Mr. Speaker, no application was received from either Canadian International or American Airlines to increase American's share of Canadian.
As no application was made, we did not review this matter and there is no reason to make a decision.
House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2004, with 35% of the vote.
Air Transportation November 7th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, no application was received from either Canadian International or American Airlines to increase American's share of Canadian.
As no application was made, we did not review this matter and there is no reason to make a decision.
Air Transportation November 7th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question, but there is no change in the government's position in this regard.
We do not believe that putting money into a company that has not requested it, to deal with a problem that is essentially a restructuring problem to deal with long term deficits would not have any purpose whatsoever.
Air Transportation November 6th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, there is no question at the present time of answering such a question in this House because no request has been put by anyone in the airline industry for us to make that decision or to reconsider that decision.
Therefore the question is entirely hypothetical and obviously cannot be answered in this House under the rules of Beauchesne's, which I happen to have in my hands at the present time.
Air Transportation November 6th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, the member talks about differences of opinion between ministers and getting quotes by two ministers who said exactly the same thing.
I would point out to the member that the company we are talking about, Canadian airlines, has a major problem of restructuring which it faces and this will require substantial changes to its operations. It is a private company and therefore must go out and, like other private companies, attempt to deal with its problems on its own.
From the government's point of view, we wish to encourage competition. Many of the steps we have taken since becoming government have shown that. We believe the increase in air traffic that has resulted since we have taken office does show that we have succeeded in this regard.
Obviously we are particularly interested in this major company, one of our major carriers internationally as well as domestically, but at the present time we have received no request for any assistance from either the company or from the unions involved as well.
Auto Industry November 1st, 1996
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for Nepean for the best question of the day so far.
Some six weeks ago, I wrote to the auto industry on the urgent need to improve airbag performance. I am very pleased to report to her and to the House that the auto makers have responded positively and constructively. They announced this morning in Washington that from now on airbags will be depowered.
I would like to thank the hon. member for her question. It allows me to say, Mr. Speaker-you, I know, are a parent of young children-that it is tremendously important to have seat belts done up, the children in the back seat and to make sure that we cut down on this dreadful toll of over 3,300 Canadian lives lost annually in automobile accidents.
Railway Transportation October 28th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, it is true that jobs are being cut in the rail sector in Quebec and elsewhere, but I must say to the hon. member that these cuts were not as bad in Quebec as they were in the rest of the country.
Motions For Papers October 23rd, 1996
Mr. Speaker, the operating agreement between the Grain Transportation Agency Administrator, Canadian National Railways and Canadian Pacific Ltd. is not available for tabling at this time.
The government is currently in the midst of structuring the process by which it will dispose of its 13,000 hopper cars, which are governed by the above mentioned agreement. As part of this process, discussions with the railways about revising the operating agreement are currently ongoing.
Public release of this document at this time may well harm the government's ability to negotiate fabourable revisions to the operating agreement, ultimately resulting in a negative impact on the possible value it will get for its hopper cars.
As the document is a private agreement between the railway companies and the government, the companies' views were sought on this matter. They have expressed similar concerns about the tabling of the agreement at this time.
I therefore ask the Honourable Member to withdraw his motion.
(Motion agreed to.)
Air Transport October 22nd, 1996
Mr. Speaker, the policy that we have with respect to routes to countries such as the Czech Republic is very straightforward. It has been established now for over a year and a half.
The routes are assigned to one of our major airlines and if the airline does not pick up that route and use it within a period of 365 days it is reassigned to the back-up or supplementary carrier, the secondary carrier. This is a well established procedure.
The minister is concerned about pressure. There is no pressure whatsoever from Canadian because it is essentially an automatic procedure. The only area where there might be some concern is whether we issue a letter to the first carrier at the end of the first year or whether we wait some time, and the normal process is to within a reasonable time send out that letter.
In the case of Prague I believe the letter was sent out some two months after the one year period expired.
Joffre Shop October 11th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, I constantly get questions from the other side of the House claiming, quite inaccurately, that there are increases in risk in the railway system in the province of Quebec.
There are from time to time minor variations among all provinces but essentially when we look at accidents in the various categories in which they are analyzed, there has been a slight increase in some of the derailments but not at all untoward and certainly not out of the ordinary with respect to the normal variation statistics.
I find the question very puzzling. The changes have been made and efficiencies have occurred. However, we cannot continue to maintain exactly the previous systems and then expect to get improvements in the future. We have to be willing to make changes to the system that the railways use and in the future we can expect improvements. We cannot have it both ways, as the hon. member seems to think.
Air Transportation October 11th, 1996
Mr. Speaker, the use it or lose it policy of the government, established by this government was that if an airline did not pick up the route and use it within the required period of time, which is one year, it would be offered to another airline. We do not wait until the exact second of 365 days and then say that it is over. If there was no other airline that wanted to come in, we would probably let the thing slide. But the principle of use it or lose it remains our policy.
Under this policy Air Canada has acquired a substantial number of new routes. It has the majority of the routes which Canadian airlines overall have established with the United States since open skies. It has 60 per cent of the international routes and 70 per cent of the travellers internationally to or from Canada.
If that is mistreatment of Air Canada, and in addition Air Canada has been given rights to markets it never had before, such as Japan and Hong Kong, and if that is mistreatment of Air Canada, I would like to know what the hon. member is suggesting.