THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT AND COMMUNICATIONS
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Wednesday, May 29, 2019
The Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications met this day at 6:45 p.m., in camera, to give consideration to the subject matter of Bill C-48, An Act respecting the regulation of vessels that transport crude oil or persistent oil to or from ports or marine installations located along British Columbia’s north coast (consideration of a draft report); and, in public, to study the subject matter of those elements contained in Divisions 11, 12, 13 and 14 of Part 4, and in Subdivision I of Division 9 of Part 4 of Bill C-97, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 19, 2019 and other measures.
Senator David Tkachuk (Chair) in the chair.
(The committee continued in camera.)
(The committee resumed in public.)
The Chair: We are back in session. Is it agreed that the draft report be adopted?
Senator Miville-Dechêne: On division.
The Chair: All in favour?
Senator Plett: On division.
The Chair: On division? Okay. So it’s adopted.
Is it agreed that the Subcommittee on Agenda and Procedure be empowered to approve the final version of the report, taking into consideration this meeting’s discussion, with any necessary editorial, grammatical or translation changes required?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Is it agreed that the chair present the final version of the report in the Senate?
Hon. Senators: Agreed.
The Chair: Very good. We’ve done that and we’re now going to go to the budget part of the meeting.
We scheduled witnesses for 7:45. The clerk was anticipating that we might have an earlier start, so it’s now 7:15 and she has asked them to come. I don’t know if they will show up, but they’re scheduled. Don’t go too far away. I will suspend until 7:15, and if they’re not here then we’ll suspend again until 7:45. If we get them here at 7:15, we’ll be done earlier and finished this.
Senator Miville-Dechêne: Can you tell me, in terms of procedure, the report goes to house tomorrow? How does that work?
The Chair: It will go to steering first, and after they do the final version it will go to the chamber. Monday night at the latest.
Senator Miville-Dechêne: There are many mistakes in French.
The Chair: Well, then it may take some time.
Senator Miville-Dechêne: No, I don’t think it will take time, but there are mistakes.
The Chair: They will have to work on it.
Senator Miville-Dechêne: We saw a few of them.
The Chair: Okay.
Senator Miville-Dechêne: I don’t think it makes any difference, to be very frank.
The Chair: Well, it does make a difference. We don’t want to have mistakes in French. Steering will have the final on it, so they’ll be working on it. They will be working with translation. Then, when they’re finished, it will go to steering, they’ll have a look at it, make sure that there are no mistakes. From steering it will then be presented in the Senate. It’s not a complicated process. It just takes a little work.
(The committee suspended.)
(The committee resumed.)
The Chair: Honourable senators, this evening we are continuing our study of the subject matter of those elements contained in Divisions 11, 12, 13 and 14 of Part 4, and in Subdivision I of Division 9 of Part 4 of Bill C-97, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on March 19, 2019 and other measures.
On our panel this evening we are pleased to have appearing before us, from Canadian Air Transport Security Authority, Mr. Michael Saunders, President and Chief Executive Officer; Nancy Fitchett, Acting Vice President, Corporate Affairs and Chief Financial Officer; Charles S. Sullivan, President and Chief Executive Officer of Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada; and Jacqueline Corado, Vice-Chairperson of Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada.
Thank you participating. The floor is yours.
Michael Saunders, President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Air Transport Security Authority: Honourable senators, my name is Michael Saunders, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority, also known as CATSA.
[Translation]
In French it is ACSTA.
[English]
I am pleased to be here today with my colleague Nancy Fitchett, Acting Vice President, Corporate Affairs and Chief Financial Officer to answer any questions you may have.
[Translation]
CATSA is an agent Crown corporation funded through parliamentary appropriations and reports to Parliament through the Minister of Transport. The Government of Canada has mandated the administration to protect the public by securing critical elements of the air transportation system.
As an authority responsible for managing the safety of national civil aviation, CATSA is regulated by Transport Canada, the designated national authority responsible for ensuring the civil aviation security.
[English]
In this context, CATSA’s mandate outlines its four core responsibilities within the realm of aviation security: Pre-board screening, or PBS, the screening of passengers and their belongs prior to their entry into the secure area of an air terminal building; hold baggage screening, or HBA, the screening of passengers checked or hold baggage for prohibited items, prior to it being loaded onto an aircraft; non-passenger screening, or NPS, the random screening of non-passengers accessing restricted areas at the highest risk airports; and restricted area identity card, or RAIC, the program with uses iris and fingerprint biometric identifiers to allow non-passengers access to the restricted areas of airports.
[Translation]
CATSA expects to screen over 70 million passengers and their belongings in 2019-20. Given the continued long-term growth of air travel, it is expected that this number will reach nearly 88 million passengers by 2023-24, five years from now.
[English]
CATSA supports the security screening services commercialization act contained in Bill C-97. We will continue to support Transport Canada in the transfer to an independent, not-for-profit designated screening authority while maintaining seamless operations and ongoing communications with employees.
To conclude, Ms. Fitchett and I would be happy to answer any questions you may have that fall within our purview. Thank you very much.
Charles S. Sullivan, President and Chief Executive Officer, Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada: Mr. Chair, esteemed members of the committee, thank you for the invitation to appear before you this evening.
[Translation]
Thank you for the invitation to appear before you this evening.
[English]
I would like to begin by sharing a few points on the history of the Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada and then briefly describe who we are, what we do, how we do it and the resources we need to deliver our mandate.
In 1982, the Dubin commission of inquiry published its report on aviation safety in Canada. The findings of Justice Charles Dubin led to new legislation, Bill C-36, which amended the Canada’s Aeronautics Act to include Part IV, the Civil Aviation Tribunal. An order-in-council established the Civil Aviation Tribunal in June 1986. The purpose of the tribunal at that time was to fulfill the essential role of providing an independent review of enforcement and licensing actions, taken by the Minister of Transport in Canada’s aviation community under the Aeronautics Act.
In 2003, the tribunal’s mandate was expanded to include marine and rail sectors. It now includes international bridges and tunnels and motor vehicle safety.
[Translation]
In June 2019, the Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada will celebrate its 33-year anniversary.
[English]
Currently, the tribunal’s jurisdiction is expressly provided for in the Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada Act and 10 federal acts that impact Canada’s transportation sectors. New and emerging legislation expected to have an impact on the tribunal include marine wrecks, abandoned, dilapidated, hazardous stressing and salvage operations, motor vehicle safety and recalls and unmanned air vehicles.
The amendments to the Pilotage Act proposed in Bill C-97 also represent a new area into which the tribunal’s jurisdiction would extend. These amendments reflect the need to ensure that an independent and expert review mechanism for licensing and enforcement action is available in the pilotage field.
[Translation]
The tribunal is composed of 12 full-time employees and 43 part-time members located across Canada who serve as presiding officers and adjudicators.
[English]
Full-time staff here in Ottawa include the chairperson and vice-chairperson, both Governor-in-Council appointments, and 10 public servants who form the tribunal secretariat, providing legal, registry, editing and administrative services. Our 43 part-time members are GIC appointees are selected based on their knowledge, experience and expertise within their respective transportation sectors.
The number of part-time members corresponds to the number of cases the tribunal expects to receive within each transportation sector in the coming years — the highest number being in the aviation sector. The tribunal is in the process of hiring seven new bilingual part-time marine and medical members, which will bring the total number of members up to 50.
The TATC provides an independent review process for those affected by administrative and enforcement actions taken in the national transportation sector by the Minister of Transport and the Canadian Transportation Agency. Hearings are conducted orally and the affected parties can, by request, avail themselves to two levels of hearing: a review hearing, followed by an appeal hearing if they are not satisfied with the outcome of the initial review.
The tribunal adjudicates matters that have serious impact on the livelihoods and operations of Canada’s transportation community. Given its structure and process for conducting hearings, the tribunal is readily accessible to the entire community.
During the fiscal year 2018-19, the TATC received 162 new requests for review and appeal; this is the largest number since 2013. We also conducted 46 hearings. We are anticipating a further increase in operational activity due to our expanded mandate. The hiring and training of new part-time members will ensure the tribunal is well prepared to handle the increased caseload.
[Translation]
Quality decisions delivered to parties in a timely manner is the hallmark of the TATC. The tribunal conducts itself in an open and impartial manner consistent with procedural fairness and the rules of natural justice.
[English]
The TATC falls within the Minister of Transport’s portfolio. As the chairperson, I report to Parliament through the minister. The tribunal’s credibility is based on its cadre of part-time members. The chairperson, I assign members to preside over hearings based on their knowledge, experience and expertise in their respective transportation sectors. At the conclusion of a hearing, the tribunal may confirm or dismiss the minister’s decision, substitute its own decision and, in some cases, refer the matter back to the minister for reconsideration.
Tribunal operating costs are based primarily on our full-time staff positions and the number of hearings carried out on an annual basis by our members. The tribunal’s current operating budget is just over $2 million.
In conclusion, Canada’s transportation sectors are continuously evolving in response to new and emerging technologies and improved safety and risk assessment methodologies. The Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada will continue to fulfill the vital role of providing an independent and impartial adjudication of administrative and enforcement actions taken by the minister in Canada’s transportation sectors.
Mr. Chair, this concludes my remarks. I would be pleased to respond to the committee’s questions.
The Chair: Thank you very much. We’ll begin questions.
Senator Simons: Thank you, Mr. Sullivan. I had never heard of your organization before now, I am ashamed to admit it . That was a thorough background briefing. I am now 100 per cent smarter about this agency than I was before I came here this evening.
My question is actually for Mr. Saunders, if I may. When we heard testimony yesterday, there was some question about privacy, and what privacy laws and regimes would apply to the new agency, as opposed to CATSA. Given the amount of personal information CATSA comes across, I wanted to make sure I understood how you handle privacy now and how that might be different under the new model.
Mr. Saunders: Thank you very much, senator. Currently, we handle privacy in terms of following and adhering to the Privacy Act. We are audited on a regular basis, and if there are recommendations for improvements we adhere to and follow those. Our privacy focus is quite strong.
In terms of going forward in the new proposed entity, I will ask my colleague who is managing and leading that process from the CATSA perspective to comment on that.
Nancy Fitchett, Acting Vice President, Corporate Affairs and Chief Financial Officer , Canadian Air Transport Security Authority: We are working with Transport Canada, as well as Treasury Board and the Office of the Privacy Commissioner, to determine whether PIPEDA is the appropriate legislation going forward and what those implications would be for the new designated screening authority.
Senator Simons: My other question was about staff. Your conclusion left me a bit puzzled. Is it your understanding that staff would be rolled over into the new agency? Would people have to reapply for their jobs? Would there be a difference about who is union and who is not? What does this change mean for the people who work for CATSA?
Mr. Saunders: Actually, CATSA does not have any responsibility in terms of government policy, nor can we speak on behalf of Transport Canada who is leading the negotiations with industry. We also cannot speak on behalf of industry. So it becomes a question I really can’t comment on.
Senator Simons: Are your staff now members of a union?
Mr. Saunders: We have 444 full-time employees in 9 locations: 8 class 1 airports, the biggest airports across the country, and in our headquarters. They are not unionized. For screening, through a third-party model we employ three contractors: Securitas, GardaWorld and G4S for approximately 8,280 screening officers. They are unionized, but they are not our employees.
Senator Simons: I don’t want to put you in a position where you are speaking for people who are not you, but is it your understanding, Ms. Fitchett, that the new model would also rely upon contract workers from those big security agencies?
Mr. Saunders: Again, I can’t speak on behalf of the new model or a new board of directors, but I think that would be continued, at least for a certain period of time. I can imagine that would be the most effective and efficient model, but again I can’t really confirm —
Senator Simons: I didn’t realize how much of this is actually contracted out. You have very few actual direct employees.
Mr. Saunders: That’s correct. We have 444 employees.
Senator Simons: A nice, round number.
The Chair: Ms. Fitchett, how long do you think the transition will take?
Ms. Fitchett: Transport Canada has shared and communicated in various forums an expected asset sale date of March 31, so less than a year from now. I think they have been quite honest in sharing that that is an ambitious timeline. We would certainly share the view that that will be a stretch.
Senator Dasko: We are here today to talk about the legislation and the amendments, significant as they seem to be, from the presentation we had yesterday.
Mr. Saunders, I would like to ask for your thoughts about the legislation and the changes being proposed. What do you see as the strengths and weaknesses of the legislation that we are being asked to deliberate on?
Mr. Saunders: CATSA was not part of the deliberations or the creation of the act or the new entity. We were part of meetings with Transport Canada, but we have not been part of creating the new structure. So I think it’s a bit difficult for me to comment on that.
You asked for my personal opinion, and personally I can go as far as saying our board of directors has endorsed this approach to an independent, not-for-profit entity.
Senator Dasko: Your board has supported it?
Mr. Saunders: They have. In fact, after the Canadian Transportation Act review in 2016, they sent a message to the minister at that time. If the committee would like, I can make a copy of that letter available through the clerk. It is clearly stated in that letter that our board supports the direction proposed by government.
Senator Dasko: I am asking your thoughts about the changes. You are obviously in the middle.
Mr. Saunders: I am excited. It’s a very good approach and it makes an awful lot of sense. It will give CATSA a nimbleness and a flexibility we have not been subject to for a number of years. We look at it as an opportunity to address financial issues. We have, for the last five years, had single-year funding. This prevents us from doing any long-term planning and impedes the ability to meet the expectations of a lot of our stakeholders. As I said, to be able to plan on a long-term perspective, to meet those expectations and to plan for new technology and innovation, you have to be able to plan more than one year in advance. I look at this as a positive step.
Senator Dasko: Would you see a downside?
Mr. Saunders: The downside is it’s a lot of work to get there. From an organizational perspective, we are ready.
[Translation]
Senator Cormier: My question is for Mr. Saunders and concerns the staff involved in the transition to this new organization and the official languages component, because I know that your organization has a responsibility to comply with the Official Languages Act. How do you think this transition will proceed with respect to the new organization’s responsibility for compliance with the Official Languages Act?
Mr. Saunders: I don’t see any change in our current approach. We comply with the terms of the Official Languages Act, and we will continue to do so with the new organization. I don’t see any breaks or changes.
Senator Cormier: In terms of your staff across the country, the level of capacity to provide services in both official languages in the various airports certainly varies. We have seen this because we travel across the country. This probably goes beyond Bill C-97, but how do you plan to continue working to improve the quality of services in both official languages?
Mr. Saunders: You mentioned our employees; do you mean the workforce, the search and screening officers?
Senator Cormier: Yes.
Mr. Saunders: They are managed under a contract with their employer, and the official languages component is incorporated into the contract, so I don’t anticipate any change.
Senator Cormier: Okay, thank you.
Senator Gagné: I wanted to mention that I asked the question to the witnesses yesterday. I was assured — and I had them repeated twice — that in transferring CATSA to this new entity, we would respect the official languages. However, I wanted to make another comment that echoes Senator Cormier’s comments, namely that we must ensure that we increase the number of employees who are able to provide services in both official languages. So it is a matter of traveller safety, and I think we are aware of the challenges in this regard.
My next question is for Mr. Sullivan. You mentioned that the Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada currently has 12 full-time employees and 43 part-time employees. You are also going to hire seven new bilingual part-time members. As a first question, what percentage of employees have skills in both official languages?
I also note that the number of requests for review and appeal have increased, and you said that in the 2018-19 fiscal year, the Transportation Appeal Tribunal received 162 new requests for review and appeal. With regard to the forecasts for the next five years, I’d like to know what would be the extent of the increase in appeal requests and what that would mean for the tribunal’s budget.
Mr. Sullivan: Thank you. There are two questions? We currently have 16 members who are bilingual.
Senator Gagné: Okay.
[English]
Mr. Sullivan: We also have the ability to conduct bilingual and French-only hearings both at the review and appeal levels.
Senator Gagné: Okay.
Mr. Sullivan: We are hiring three new bilingual members strictly for the maritime or the marine sector, which will give us —
[Translation]
— a tremendous capacity in the marine sector as well.
Senator Gagné: Okay.
Mr. Sullivan: As for your second question about five-year forecasts —
Senator Gagné: Budget forecasts, actually.
Mr. Sullivan: Yes.
[English]
As it stands right now, we expect to see a 30 per cent increase in operational activity over the next two years, which will allow us to come up to meet the new expanded mandate. It is my estimation that that augmentation or increase will continue. As far as resources are concerned, we are somewhat flexible and nimble and can hire, recruit and select new members and adjudicators in a relatively quick fashion — about six months — to bring them on board and train them to conduct hearings in both official languages.
[Translation]
Senator Gagné: With regard to your staff, you say you are flexible and able to hire fairly quickly. Do you contract or are people hired on an occasional, non-permanent or contractual basis?
Jacqueline Corado, Vice-Chairperson, Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada: Most employees of the Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada are bilingual at one level or another, depending on the classification of their position. There are federal government employees who must be bilingual at the CCC level, which is one of the highest levels. All employees are bilingual on the Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada.
Senator Gagné: Okay, thank you.
[English]
Senator MacDonald: Thank you to the witnesses. It is great to have the head of CATSA here.
I am curious, do your ears burn during the day, people complaining about CATSA? Like all of us here, I spend a lot of time in airports, particularly the Halifax airport, and I see improvements all the time. Things are always getting better. I think one thing we can compare is the way we travel through our airports to the way a Canadian can travel through American airports. With the TSA, when you go through the American airports, I find there are times when — although I am a frequent traveller and they have all kinds of documentation on me and I have a NEXUS card — all things go the way you want them to and I can get through an American airport quicker and more efficiently than I can get through a Canadian airport.
As a senator and somebody who would go with some official documentation, I find that odd. For the average person, I would find it odd, too. Why is it so much more difficult to get through our airports rapidly when I can be fast-tracked through an American airport?
Mr. Saunders: When you refer to being fast-tracked, is that using Global Entry or NEXUS?
Senator MacDonald: And through the TSA.
Mr. Saunders: So you are using pre-check?
Senator MacDonald: Yes. Why don’t we have that or an equivalent in Canada?
Mr. Saunders: What we have now are the Trusted Travellers lanes. We have dedicated Trusted Travellers and queue-jump. The rules and regulations come from Transport Canada. We are following all the rules and regulations. We are enforcing them as they are designed. The TSA looks at it differently. This is really a question for Transport Canada, because they develop all the regulations and provide them to us. We are the service delivery or the operator. That’s the fundamental difference.
Senator MacDonald: Will the new changes address any sort of roadblocks or blockage in terms of a smoother operating system?
Mr. Saunders: I don’t think it would. A change to an independent, not-for-profit entity would not really make much of a difference. It is really around the regulations and the appetite to accept risk. That is something that is with the department, not with CATSA.
Senator MacDonald: Okay. Great.
The Chair: Further to that, because I asked this question the other day, too, it is not in the line-up that’s a problem. Well, that’s a problem too, because you have one line for NEXUS cards. But when you get to the line you go through exactly the same process that you do if you are not a NEXUS holder. Nothing changes.
In the States, when you go to Global Entry you don’t have to pull your computer out of your bag, you don’t have to take off your jacket or your shoes. You don’t have to do half the things you have to do when travelling through a Canadian NEXUS line. Why is that?
When you go to the Ottawa airport, that NEXUS line-up is way back. If you go through the regular line, there are six or seven different gates to go into. It doesn’t make any sense to me. It is lined up for no reason. Why would you still do that? Why would you take a NEXUS cardholder and put him through the same process as the person who travels maybe once every three months?
Mr. Saunders: I would actually say there are differences between the standard screening and the NEXUS lane in Canada. The first is you can keep headgear or headwear on, you can keep a light jacket on, you can leave a belt and shoes on and you don’t have to take small, metallic objects out of your pockets either if you are in a Trusted Travellers lane in Canada.
The Chair: I have to take mine stuff out in Ottawa. In Saskatoon, I can go through a regular line and I don’t have to take my shoes off and if I have a light jacket on I’m fine. There is no difference.
Mr. Saunders: I would say there is a difference.
The Chair: All right. I will take pictures.
Mr. Saunders: I can refer you to our website where it is all there. In terms of why, in terms of capacity, there is such a line-up, I believe we are working with Transport Canada to try to increase the membership of the Trusted Travellers membership lane. That’s what we are trying to do. In that vein, if we can get enough people, we can open up a lane from a permanent perspective. Right now, the volume in many airports does not support having a dedicated Trusted Travellers lane open.
The Chair: Mr. Sullivan, why was the clarification about the Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada’s jurisdiction regarding the Marine Liability Act not included in the Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 2, that originally introduced the administrative monetary penalties? Why are we doing it now?
Jacqueline Corado, Vice-Chairperson, Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada: The answer to that is we don’t really know. Bill C-86 amended the Marine Liability Act. It implemented monetary penalties that we will be responsible for adjudicating. The transitional amendment came in Bill C-97. We are not aware why it was not done in Bill C-86, but here we are today.
The Marine Liability Act is in force now, but our section 2 has not been amended to give us that jurisdiction. That is what Bill C-97 is doing now.
The Chair: Any other questions?
Senator Simons: Mr. Saunders, have you ever worn an underwire brassiere?
Senator Manning: Don’t answer that question.
Senator Simons: Is it possible for CATSA to explain to the gentlemen who work for its agency what an underwire brassiere is and why a gal might wear one?
Mr. Saunders: I would rather not. Senator Manning is suggesting I not answer that.
Senator Manning: Don’t go there.
Senator Simons: I can’t tell you how many breast exams I have had — far more in airport screenings than through my GP.
Mr. Saunders: Likely going through a walk-through, which is a magnetometer. It detects metal. The regulations stipulate that we have to resolve every single alarm. We have to resolve it, and one of the ways to do that is a pat-down.
The Chair: That’s a very interesting way to end the meeting. I want to thank the witnesses for appearing here today. And thank you, Senator Manning, for suggesting that the witness not answer that question.
(The committee adjourned.)