House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2021, with 70% of the vote.
Air Canada Public Participation Act April 18th, 2016
Madam Speaker, speaking of history, I am speaking of when we had a tremendous aircraft industry in this country that was recognized worldwide for the safety it created, how well our flights were managed and our equipment was maintained so that we felt safe flying. Therefore, for me to change that to possibly moving jobs somewhere else, where we would not have that insurance, is a risk factor for our citizens who want to fly and feel safe in this country.
Air Canada Public Participation Act April 18th, 2016
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for the question and for sharing his time today.
One of the things we understand that is really important is that in owning a vehicle, we learn quickly that the mechanical upkeep of it is important. When the dealerships have strong support staff and mechanical people, we trust our vehicles. Those people live locally in our communities. I think this is what is important. As my hon. member has said, we trust our vehicles because of the level of trust we have in the staff who maintain them.
The only way that works if one is flying is that we can trust the maintenance staff that keep our airplanes flying. Therefore, I think it is critically important to have those people in our communities so that we understand and trust that we are flying safely in this country.
Air Canada Public Participation Act April 18th, 2016
Madam Speaker, it is a privilege for me to speak to Bill C-10, an act to amend the Air Canada Public Participation Act and to provide for certain other measures.
Canada has had a long history when it comes to flight. In 1909, the Silver Dart in Baddeck Bay, Nova Scotia was one of the first flights that occurred in the world. In 1913, the first cargo flight was the delivery of the Montreal daily mail to Ottawa. Its return flight was a little iffy.
I have some concerns with the legislation as it stands. One of my biggest concerns is that 3,000 Canadian aircraft maintenance jobs are on the line as a consequence of this legislation. That is a lot of highly skilled, high-paying jobs. It would be a major loss to the communities affected were these jobs to vanish. It would be one of the most negative consequences of the bill.
I am concerned because this could negatively affect the communities of Mississauga, Montreal, and Winnipeg. I find it strange that Air Canada never mentioned aircraft maintenance costs as being prohibitive in its various comments made in the context of the past Canada Transportation Act review.
I am skeptical about the legislation. What does it seek to achieve? Why is it trying to fix a problem that does not seem to be a problem at all? If we really want to do service to Air Canada and other Canadian carriers, let us fix the situation that experts at Air Canada have identified.
Trans-Canada Airlines started in 1937. In 1937, the first stewardesses were hired. They had to be nurses. Why? It was to ease the concern of passengers for the safety of flying. We now have excellent maintenance that we can trust and Canadian flyers on Air Canada can trust this. For the younger members of the House, in 1995 the name was changed to Air Canada.
I have some suggestions for ways Air Canada could be made more competitive both in Canada and at the international level. My suggestions may not put the jobs of 3,000 Canadian workers in jeopardy.
One suggestion is tying airport fees to tangible projects with clear sunset clauses. When sunset clauses are effective and travellers see direct results of the fees in improvements, it may result in reduced ticket prices. That means more passengers on Air Canada flights and a direct benefit to the airline's bottom line. That is one way to help Canada without risking 3,000 jobs in Winnipeg, Mississauga, and Montreal.
A second way to make Air Canada more competitive is by reducing the excise tax on aviation fuel. There are high taxes on aircraft fuel. A variety of federal fees and taxes inflate the cost of air tickets in Canada, making it very expensive to fly within Canada. The air fuel excise tax is one of these examples. Therefore, why would the Minister of Transport not look at this as a possible way to make Air Canada more competitive? As was pointed out in its brief, these excise taxes were supposed to be reinvested in airport infrastructure. If we could fix the excise tax problem, I am sure Air Canada would appreciate such a change.
One of the major issues that ends up affecting Air Canada and all carriers at airports is the issue of security. What we need for security screening is an intelligence-driven, risk-based passenger screening process. This would lead to a smoother, quicker system that would save critical time for airlines like Air Canada and airport staff, and relieve the burden of the one-size-fits-all process we have now. Let us streamline the security process so we make a more simple and yet more robust security screening process at the same time.
Let us try to fix some of the issues Air Canada has stated. One of the issues with respect to security is the air travellers security charge, or ATSC. This is a fee that is charged to passengers to cover the costs of the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority. It was founded in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks to ensure the security of those who flew within Canada.
The issue is, as Air Canada pointed out in a submission, that the amount of fees collected from passengers is too high. Looking at the numbers, the amount taken in surpasses the budgetary needs. In 2013-14, this left a surplus of $123 million. That is a problem. Why are we making such a small change to the act? What kind of support will this give to Air Canada?
We are not quite sure what it will do to help the airline. It has not been made clear to us. What we do know is that the bill would put the jobs of 3,000 airline mechanical staff in jeopardy, in Mississauga, Montreal, and Winnipeg.
The bill is not worth the risk, and an unintended consequence of passing the bill would be that these 3,000 jobs could leave Canada. I am asking the government to take another look at the bill and see that it is not the right course of action.
The Minister of Transport believes that somehow the legislation before us would assist Air Canada in cutting costs. I appreciate that he says this is his goal, but what we would like to see on this side of the House are some actual numbers. I know that our transportation critic, the hard-working member for Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, has asked for this from the minister. Therefore, I am asking again. Can the minister provide the actual amount that this proposed change would deliver in savings to Air Canada? If not, then I would ask him to give us more detail as to the rationale for the legislation.
As we are very concerned about these 3,000 workers, can the minister confirm that he has consulted with them about any of these changes? Has the minister consulted with their union on this?
Airport rent is another sticking point. Airport rent and fees in Canada are incredibly high, and it makes it very hard for airlines like Air Canada to operate in this business climate. I will quote directly from Air Canada's submission to the Canadian Transportation Act review.
In fact, depending on the type of aircraft, Air Canada landing and terminal fees in major Canadian airports are 35% to 75% higher than in major U.S. airports. When factoring in the difference between the Airport Improvement Fee and its U.S. equivalent (Passenger Facility Charge) that are paid by passengers, airport-related costs are on average 83% higher per departing seat in Canada than in the U.S.
This uncompetitive cost environment is not only causing the leakage of Canadian passengers to the United States, but also the loss of international traffic travelling to or via Canada.
This is from a recent National Post article:
The World Economic Forum ranks Canada No. 16 out of 140 countries for the quality of its airport infrastructure, but No. 130 when it comes to ticket taxes and airport charges.
This loss reduces our ability to position our country as an international gateway and to grow airlines and airports. There is potential to work something out, and I hope the minister is looking at other options to help the airline industry find solutions to these real problems that have been identified.
Air Canada is seeking a regulatory change as to how we manage the aviation industry. This is from its submission:
Our country also needs an efficient process for determining new aviation policy and rules—one that is able to keep pace with the rapidly evolving technology and operations of the industry.
The issues I have outlined in my speech are real issues, many of them raised by Air Canada itself. Why are we looking at such a small change, to the risk of 3,000 workers in Montreal, Winnipeg, and Mississauga?
I cannot support the legislation before us. That being said, I am looking forward to seeing what the minister might offer in terms of really supporting the Canadian airline industry, hoping there will be some future pieces of legislation that I can support.
Income Tax Act March 7th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments made of my colleague from Calgary. One of the things I do know is that he does stay connected. He really does know his constituency, and he has talked to a lot of people in Calgary. When he refers to positive feedback, my question for him would be with respect to the demographics in the sense of the responses he has received.
Would he expand upon that and say what kind of response, demographically, he has received on that issue?
Oil Respect Campaign February 24th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, on February 18, in Calgary, the Oil Respect campaign began with the goal of telling the story of the hard-working members of Canada's critically important energy sector. They are our neighbours and our fellow Canadians.
The Oil Respect campaign has started at the right time. With extremely low oil prices, it is important to remind all Canadians that our energy sector is a key part of the Canadian economy. We are lucky to have one of the strongest, most respected regulatory systems in the world. We also have one of the best trained workforces in the energy sector. We need to encourage and support the families who struggle through these tough times.
I encourage all parliamentarians to please support the Oil Respect campaign, which will be coming to a community near them. In this party, we continue to stand up for our energy sector, and for Canadian workers.
Petitions February 5th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to present a petition that over 100,000 Canadians have signed. The petition sadly highlights the fact that 22-year-old Kassandra Kaulius was killed by a drunk driver. A group of people who have also lost loved ones to impaired driving, called Families for Justice, believes that Canada's impaired driving laws are much too lenient.
The petitioners are calling for new mandatory minimum sentencing for people who have been convicted of vehicular homicide.
Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply January 26th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member's background in municipal work. I was a mayor for a number of years as well. Infrastructure is an important topic for us.
One of the plans that I would like her to respond to is the following. When the federal government makes a plan to distribute money to a province, municipalities are then left in a different difficult position.
Would the member be supportive of the federal government's accepting applications directly from municipalities for infrastructure money rather than the latter going through a provincial government?
Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply January 26th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the member for Yukon, our northern neighbour, on his speech today.
He identified many areas of concern, including with regard to health. I wonder if he had an opinion on palliative care, as he has talked about many aspects of health. Does he have an opinion of and is he willing to work on the issue of palliative care?
Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply December 8th, 2015
Mr. Speaker, one of the challenges, in the sense of all of the different varieties and sectors that we have in our agricultural communities, is can we meet all the demands and resolve all the questions in a trade agreement? I am proud of the number of trade agreements that have been negotiated over the years.
One of the factors that I have heard this is the dairy industry. Having met with dairy people, they were very concerned about what might be in this agreement. Dairy people in our country are some of the hardest working people. They work the longest hours. They are tremendous people. They live in rural areas and they support their communities. Therefore, it was a concern to me about how they would respond to this. They said that what they had seen so far, they agreed that this agreement would work for them.
Resumption of Debate on Address in Reply December 8th, 2015
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the part of the riding that he donated to me. I am sure it is probably the best part. Maybe soon, some of those citizens will quit looking for the member and recognize that I am their MP.
It is a phenomenal part. No matter what we do in this world, what conveniences we have, how much technology we have, or how grand we build things, if we do not eat, it will not happen. Agriculture is therefore critical to our economy in the sense of providing food that is healthy for our citizens. When we have the capability as one of seven countries to produce it for other parts of the world, it is a phenomenal part of our economy and a contribution to humanity.