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

Results 91-105 of 128
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Finance committee  It's subject to being defined, I guess.

November 17th, 2014Committee meeting

Daniel-Robert Gooch

Finance committee  It certainly opens the door to repoliticizing it, yes.

November 17th, 2014Committee meeting

Daniel-Robert Gooch

Finance committee  The language is pretty broad.

November 17th, 2014Committee meeting

Daniel-Robert Gooch

Finance committee  I would prefer not to go into what motivated the minister. We were told that there was a concern with private aerodromes generally. There may have been a project or two that were of particular concern, but I really think it's probably best left to the minister's office to testify

November 17th, 2014Committee meeting

Daniel-Robert Gooch

Finance committee  The question you've asked is really about a non-physical change to the airport. Again, I don't have the language here, but I don't believe it's covered by that. You've asked about aircraft noise. Those complaints are often related to changes in flight paths. Certainly our airport

November 17th, 2014Committee meeting

Daniel-Robert Gooch

Finance committee  I think what's tough is that there is no threshold date. With the aerodromes it's writ large. If this language was intended to deal with just the private aerodromes, we would like to see some language that constrained the airports that were captured by it. We've had lawyers rev

November 17th, 2014Committee meeting

Daniel-Robert Gooch

Finance committee  Yes. Thank you, Mr. Caron. We could look at the wording and suggest some sort of an amendment over the next few days.

November 17th, 2014Committee meeting

Daniel-Robert Gooch

Finance committee  I will answer in English. In terms of the exact language, we hadn't seen it, but as I said, certainly we knew of the issue that drove this proposal to amend the Aeronautics Act. We were aware of the issue in question, and we were given a heads-up that language was coming, but th

November 17th, 2014Committee meeting

Daniel-Robert Gooch

Finance committee  We have no quibbles that additional regulatory powers over private aerodromes may be needed. Certainly we consulted with the department on that. There were concerns about some private aerodromes that were under development. We had discussions with the government on that. Certainl

November 17th, 2014Committee meeting

Daniel-Robert Gooch

Finance committee  If I may, sir, certainly we're not so familiar with the problems, or the perceived problems, that led to the language. I'm more familiar with the concerns about the unintended consequences. Certainly there are a great number of rules around safety and security in aviation today.

November 17th, 2014Committee meeting

Daniel-Robert Gooch

Finance committee  It's a bit more than one line; it's a couple of paragraphs.

November 17th, 2014Committee meeting

Daniel-Robert Gooch

Finance committee  The language is written pretty broadly. I don't have the text right here, but my recollection is that it doesn't actually get into differentiation or any sort of threshold, which I think is part of the concern. As I said, the intent, as we understand it, is to deal with private a

November 17th, 2014Committee meeting

Daniel-Robert Gooch

Finance committee  That's not something I've tried to do, but my understanding is that the department, the minister, feels there is an insufficient level of—

November 17th, 2014Committee meeting

Daniel-Robert Gooch

Finance committee  —exactly, in terms of the ability to have a role or a say in the building of private aerodromes.

November 17th, 2014Committee meeting

Daniel-Robert Gooch

Finance committee  I'm not an expert on the environmental requirements for an airport, so I don't really want to comment on that, but certainly airports comply with all the requirements in various elements of federal law today, in terms of what they need to do.

November 17th, 2014Committee meeting

Daniel-Robert Gooch