need to be across the board. Air Canada is not the leader that we want airlines to follow. We need them all to become leaders and to change their practices.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you, Professor Lepofsky.

Next we'll go to Ms. Walkus.

The floor is yours.

Ms. Walkus, unfortunately you're on mute. I will wait for you to unmute yourself and then we'll restart the clock for you.

[Heather Walkus, National Chair, Council of Canadians with Disabilities]

Thank you for letting me know that. Many people like to use the mute button with me.

Thank you for having me here.

I have been involved in the federal transportation industry and disability since 1979. I was so happy when we finally got regulations, not voluntary codes of practice, which went into effect on June 25, 2020. Let me tell you, for someone who's been involved internationally and nationally around disability and travel, I thought, “What could possibly go wrong now?” In 2019, it looked like we were going to get there in one year, right in the middle of the COVID shutdown.

Do you think the airlines and the airports stopped at that point? No, they asked for exemptions, exceptions and extensions for putting in mandatory regulatory areas that they had to deal with, which they had a full year ahead, and all of a sudden, because of COVID, they couldn't do it.

We had to take the disability community and fight that request of the federal cabinet, and we had to have a global reaction to that. We should have been looking after our own people during that time, but we couldn't. Our people were hungry, they couldn't use cash, and they couldn't get proper health care assistance. We were hurting in the disability community, yet we mounted a campaign against the airlines to stop taking away the regulations we had fought for for dozens and dozens of years.

This is not new. We tried everything to make change with the industry. Now, we're not just talking about Air Canada; we're talking about interprovincial buses, interprovincial ferries and Via Rail. We have had to fight every inch of the way.

I noticed last month that some of the discussion was around “one person, one fare”. The Council of Canadians with Disabilities was the one that went to court against Air Canada to ensure that we had one person, one fare. Then one of our members followed that up with another court case to allow room for guide dogs and service dogs to be able to stretch out, because they immediately have to work after getting off a carrier.

Since those times and since those very important court cases, we've also gone against Via Rail because they were buying inaccessible rail cars. We fought them, and we won that, and the big principle that came out of that legal fight was that you cannot end a barrier by creating more.

We have regulations that embody some of those legal precedents that we set from the disability community. We didn't get any help. We had to do that on our own. We're still doing it on our own, and the biggest issue right now is that systemically it is not accessible.

If a person wants to utilize one person, one fare, every carrier does it differently. Every carrier wants a doctor's certificate. Every carrier uses a different type of certificate. They undermine what has already been won. I call it a death by a thousand cuts. Every time we try to enact what is already in place, there's some new barrier to change, which we have to then fight. It's like whack-a-mole. Every time you try to do something, it hits.

I'll tell you about the ridiculousness that David was talking about. I met up with a person who had just started on the accessibility desk for Air Canada at YVR. She was shaking. It was the first time she'd ever met a person with a disability. It's a good thing that I'm a nice person, because I helped her through it. I spent more time supporting her, but she, through two weeks in a classroom, had never met a person with a disability.

The question I have is, why is it that everyone is talking about us and everybody is doing their best for us without us? We've been here. We are always here. We are not stakeholders. Stakeholders come in and set the parameters, rules, of what they're in charge of. We are rights holders. When you look at the Constitution and section 15, you can see that people with disabilities are in there. We're at the very end, because in the first draft we weren't included. We had to fight for that, too, but we're there.

Every time we have to mount yet another campaign or another legal challenge, it takes people away from their families and from their regular lives, and we are all volunteers. We are not paid to do this. I am the chair of the largest and oldest disability rights organization in this country. We are 48 years old. We have been and are run mainly by volunteers, and we have made great strides to get us to where we are, but we need you.

We need this committee—and I'm so blessed to be here—not just to give recommendations but to follow them through. I would have loved to be able to sit in this morning and ask Air Canada questions. This big summit that's happening in a couple of months, the disability community has never been consulted about that. We need to be at the table with the same authority and to speak from that same authority to ask questions of Air Canada. They wove a pretty picture this morning, and some of it is pretty—they have done some good work and they have great staff—but systemically, when you try to get through to them, it's impossible.

I want to leave you with a very ugly picture. At WestJet, when a person is larger than the seats will allow within one person, one fare—that legal fight saw obesity as a disability—the demeaning process is that you have to have your butt measured. You have to put it on paper. A doctor has to sign off on it—try finding a doctor—and then you have to send it in. WestJet has an algorithm that they spent a lot of money on. It is proprietary. They take those numbers and they decide whether or not you get the extra seat. It is demeaning, embarrassing and expensive, and it is why many people with disabilities are not travelling anymore, because they're harmed. They're harmed through the process.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you—

[Heather Walkus]

I'll leave it there for now. I'd love to answer any questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you, Ms. Walkus. I didn't want to cut off your opening remarks. I just want to make sure that all the members here are able to ask you questions and get your point of view and expertise on the record.

We'll begin our line of questioning today with Mr. Strahl.

Mr. Strahl, you have six minutes.

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Hope, BC]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Lepofsky, I found your comments about being handed off three or four times in an airport—like “a baton”, I think you said—to be interesting. We've been talking about making sure that people are treated with respect and dignity and are provided a good service from the time they get out of their vehicle, or whatever transport they've used to get to the airport, until they're seated in the aircraft.

Your comments were focused largely on Air Canada. I assume that's the one you've had the most experience with. Has it been any different when you've travelled with any other domestic Canadian airlines? You referenced the United States. I see in some prepared remarks here that you also travel to Israel, etc. Where have you had the best experience, and with which airline, in terms of not being passed from person to person through the airport?

[David Lepofsky]

Thank you.

Number one, I've talked a lot about Air Canada, but it's not limited to Air Canada in terms of my experience in Canada.

Number two, my better experiences are anywhere outside this country. I'm sorry to say that, and I'm embarrassed as a Canadian to say it, but it proves that others can get it right. Why the heck can't we?

I talked about being passed like a baton. For the longest time—for decades—in terminal 1 in Toronto, you came through with one person taking you from the airplane all the way through customs to getting your bags and getting you out the door and into a cab. Now, because some geniuses put their heads together and thought this was a better thing, for the last 10, 15, 20 or maybe 50 metres, you have to be passed to an airport authority person—literally, for the last few metres. You spend more time having the two ground officials taking your boarding pass and scanning, as you're leaving one and being passed to the other one, than it takes to get out the darned door. Try that after a 13-hour flight, when you just want to get home and go to bed.

When you come in at Toronto, again, at Pearson terminal 1.... I'm just going to give this as an illustration. We haven't audited right across the airport—we can't; we're volunteers. However, it's important for you to understand this. You come to the counter, and then they tell you to sit and wait, sometimes upwards of an hour. However, the seats aren't right next to where the staff are. You're sitting there for an hour. You can't ask somebody where the bathroom is. A couple of flights ago, I actually thought they had forgotten me. There was no one to ask, so I just stood up. I heard someone that sounded like an airport.... How's this for dignity? I was standing up and bellowing, “Excuse me. Do you work for the airlines?” Why should we have to do that?

Similarly, on the way out—again, depending on this baton passing—you could be escorted from the aircraft to a seating area before you go through customs and then you are told to wait and that someone would come and get you. You ask, “How long?” They don't know, and they leave. There is no staff there to ask. I've sat there hearing somebody in another seat next to me saying, “I need help. I need to go to the bathroom.” This is an adult, in public, in an airport. Welcome to Canada.

This is not the way we should be treated.

[Mark Strahl, Conservative, Chilliwack—Hope, BC]

In all of these experiences, obviously, when you've booked your ticket, you have informed the airline that you require extra assistance, and they're still unprepared to deliver a seamless service.

[David Lepofsky]

It's totally inconsistent. The people are nice—don't get me wrong. They're not surly. They don't need sensitivity.... They need sufficient staff and a system that works, from the aircraft all the way out the door. Some do it. It varies from day to day and from flight to flight.

Yes, in my file, before I do a booking, it's automatically set out that I have a vision disability and that I need ground assistance. Usually when I book the reservation and I get the electronic ticket, it says it right there. However, it doesn't tell you whom to call for help.

I have one last thing. Why should just getting from the front curb into the airport be so complicated? Why can't there be a one-stop phone number to call? Instead, you have to figure it out. Different airlines do it differently. If you have the wrong number, there's nowhere to call to get the right number.

Anyway, none of this is tough.

By the way, I want to focus on this just for a minute, sir, if I may. Senior executives of airlines need to be held personally accountable. They can't just hire a Kerianne Wilson—who's a really good person and really dedicated—and then tell people like me to go talk to her. That's what he told you when he was pressed about it. With me it was, “Well, it's me or her—it would be good to talk to her.” They need to not be shielded by people. They need to talk to us directly—and I'd be happy to, if he would be agreeable to that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Mr. Strahl, and thank you, Mr. Lepofsky.

Next we have Mr. Rogers.

Mr. Rogers, the floor is yours. You have six minutes, sir.

[Churence Rogers, Liberal, Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, NL]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Welcome to our guests today.

Ms. Walkus, and then Mr. Lepofsky, maybe you can can make some comments, after the fact, to the question here.

We've heard from WestJet and Air Canada, from airlines, from airport personnel and from CATSA, who've all claimed they have some sort of assistance program in place. Yet, we've seen and heard the stories of mistreatment and neglect in your travels, some of which you've alluded to today.

Ms. Walkus, can you speak to the end-to-end service and potentially share where you think the gaps are in the airline industry?

[Heather Walkus]

In the airline industry, there are gaps right from the time you try to get online and book a ticket.

Most of us have to then go to the medical desk. Depending on who's on that desk and how they feel that day, there is no consistent way that the regulations are even looked at. They look at their own personal policies. That will determine whether you actually get a seat that you need. They predetermine everything, from whether you get the second seat for a guide dog to whether you get the second seat for a support person. By the way, they charge you taxes on that seat. They're not allowed to, but they do anyway. That needs to be resolved.

When you get to.... As David alluded to, every airport is different. Winnipeg now has a kiosk when you get to the curb. Unfortunately, it has a flat screen, so someone like me, who is blind, can't use it. At Vancouver airport, you call the main number, but it doesn't have a code for accessibility so that you can just call someone. If you call the Ottawa airport, they do. They say, if you're coming to the curb, press 3 and we'll get somebody. Somebody actually answers the phone, talks to you, arranges what time you'll be there approximately by taxi, and they're there waiting for you. As David said, there's no consistency.

Not every airline that flies out of this country follows the rules of Canada, because they're all domestic. We need to change that. I don't think Global Affairs should make a decision on what is right for Canada, whether we're going to make changes so that those regulations are also for international.

I personally have spent four hours parked at a gate waiting for a flight. No one comes to see me. There's no way to contact anyone. I have to go to the washroom. I can't get something to eat. I cannot use any of the airport services. We're moved like luggage from one end to the other. Sometimes, as David said, there are four or five people involved.

The way they move us is really demeaning. Sometimes you have to climb up onto a golf cart that, physically, you may not be able to get up on. They put their hands on your hips and they push you up onto it. Then when you get to the other end, they might park you somewhere and you have to wait for a person to show up with a wheelchair. Then that person will take you to another section where they drop you off again.

It's this constant going through and not being able to even grab a bite to eat because most of the people helping you are not assigned from the airlines to help you. They actually have to run back.

[Churence Rogers, Liberal, Bonavista—Burin—Trinity, NL]

Ms. Walkus, can I ask you if some of the training that's been alluded to by the airline people is improving the situation any?