Dennis Bevington Presents Motion to SCOTIC
What follows is the text of NDP Transport Critic Dennis Bevington's presentation on his motion to the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities which took place on October 19th, 2009.
The Motion:
"That the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities engage in a study of Transport Canada’s enforcement of air safety regulations and implementation of safety management systems for the aviation industry, and report the results of the study to the House of Commons."
Mr. Dennis Bevington (Western Arctic, NDP):
Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Since I was appointed transport critic, I've been struck by how important aviation safety is and how important it is that we take our responsibility for that very seriously.
On April 21, I hosted in Ottawa a round table on aviation safety, and I heard how reports from inspectors and craft investigators are not receiving the proper attention. I learned that Transport Canada is actually ending inspections of many aircraft. A federal program to audit airline safety procedures has been cancelled and Transport Canada intends to stop regulating the frequency of inspections. The effect is to leave airline operators in a position of balancing business pressures and safety concerns, with minimal or no direct oversight.
I learned as well how people who deal with these issues are being treated in the industry and how they have suffered consequences from bringing forward their concerns. I can name a number of people who gave testimony in front of our round table. These results are available on a video recording at www.SafeSkies.ca. I have hosted press conferences on this to make public what I've learned. I have asked questions in the House as well.
Following a report on the CBC's the fifth estate, we see there has been a softening in the government's position. I think they are willing to take a good look at this to reassure Canadians that we are acting in their best interests when it comes to aviation safety.
The core of this problem is the implementation of an approach called safety management systems. It is a move away from prescriptive regulation, or criteria to which the industry must adhere, to performance-based regulation, which describes objectives and allows each regulated entity to develop its own system of achieving the objectives. In other words, the industry must develop its own policies and systems to reduce risk, which should include implementing systems for reporting and correcting shortcomings.
It's not that this system is not good. The International Civil Aviation Organization advocates SMS, but only as an additional layer to regular audits by governmental authorities--in this case, Transport Canada.
Justice Moshansky, who conducted the inquiry into an aircraft crash at Dryden, Ontario, said:
It is extremely naive to think that under SMS a financially strapped operator is, on its own initiative, going to place necessary safety expenditures ahead of economic survival. The historical record hardly inspires faith in the voluntary implementation of safety measures by some such carriers, especially in the absence of strong regulatory oversight.
My office continues to hear calls for action. I want to emphasize that the most important action we take is to protect our citizens, and so I am putting forward this motion so we can get that reassurance.
The Chair:
Comments?
Monsieur Laframboise.
[Translation]
Mr. Mario Laframboise (Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, BQ):
I'm going to vote for Mr. Bevington's motion. We have already discussed the matter of safety management systems. You will remember that at the time, Minister Cannon stated that he did not intend to reduce the number of inspectors because all of the inspection work still had to be done. We have to make sure that the work continues and we should call Transport Canada and the inspector pilots' union to appear. That way, we will know what is going on.
[English]
The Chair:
Mr. Volpe.
Hon. Joseph Volpe:
Mr. Chairman, you'll recall that the committee was engaged and taken up with the study of an SMS system when we were dealing with what was then, I believe, Bill C-7. Was it Bill C-11? I think it has changed now. At any rate, it was part of a legislative study. While I think we all in principle would agree with the motion Mr. Bevington has presented, I'm more in tune with what Monsieur Laframboise said: that while we can all agree in principle that the essential issues are whether the prescriptive legislation has been displaced by an ad hoc adherence to a voluntary safety management system, my understanding is that essentially the department implemented an SMS system notwithstanding the collapse of the legislation, which the NDP prevented from being implemented with a hoist motion. That's not a partisan comment; it's just what happened. The department went ahead, at any rate, and put in place the mechanisms to engage an SMS system.
So I think Monsieur Laframboise has a very legitimate point. If in fact that did take place, what this committee ought to do is at least convene before it members of the department and the airline pilots associations to see whether in fact the system is working and what its shortfalls are.
I hasten to add that we have two decisions to make. One is to accept the principle of this, which I would agree with. The other one is to fit this into a chronology, a timetable, that we have already started and are well on our way. I imagine if we accept that, then this will be an item for discussion at the steering committee when it next meets.
The Chair:
Mr. Jean.
Mr. Brian Jean:
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I really wish Mr. Kennedy were still here so he could have an opportunity to see how vigorously we debate issues that may not be on his particular timetable but are certainly are on the committee's timetable.
I would agree with this in principle as well, but I agree with Mr. Volpe and Mr. Laframboise. It's pretty consistent. I would agree with that motion. But I think in essence it needs to be narrowed to focus on exactly what your accusations are from the people you're talking to. Certainly we have studied this for a long period of time and the general principles of the motion itself, but if you could narrow it down, I would be interested in spending one day trying to get to the bottom of any accusations that have been put forward to you, because certainly they are not what I understand the government is currently doing or directing. So it would be very, very important to get to the bottom of it. And certainly one day, I think, would not be outrageous, if everyone else agreed. But let's focus on what we want to study, because we could study your general motion for the next 50 years and still come to no real conclusion.
That would be my recommendation.
The Chair:
Final comment, Mr. Bevington?
Mr. Dennis Bevington:
Well, having heard that, I'm interested in first, as you say, actually engaging with what the problem is, where the difficulties lie, where on the one hand you have regulations that set Transport Canada in one direction and on the other hand you have a system set up that perhaps doesn't meet up with those regulations. So that would be, I guess, the first step in this kind of work. I would like to see that go ahead, and if that's what the committee wants to start with and to have an opportunity to take a look at, I would think that if we can fit that into the next number of months or before Christmas, it would be very useful. I think that would be a good step.
Aviation traffic has increased by about 50% over the last two decades, and the number of inspectors has dropped by about 15%. So we're seeing that this process is taking place in the absence of legislation. We have a responsibility to ensure that this moves ahead in a good fashion.
Anyway, if people support this, I would be quite willing to work with you on the steering committee to ensure that it doesn't tie up this committee for too long.
The Chair:
I suggest that rather than voting on the motion today, we refer it to the subcommittee that I hope to have on the fourth. I think everybody is in agreement with what you're saying. We can perhaps work out the details and then present it to the committee.
Are you comfortable with that, Mr. Bevington? If you're not, we'll call the vote.
Mr. Dennis Bevington:
I'm fine with that. I think we can move forward in that fashion.
The Chair:
I will put it on the agenda for the fourth.
"That the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities engage in a study of Transport Canada’s enforcement of air safety regulations and implementation of safety management systems for the aviation industry, and report the results of the study to the House of Commons."
