André Harvey

[Competition Act, October 24th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I will begin by thanking my colleague from Acadie--Bathurst, who always defends with such passion the interests of fellow citizens in his entire region. Sometimes the causes he defends are even national in stature. I congratulate him for all the interest he has shown in important issues.

As far as the application of the Official Languages Act is concerned, I believe the hon. member is clearly differentiating this. It is obvious that full application of the Official Languages Act applies to the national airport system.

Application of the Official Languages Act therefore covers 95% or 96% of all Canadian air traffic. This does not necessarily solve the problem of the portion of the issue the hon. member has focused on: defending the value of respecting official languages. Even if we do not have complete jurisdiction over privately managed airports, I still want to point out to the hon. member that a review of the Canada Airports Act is under way. It will maintain application of the Official Languages Act in all of the national airport system.

With regard to airports that are not covered by the national airport system concept, it is important to point out that they are governed by the market. I fully realize that this is not enough. Measures are required, not necessarily coercive measures, but significant incentives.

While this may cover 1.5% or 2% of the overall traffic, I do not know if there is a particular problem at the Bathurst airport as I do not have a detailed knowledge of all regional airports, or even national airports, but all the measures taken and the report of the Commissioner of Official Languages also bear fruit. Through the measures that were put in place, managers developed an awareness of and a respect for official languages. Even if the Official Languages Act cannot be fully implemented in these sectors, the measures include an increased awareness by airport operators of the requirements in that regard.

Improving the government's monitoring efforts is also important.

Let me also say that the appointment of the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs to deal with the issue of official languages will be a major asset in achieving the anticipated success in the future.

I think that the introduction of a protocol to codify the process for handling official languages complaints is an interesting guarantee, not necessarily a guarantee of perfection but an interesting guarantee for the attainment of an objective that is very important not just to the member for Acadie--Bathurst but for all members of the House, particularly the French-Canadian members who have an interest in seeing their language fully respected in all Canadian airports.

I repeat that there is full respect in national airports throughout the national system. Additional measures to ensure respect for both official languages throughout the system are, I believe, beginning to bear fruit and are in fact bearing fruit.

Transport Canada is working with the Minister of Transport and all stakeholders. I think we can be optimistic that the results will be interesting, but we are not there yet.

I wish to thank the member for his diligence on this issue. I think it is my role, as parliamentary secretary, but also as a French-Canadian, to defend interests having to do with the respect of the official languages, even in those sectors where full respect is not automatic.

[Armenia, October 23rd, 2001]

Madam Speaker, tens of millions of dollars have been announced. Again, in recent days, $79 million was announced to improve the equipment used in airport safety and security.

Clearly Transport Canada will continue to define the standards surrounding the application of the measures that must be taken with airports. Transport Canada will continue to assume its responsibilities in order to continue to improve a system that was considered just about perfect in the world.

It must be remembered that international agencies have rated our security and safety system as one of the best in the world and unparalleled. It is true it is not perfect. It is easier to be perfect in opposition than in government. That is not a criticism. It is a fact.

In short, we will continue to examine things. Every day, the Minister of Transport will look at the situation with all his collaborators, within the department, all of the airlines and those responsible for security.

[Armenia, October 23rd, 2001]

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to provide my colleague from Sackville--Musquodoboit Valley--Eastern Shore with a response to her question of September 24.

I would like to point out that since September 11 the entire matter of airport security and safety has constituted an extremely important issue for the government as whole.

Since September 11, a number of measures have been announced by the minister as circumstances have dictated. The government has announced numerous measures which contribute to enhancing security and safety.

It must not be forgotten, however, that a few months before the events of September 11 the International Civil Aviation Organization gave Canada a top rating in terms of security and safety.

ICAO said that Canada's methods for ensuring security and safety were unparalleled. I would therefore like to point out to my colleague that we were not starting from scratch.

It is important to point out as well that the government did react after the events of September 11. In response, Transport Canada issued a directive on September 12 for the confiscation of certain articles at preboarding check points. If members of the general public attempt to get around this directive by attempting to get past check points with knives and other sharp objects, charges will be laid.

I would like to reiterate that we were not starting from scratch in the field of safety and security. Throughout this whole assessment, this whole process, we have come to the realization that other objects, such as the cutlery provided by airlines for meals, will need to be evaluated even more carefully.

These revised directives were made public September 21 to provide further direction for the industry regarding passengers and carry on baggage. These security measures were implemented to allow us to find and confiscate any dangerous objects and weapons aboard aircraft and in restricted areas of airports. The discovery of such objects on aircraft or in restricted areas must be reported immediately to the police and to Transport Canada officials.

Increased security measures have also been issued regarding food serving utensils provided by airlines.

To this effect, I would like to specify that knives with serrated edged blades, like a saw blade, are banned from aircraft, and this ban has been extended. However, butter knives with blunt blades and ball tipped points or plastic knives are still permitted on board aircraft for meals served in flight. This approach is consistent with that of the United States on this issue.

With the help of the airlines and airports, Transport Canada continues to ensure that these heightened measures are appropriate and can be implemented effectively.

We will continue our momentum to further increase the safety and security of travellers.

I would also like to point out to my colleague that everything to do with security and the standards applied are checked daily by Transport Canada.

Since the events of September 11, the minister has answered all the questions in the House every day. He took part in the emergency debate we had. He appeared before the Standing Committee on Transportation to answer all questions raised by my colleague and by others.

[Highway Infrastructure, October 19th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, since May, the federal Minister of Transport has been holding money under the infrastructure program, waiting for Quebec's minister of transport to define his priorities.

Unfortunately, during the last election campaign, the PQ and the BQ were nervous and Quebec's minister of transport came and bandied around a bunch of figures. We have a program. The money is there. All we need to know are the province's priorities.

[The Acadians, October 3rd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I want to point out that in 1995 the government put in place the national marine policy, which has allowed for the commercialization of the operations of the St. Lawrence Seaway, the creation of 19 Canada port authorities and the divestiture of many public harbours under which came the divestiture of the harbour bottoms.

The divestiture of harbour bottoms is part of the national marine policy. Transport Canada owns 43 of them. Obviously they were first offered to federal departments and then to the various provinces.

In Nova Scotia, negotiations started up with top officials. Transport Canada manages 15 harbour bottoms in Nova Scotia. Discussions are going on and these are things that must not be done hastily.

Obviously there are also benefits related to harbour dues, since in Nova Scotia alone there might be potential savings of $900,000.

When a harbour bottom is divested, it is important to remember that the federal government will continue to enforce federal laws, including the Canada Shipping Act and the Navigable Waters Protection Act.

In short, and I want to reassure my hon. colleague, absolutely no final decision has been made with regard to the divestiture of Transport Canada harbour bottoms.

[The Acadians, October 3rd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague and congratulate her on her interest in a matter of extreme importance and timeliness. Transport Canada acknowledges that the implementation of enhanced security measures is putting enormous pressure on airports and air carriers.

The shutting down of airports for a number of days obviously led to marked decreases in revenue. I would, however, point out that the government's contribution of $160 million is connected to the closing down of air space for a number of days, which obviously had significant impact on the carriers.

This is an arrangement that compensates airlines for the Government of Canada's decision to close down Canadian air space. It provides airlines and operators of specialized air services with the funds they have been so anxiously awaiting, which will enable them to recover from the abrupt interruption of their activities.

An examination of the financial data was carried out with executives directly involved in this sector. The Air Transport Association was also involved in assessing the costs.

Those who will be directly concerned and will benefit from that allocation of funds are obviously air carriers and service operators.

With this compensation package, Transport Canada and the federal government continue to monitor the situation very closely. Our main concern is of course the security and safety of the travelling public.

[Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada Act, October 3rd, 2001]

Madam Speaker, it gives me pleasure to have the opportunity to speak about the establishment of the Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada. We are going through a period characterized by great insecurity in the field of transportation and this affects not only the Department of Transport but almost all departments. Clearly there is no simple solution to a complex problem.

In this spirit, I wish to pay tribute to the excellent work done by our colleague, the Canadian Minister of Transport, who has played a very important role in co-ordinating the activities of various departments. From the very first day of the crisis, when terrorism invaded all the countries of the world, he showed great wisdom in implementing concrete measures, which will not be in place forever but which were very important in the short term.

I have frequently heard certain members of the opposition criticizing some of these measures. They would have liked to see a simple response to something as complex as terrorism. Nonetheless, the minister has moved forward, implementing measures which will help, in the very near future, we hope, to put the airline industry back on its fee, and which will have an impact on all economic activities and all aspects of our economic and social life.

It should be pointed out that in spite of the grievances of some opposition members, there are many who would find it a lonely place if they were members of other western parliaments. I think that Canada and the Canadian parliament have been models of consultation and information since the beginning of the crisis.

We have had tens of hours of debate, the Prime Minister has been present at almost every oral question period and the Minister of Transport has been present at all of them. He was also here throughout the emergency debate that we had on Monday evening to discuss the air transportation issue. I should also mention the availability of all the committee members. Not many parliaments in the western world have been so open to a largely public discussion on the enormous challenge that faces us in the area of security.

I am pleased to support Bill C-34, an act to establish the Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada and to make consequential amendments to other acts. This bill is another illustration of the federal government's commitment to reform the legislation on national transportation and to improve safety and security in the national transportation system.

In order to have the safest possible transportation system, it is very important that Transport Canada officials have a broad set of effective powers to ensure compliance and enforce regulations.

When serious offences are committed, we rely on criminal proceedings and penalties. We will continue to deal with these types of offences through the use of enforcement powers and criminal penalties. However, because of certain acts governing transportation in Canada, the department has had to rely on criminal proceedings to deal with minor offences.

Criminal proceedings can be very costly and in some cases they can drag on for years. Moreover, the vast majority of offences under the various federal transportation laws are not of a criminal nature. There is a huge discrepancy between the offence and the criminal penalty that may be imposed. For these two reasons, there has been in recent years a marked tendency to decriminalize federal transportation laws and implement an administrative process instead of resorting to criminal proceedings, except for serious offences.

Administrative measures can take various forms: licences, certificates and permits may be suspended or revoked; compliance transactions may be concluded; pecuniary penalties may be imposed; and orders can be issued.

Current federal legislation on transport, as well as that proposed, contains examples of these administrative powers.

There is another point that is as important as the matter of administrative powers and that is the need for individuals and businesses that have been taken to court to have recourse to an independent entity able to review the way Transport Canada is using its powers.

As far as aviation is concerned, individuals and companies against which administrative measures have been applied under the Aeronautics Act have recourse to the civil aviation tribunal. There is no similar tribunal for the maritime or rail sector. In those sector, the examination processes, if there are any, take place typically within the department.

The purpose of Bill C-34 and of the creation of the transportation appeal tribunal of Canada is to enable the maritime and rail sectors to have the same effective right to recourse as the civil aviation sector does with the civil aviation tribunal with respect to administrative decisions by Transport Canada.

The civil aviation tribunal was created in 1986 to examine cases of infractions of the licensing or other regulations by companies or individuals under the Aeronautics Act. The tribunal is completely independent of Transport Canada.

For more than 15 years, the civil aviation tribunal has been providing admirable service to the aviation industry and the department. In the course of a typical year the CAT holds about 100 hearings as well as settling some 100 other cases without involving the entire hearing process.

The new transportation appeal tribunal of Canada would replace the civil aviation Ttibunal as well as encompassing the marine and rail modes. The three major circuits would therefore be integrated. Cases would be heard relating not only to the Aeronautics Act but also to the Canada Shipping Act, the Canada Transportation Act, the Marine Transportation Safety Act and the Railway Safety Act. Thanks to the creation of a multimodal tribunal, the aviation, maritime and rail sectors would all have similar rights of recourse in connection with administrative decisions by Transport Canada.

The new tribunal would adopt many of the specific characteristics that have made the civil aviation tribunal so effective. Members of the transportation appeal tribunal should possess expertise in the specific transport field. For example, cases relating to the maritime shipping sector would be heard by tribunal members with knowledge of that sector, and the same for the rail sector.

Under this approach all the cases would be heard by people who have the necessary technical and operational background to understand the evidence, determine if all the regulations and security standards were complied wit, and identify the impact on security of failing to comply with regulations or of engaging in dangerous practices.

The process the tribunal would adopt would be informal, inexpensive and quick, because the tribunal would be an administrative body as opposed to a court of justice. It would not be subject to some of the costs, restrictions and other matters associated with criminal procedures.

Operators or individuals could represent themselves instead of hiring a lawyer, but the parties would be free to do so if they wish to.

The new tribunal would examine all the cases in two stages. First, a review hearing would be held by a single member of the tribunal. After having heard the two parties and taking into consideration all the evidence adduced, the member would make a determination. The individual against whom the measures would be taken could appeal to an appeal panel, which would usually consist of three of the members of the tribunal.

In some cases the department could also appeal the determination made by the member and the decision of the tribunal would be final. Moreover, the appeal could not be taken to the courts if it was based on the same facts as those examined by the tribunal.

The powers of the transportation appeal tribunal of Canada would depend on the nature of the cases it hears. Should the penalty be essentially punitive, the tribunal's decision would take precedence over that of the department. A good example would be the levying of a monetary penalty by the department based on the breach of a regulation.

After considering the evidence provided by the parties, the tribunal would be authorized to make a final, mandatory decision as to whether or not there actually was an offence committed and, if so, what the appropriate penalty should be.

Conversely, when measures are more concerned with qualifications for holding a licence, a certificate or other documents, and other matters of safety and security, the tribunal could, as a general rule, merely confirm the department's decision or refer it back to the department for review.

The purpose of the bill is not to water down the Department of Transport's basic responsibilities for safety and security under various statutes. As I have already said, the transportation appeal tribunal of Canada would operate in essentially the same manner as the civil aviation tribunal.

I am certain that the transportation appeal tribunal of Canada, as proposed in Bill C-34 would provide the department and the air, rail and marine sectors with a process for reviewing enforcement measures that is fair, rapid and cost effective. The tribunal would promote greater compliance with federal statutes governing transportation and would enhance safety and security in the national transportation system.

[Quebec Byelections, October 2nd, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, it brings me great pleasure to congratulate Françoise Gauthier of the Quebec Liberal Party for her victory in Jonquière.

Despite the fact that the PQ has virtual complete control of Quebec's institutions, her victory in Jonquière has shown us democracy at its very best. I promise her my utmost co-operation for joint projects for the betterment of our beautiful area.

I am convinced that Quebec will be completely liberated during the next provincial election, when Quebecers abandon the PQ just as the PQ abandoned hospitals. Then, Quebecers will be dealing with new political and social realities.

[Sudan, September 26th, 2001]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for New Brunswick Southwest for sharing his parliamentary experience with this House. I think he deserves our full congratulations.

He was right to point out that, before acting too quickly in financial terms, we must exercise caution.

Reference to lost jobs is a generality. Jobs have been lost in a number of industrial sectors. I think that in the airline industry, the analysis must be very detailed.

In response to what my colleague said a few days ago, the federal Minister of Transport, who has always been wise and circumspect in his interventions since the beginning of this crisis, was quite right in saying that we should not put the cart before the horse.

We must take time to carefully assess the scope of the upset and the damage, and we must make no mistake, it is considerable, before we examine the facts and decide what it would be appropriate to do. This is just one part of the transportation industry.

Indeed, I think that the Minister of Transport has shown the way. We must exercise caution, because, at the moment, all sectors are affected by the crisis.

The terrorist attack changed all the parameters in our civilization. Our economy, our society and our whole network require us to think more deeply about what corrective measures should be taken, about more comprehensive safety measures.

The minister should be commended, as the hon. member pointed out, for showing patience, for looking at the issue from a proper perspective and for not jumping into financial commitments which, I believe, would not necessarily be justified.

I thank the hon. member for expressing his view. He can be assured that his comments will be taken into consideration in the global reflection that we must make, not only with regard to the transportation industry, but all the industrial and tourism sectors, and also the whole economy.

[International Boundary Waters Treaty Act, September 24th, 2001]

Madam Speaker, allow me to pay tribute to the member, who is interested in improving the highway system.

First of all, I wish to point out to him that, when it comes time to decide which projects to fund, the responsibility of provincial governments is definitely a key element in defining priorities.

There is no question that highway 7 is a major highway in the Province of Ontario, but it is unfortunately not part of the national highway system. National highways are defined as those which promote interprovincial economic development. This responsibility therefore falls to provincial governments.

In any future funding, Transport Canada will obviously give priority to highways which are part of the national highway system.

The Province of Ontario has itself decided that highways 416 and 401 would form the segment of the national highway system between Ottawa and Toronto. The program to improve the national highway system, which was announced a few months ago, will obviously encourage development of the regional highway system, including Highway 7, with respect to tourism and economic development.

By announcing its $600 million Strategic Highway Infrastructure Program, Transport Canada will certainly be able to help improve the main national highway system.

Ontario will receive $160 million. It must be understood that it is not Transport Canada's responsibility to define the provinces' priorities. Transport Canada will have to accept the priorities already identified by the provincial governments. I think that everyone will agree that these priorities must be respected by the federal government.

Official negotiations will soon begin and I hope that we will have an opportunity to help improve the national highway system which, in turn, will have an impact on regional highways.