Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 16-30 of 94
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Transport committee  There's no other reason but to offer as much flexibility as possible to our airlines. Many of us would have preferred harmonizing the regime across-the-board to have only one ratio,1:50, to simplify things, but airline companies, namely, preferred having more flexibility. As far

June 20th, 2006Committee meeting

Marc Grégoire

Transport committee  I will attempt to answer your five questions. First, on the WestJet table, as you can see, we're not hiding anything. We're showing you the figures for each and every aircraft used in Canada. So we're playing extremely transparent here. If you look at the WestJet B737-700 that

June 20th, 2006Committee meeting

Marc Grégoire

Transport committee  Actually, your clerk may already have a copy from the last time we gave it. But we'll check with him and re-table. In terms of what Australia does, to my knowledge Australian authorities were convinced that the 1:50 ratio was the way to go. But they decided to stop the change of

June 20th, 2006Committee meeting

Marc Grégoire

Transport committee  Yes, well, the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities still has the option of moving ahead or stopping. That's his decision. But we think from a technical point of view it is perfectly safe to go with the regime of one to fifty. So if that process is stopped, it

June 20th, 2006Committee meeting

Marc Grégoire

Transport committee  Because the TSB often takes two, three, or four years for a major investigation like this. And we've been at this so many years. If we had heard any safety concerns from the board, we would stop it immediately. We haven't.

June 20th, 2006Committee meeting

Marc Grégoire

Transport committee  There is no risk.

June 20th, 2006Committee meeting

Marc Grégoire

Transport committee  Was that a question or a comment?

June 20th, 2006Committee meeting

Marc Grégoire

Transport committee  Did we conduct a risk assessment after the risk assessment? No. Have we introduced mitigation measures to ensure that the level of safety remains the same? Yes, and that's what I explained today.

June 20th, 2006Committee meeting

Marc Grégoire

Transport committee  No. That's what I just said. It has not been done.

June 20th, 2006Committee meeting

Marc Grégoire

Transport committee  Well, there is. We did a cost-benefit analysis and we quantified that it would be beneficial for the industry as a whole to move on this. There is, today, a competitive disadvantage for airlines flying on international routes where all of the other airlines--except for Australia,

June 20th, 2006Committee meeting

Marc Grégoire

Transport committee  As I said earlier, a risk assessment was carried out, but I gave you the technical details on the regulatory proposal in my presentation. The regulatory proposal that was tabled today is different from the one we discussed two years ago at CARAC's level. That's why it differs. As

June 20th, 2006Committee meeting

Marc Grégoire

Transport committee  These recommendations were made by professionals, experts in their field, and in many cases they go further than other countries' rules. If I agreed with your line of thought, Mr. Laframboise, I would have to advise our fellow citizens not to fly on Air France, British Airways or

June 20th, 2006Committee meeting

Marc Grégoire

Transport committee  I don't have that information right now.

June 20th, 2006Committee meeting

Marc Grégoire

Transport committee  The proposal looked at in 2001 was not declared not safe, per se, it was declared not as safe as the 1:40 regime. Some people claim it was not safe, but let's not play with words: it was declared not as safe as 1:40. And we rejected it; we said it was not good, and we rejected it

June 20th, 2006Committee meeting

Marc Grégoire

Transport committee  I believe Minister Cannon already answered that question in his appearance on June 1.

June 20th, 2006Committee meeting

Marc Grégoire