THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT AND COMMUNICATIONS
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Wednesday, February 15, 2023
The Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications met with videoconference this day at 6:46 p.m. [ET] to study the impacts of climate change on critical infrastructure in the transportation and communications sectors and the consequential impacts on their interdependencies.
Senator Leo Housakos (Chair) in the chair.
The Chair: Good evening, honourable senators. I invite my colleagues to introduce themselves.
Senator Simons: Senator Paula Simons, Alberta, Treaty 6 territory.
[Translation]
Senator Miville-Dechêne: Senator Julie Miville-Dechêne from Quebec.
Senator Cormier: Senator René Cormier from New Brunswick.
[English]
Senator Cardozo: Andrew Cardozo from Ontario.
Senator Manning: Fabian Manning, Newfoundland and Labrador.
Senator Dasko: Donna Dasko, Ontario.
Senator Wallin: Pamela Wallin, senator from Saskatchewan.
The Chair: Honourable senators, last week, on February 7, the committee unanimously adopted a motion to hold a meeting to study the recent issues related to public air travel pursuant to a study on the impact of climate change on critical infrastructure in the transportation industry.
On behalf of the committee, I wish to sincerely thank our witnesses for appearing before our committee, in particular the minister, on such short notice. We thank you very much, the Honourable Omar Alghabra, Minister of Transport. He is joined by officials from Transport Canada: Craig Hutton, Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy; Nicholas Robinson, Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Safety and Security.
Minister, we will give you the opportunity to address us for five to seven minutes, but I won’t be very rigid, given the fact we have the minister before us.
Hon. Omar Alghabra, P.C., M.P., Minister of Transport: Thank you, senators, for inviting me. It is a pleasure to be with you discussing this important topic.
Senators, this winter we saw extreme weather conditions that caused many Canadians to be stranded, have their flights delayed or miss their holiday plans. These delays and cancellations are incredibly frustrating and completely unacceptable. Canadians deserve answers about what happened during the holiday travel season. They also deserve to know what has been done to address those problems, and what our government continues to do to ensure it does not happen again.
That’s why I welcome today’s meeting as an opportunity to provide you with information and to answer your questions.
Canadians have always known that bad weather has the ability to disrupt air travel, but bad weather cannot be blamed for why travellers were not being informed about what was going on when their flights were delayed or cancelled.
Nor did it explain why travellers weren’t made aware of alternative plans or the compensation they were rightfully due because their rights had been violated.
I was concerned then, and I remain concerned, by the experiences Canadians faced this past winter.
Passengers should not be left in the dark. The safety and efficiency of Canada’s air sector is a priority of mine. Upholding the rights of passengers is a priority of mine. Supporting a competitive and resilient air sector is also a priority of mine. Our air sector was incredibly hard hit, as you know, by the COVID-19 pandemic. Our government was there for those who work in it, supporting the sector and protecting jobs.
Last summer, as the air sector entered recovery from the pandemic and passenger volumes surged, there were challenges. In response, we took action and worked every day with airlines and airports to respond to those challenges. That meant making quick adjustments to address bottlenecks at security screening and customs lines. It also meant being transparent with Canadians and issuing weekly updates on the situation at our airports.
As the weeks went by, we saw significant improvement in security screening wait times across the country. Those improvements were possible in part due to the action we took in coordination with government agencies and industry, as well as increased staffing of key positions by airports, airlines, CBSA, which is the Canada Border Services Agency, and the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority, also known as CATSA. We are continuing to do this important work to ensure Canadians can travel safely and smoothly.
Last fall, I brought together industry leaders, including airlines, airports, unions and passenger representatives, in a summit. I stressed the importance of avoiding what we saw during the summer and discussed how to further strengthen our air sector. Since then, we’ve made a lot of progress. For example, when the holiday rush arrived, we did not see the long lineups we saw last summer at CATSA and CBSA screening lines. But we know we still have more work to do.
We were the first government in Canadian history to put in place a set of Air Passenger Protection Regulations in 2019, just a few months prior to the pandemic. And when the pandemic exposed weaknesses in these regulations, we reinforced it, requiring last September that travellers be entitled to reimbursement for situations beyond the airlines’ control.
Our work to improve these rules is ongoing. We will further strengthen and clarify passenger rights and increase air carriers’ accountability. Our government has and will continue to work with the Canadian Transportation Agency, the CTA, to provide them with the resources and the tools they need to fulfill their mandate in upholding the rights of passengers.
Currently, passengers are too often being told by the airlines that they are not entitled to compensation when they really are. This situation has generated an avalanche of complaints to the CTA since last summer. The changes we hope to make will shift the burden of proof away from passengers and onto the airlines to help reduce the number of complaints. We are also looking at strengthening regulations on lost baggage.
I hope to be able to announce those changes to the regulations and introduce legislation during this spring session.
Before I close, I would also like to take a moment to touch on the major disruptions faced by VIA Rail passengers during the holidays. I spoke with VIA Rail directly to let them know how frustrated I was on behalf of Canadians with their treatment of passengers and their handling of the situation. While the extreme weather, highway closures and CN derailment were outside of their control, there was no excuse for the lack of communication, the poor response effort and the unacceptable situation on board the trains. Their emergency protocols are being reviewed and a full examination of what happened is underway. Our government will take action accordingly.
In conclusion, Mr. Chair, I want to tell you that our government, along with industry, will continue to work together to ensure that the passenger experience is improved. I would also like to take a brief moment to thank workers.
While many Canadians are rightly frustrated by what happened, they also appreciate those who work in the sector, so I want to thank workers across the transportation sector for their hard work during this holiday season and each and every day.
[Translation]
Thank you for the work you do.
[English]
Mr. Chair, that concludes my opening statement. I am happy to answer any questions that you and our colleagues have.
The Chair: Thank you, minister. I will launch off into questions, I guess. We have seen the crisis we’ve been facing in transportation, in the railway and the airport industries. As a former member of the board of VIA Rail, I also have to say, I’ve never seen as much disruption as what VIA has been going through. But I want to stay focused on the airline industry and air passenger rights.
I am glad, minister, that you’ve acknowledged that you’ve engaged with airports and airlines for quite a while now. But the truth of the matter is, as we look at this past Christmas, the chaos at our airports and in the industry have reached a peak. We saw it particularly at Pearson airport. By your own admission, you’ve been working on this matter for a long, long time.
Now, you say that, by spring, we will be putting forward legislation to deal with it. My question, to be precise, is, the European Union has quite a robust rights plan and track record. They don’t seem to have had the chaos that Canada has experienced over the last few months. If your flight in the European Union, or EU, is cancelled, you have a series of options — reimbursement of your ticket, rerouting or a return flight, as well as a right to assistance.
My question is, why can’t we simply adopt a similar piece of legislation as the EU has, given the fact that it seems to be working better for them than for us?
Mr. Alghabra: Thank you, Mr. Chair. If you allow me, I’ll just say that Europe experienced significant challenges in the airline sector last year, at their airports, with airline cancellations, with airline delays, because they experienced what we experienced ourselves as we were recovering from the pandemic — labour shortages and surge in demand and imbalance between supply and demand. We saw similar challenges across the globe, particularly in Europe, in the United States and in Canada.
Now, to specifically answer your question, and as I said in my opening remarks, 2019 was the first time ever in Canada’s history that we had an air passenger bill of rights. We consulted and examined other regimes, and we certainly put a system in place that was way stronger than that of our neighbours to the south, our closest competitor in the airline sector. But as I admitted in my speech, the experiences that we saw over the summer and Christmas have further exposed additional weaknesses in the system.
I am committing to Canadians and to all of you here, Mr. Chair, that we will improve the system. In the process, the system that we are proposing will take into account what other countries do. I want to make sure that we have some of the best air passenger rights in the world.
The Chair: The last question, minister — and we are already in the middle of February — will we have a piece of legislation passed and in place by the end of this parliamentary session, before we go into the summer break?
Mr. Alghabra: First, let me say this, Mr. Chair. The work on the regulations started last fall. In fact, when I hosted the summit with airlines and airports and unions, I told the sector and I publicly stated that I had made a commitment to Canadians that the work is ongoing to strengthen the system. My intention is to have it tabled in the House of Commons this spring. As you know, the process of bills is somewhat out of my control, but I will do my best to see it passed as quickly as possible. If you allow me, I will pre-emptively ask cooperation from our friends in the Senate to pass it as quickly as possible when it arrives here.
The Chair: Thank you, minister. The quicker we get it, the quicker we can deal with it, of course.
Senator Wallin: My question is kind of a larger nature. I’ve been travelling for my work for about 40 years. I have more miles under my belt than almost 10 pilots put together.
My question is the obligation of a government to see that Canadians have equitable access to get to work, to visit family, to go home for a funeral, to have a holiday, whatever it may be. I live in what is often referred to as the flyover zone. It is quite literally true. There are two flights a day to Saskatchewan, on a good day, and usually not. I’m more than 3,000 kilometres from my work, so I can’t bike or do other things that have been suggested from time to time that I do. We are all shareholders in Air Canada, for example. That was what you did during COVID-19 — I think we are 6.4% shareholders at this point. So we come to it as citizens, as regulators, as users and all the rest of it.
What is your obligation to make sure that people who live in remote areas have the same access to flights as anybody who lives in Toronto or Vancouver?
Mr. Alghabra: Senator, thank you for the question.
Let me just say that I share your desire in improving the connectivity that we already have in our air sector. In fact, you alluded to this when we provided financial support to the airline sector. We included conditions on those loans, such as maintaining regional connectivity, among other things. Those are responsibilities that we ensured were protected when the airlines accepted financial support from the federal government.
Currently, those terms are no longer in place, because the airlines have paid back their loans. However, I am working — and Transport Canada is working — with airlines to ensure that we have a more competitive, more connected country where we have more options. I know witnesses from Air Canada and WestJet are appearing after me, so I know they’ll be, hopefully, happy to answer your question. I have these conversations with them on a regular basis. WestJet recently announced that they are introducing new routes, improving their routes. Porter has announced new routes. We need to work as a government in finding ways to enhance connectivity in various parts of the country.
Senator Wallin: That’s precisely what I am asking. We can fight with any airline about their scheduling issue, or lack thereof. Connectivity — both Senator Simons and I are laughing, because there is no such thing if you live in Western Canada and need to come here.
I’m asking about your obligation as a government to provide services to Canadians. I need and should be able to have the same right to see family, to visit, to travel, to get to work as anybody else in this country. I’m not asking you to buy the airline and take it over. I’m asking you to put some rules in place and ensure that there are consequences if the requests you make of those who provide air service aren’t met.
Mr. Alghabra: Senator, I would invite this committee to provide advice to government on how we can make that happen, because there is a balance between ensuring that the airline sector is safe and competitive and then demanding particular routes without compensation from taxpayers. At Transport Canada we are having discussions about how to enhance an environment that offers more connectivity. We are working on that. If you have any ideas on how we can strike that balance without providing taxpayers’ money to subsidize routes, I would welcome that advice.
Senator Wallin: We will offer that advice to you, but I think some of it is fairly obvious. You are in the position of granting the ability of airlines to choose some routes. That needs to come with some quid pro quo, and we will elaborate, but that’s the basic sense, which is that there is an obligation to all parts of the country, not just the major urban centres.
Mr. Alghabra: Again, these are private businesses, and I am not going to answer [Technical difficulties] of them, and I would encourage you to ask these questions of the airlines who are appearing after me. There is a fine line between regulating for safety and efficiency and demanding certain routes. If you find a way to find that balance without putting more taxpayers’ money to subsidize these routes, I would welcome it.
Senator Manning: Welcome, Minister, and officials here. From my own experience, on February 2, I left my office on the Hill at 4 p.m. to go to Newfoundland and Labrador, and I got home at 10:30 on Sunday morning. I realize that weather plays a role in that, and there is no doubt that I would rather be on the ground safe and sound than not.
A few years ago, we dealt with the Air Passenger Protection Regulations. Many of the people who travelled in the country felt they had some protection under that legislation in regards to reimbursement or whatever the case may be.
At the airport, on the couple of nights I spent there, the announcement was made, “Don’t bother to line up to customer service because there is no compensation.” Now, as a senator, I had my way covered, as we all do here. I talked to a gentleman there from Newfoundland and Labrador travelling with his wife and three children, and the two nights he spent in Toronto cost him over $1,200. I know you are working toward some new rules and putting some laws in place, but how do we find a way to put some teeth in the Air Passenger Protection Regulations, instead of leaving the impression that we have something to cover us when, in reality, we don’t?
Mr. Alghabra: Senator, thank you for the question.
I know many Canadians have a similar thought. Let me just say that there are really strict rules in place that protect passengers. However, I alluded in my remarks to an example of how sometimes these rules appear to be delayed — or the enforcement does — because sometimes the airline may prefer to let the passengers go to the Canadian Transportation Agency. One of the ideas I am proposing — and you will see those in the reforms I am tabling — is to shift the burden, to make sure that the airlines have an incentive in settling complaints instead of waiting for the passengers to go to the Canadian Transportation Agency for settlement.
We will make sure that the airlines have significant incentive for them to settle the complaint without forcing the passenger to go to the Canadian Transportation Agency.
Senator Manning: Thank you for that.
On another issue, in light of several studies on the impact of climate change on aviation infrastructure, including one by Andrew Leung at the University of Toronto, which addresses Northern aviation infrastructure issues from warming permafrost that would have an impact on airport infrastructure, such as runways, taxiways, fuel tanks, air traffic control and navigation facilities, to name a few, what plans does the government have to invest in Northern infrastructure to address this issue?
Mr. Alghabra: First of all, as you alluded to yourself, climate change is real and is having an impact on our aviation infrastructure, and any responsible government would need adaptation measures in place to deal with the changing climate and its impact on our infrastructure. In every infrastructure program we have at government, there is a component of dealing with — making sure that the proposal has adaptation measures. Whether at the National Trade Corridors Fund — and, by the way, it has a significant portion of it, $400 million out of the National Trade Corridors Fund, dedicated to the North — whether through Infrastructure Canada, we have set aside significant investment for the North and, within that allocation, a requirement to adapt to climate change.
Senator Manning: Operating in the North, as you know, will be much different than operating in other parts of the country. Can you give us an idea of some plans that are concrete now to deal with some of those infrastructure concerns that have been raised by pilots and others involved in the industry?
Mr. Alghabra: I can ask my colleagues here to give specific examples. I will give you an example about the importance of the North and how we understand that connectivity is important.
During COVID, when practically all air traffic was shut down, we set aside over $130 million to provide support for emergency air services to the North and remote regions. We subsidized airlines to fly to the North to ensure that the North, which often, as you said, relies on air connectivity, would still be able to operate, even if they didn’t have enough demand. That’s just an example of how we provided a unique type of consideration for the North. The same goes for infrastructure as well.
Craig Hutton, Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy, Transport Canada: Transport Canada, under the Northern Transportation Adaptation Initiative Program, has previously provided funding to conduct research in conjunction with universities, as well as northern operators, to take a look at issues such as runway material and how you can develop material that can better withstand the problems of permafrost degradation. Of course, simply paving runways in the North is, first of all, quite expensive; and, second, may not be as resilient of a material to be using and maybe not necessary either at every instance at every airport.
It’s coming up in various ways, depending upon the use of an airport, but coming up with materials that will withstand that climate change piece. So it’s working with researchers; service providers, such as the carriers; operators in the North, as well as local Indigenous knowledge, to all come together to look at solutions and pilot those solutions of what may work.
Senator Manning: So there is consultation with Indigenous groups and operators.
Mr. Hutton: Through that program, there has been quite a bit of work with Indigenous organizations and communities on what solutions look like.
[Translation]
Senator Cormier: I live in New Brunswick. The population is served by the Bathurst airport, the only airport in northern New Brunswick, which also serves much of the Gaspésie region. My questions relate to this reality. Despite your efforts, minister, it is clear that the public is losing confidence in Air Canada’s ability to serve Canadians adequately under certain conditions. There is a loss of confidence in the ability of small airports to be properly equipped to handle aircraft in certain weather conditions. There are questions about how your department can address these issues.
I’ll give you a recent example. At the Bathurst airport, a flight could not land because the infrastructure there was inadequate, apparently, despite infrastructure improvements that people appreciate. The Air Canada plane could not land and the flight returned to Montreal. I will spare you the details of the ensuing panic for the passengers, who had to find other flights. There is also insufficient service in both official languages. Several departments are involved here, and I wonder how your department or your government is working with other departments, such as Infrastructure Canada, Transport Canada and the department responsible for official languages, to find solutions.
The problem of being able to land under certain conditions is ongoing; it has an impact on the economic situation in our region and on the safety of citizens who need to be transported quickly to the hospital. I would like to hear your thoughts on this, minister.
[English]
Mr. Alghabra: Thank you very much, senator, for that very good question.
I’ve been to the Bathurst Regional Airport, and I’ve been to many other smaller regional airports. I acknowledge that airports, overall in the sector, have suffered a lot, especially in the last two years. There was already an infrastructure deficit prior to COVID, and then they lost so much of their business for at least a year and a half, that significant deficit was exacerbated.
Our government, over the last couple of years, provided almost $2 billion in support of infrastructure under different programs, some of it under the Airport Critical Infrastructure Program, some of it under the Airports Capital Assistance Program, and some of it under regional airport economic development, just to help airports during that difficult period.
I acknowledge that this alone is not going to fix all of those problems and there are still some challenges, so we are going to continue to work with Regional Economic Development, with Transport Canada and with Infrastructure Canada to identify how we can continue to support airports to catch up on their infrastructure deficit.
I’m also aware that the Government of New Brunswick has done a study on regional airports and connectivity and how to improve coordination between those airports. I provided support in principle on their work. If there’s anything we can do with the New Brunswick government to further enhance the roles of airports, the coordination among airports, I remain committed to doing that.
I want to assure you that this is something that is important to me, and we’re doing what we can to support airports to recover after a very difficult two years.
[Translation]
Senator Cormier: Thank you for your response. It is more than a matter of importance, it is a matter of urgency. What is happening in our community is that people are no longer using the Bathurst airport, because they no longer have confidence in the ability of the airport and the airlines that land there to serve them adequately. People are going to other airports, including the one in Moncton. This is a very unique dynamic. If we don’t take concrete action to support the Bathurst infrastructure, we will lose momentum and, one day, we will cite a lack of customers to justify closing this airport.
How are you dealing with this urgent situation? COVID is not the only factor — it was like that before. Today, it is urgent that regions like northern New Brunswick be adequately equipped so that Air Canada can continue to serve the population, minister.
[English]
Mr. Alghabra: Thank you, senator. Again, let me just say there’s a national airport network, and then there are regional airports that are owned by the municipality or the province, so each have different access to support. Ultimately, the airport is the agency or the organization responsible for their infrastructure plans.
If the Bathurst Regional Airport has a proposal, we’d be willing to look at it and see what the federal government can do. Understandably, I know you are speaking particularly about the Bathurst Regional Airport, and I understand why, but I’m giving you the answer about the policies that are available to airports like the Bathurst Regional Airport. If there are specific projects that the Bathurst Regional Airport has in mind, I’d be happy to discuss it further with you.
Senator Simons: Thank you very much, minister. I have some questions related to the passenger bill of rights. I would be curious to know, first of all, from your department if you could tell us how many formal complaints have been filed and how many passengers have received satisfaction.
It seems to me that the problem with the passenger bill of rights is that there’s an escape valve for every step if the airline can say that it’s out of their hands, out of their control. For example, the rules say that no one can have a tarmac delay of more than three hours, but we all know that at Christmas, people were kept on planes in Vancouver for 10, 12, 15 hours. I myself got kept on a plane for seven hours in the springtime. There are all these rules. You have to have food; you have to have water; you have to have ventilation. None of those protocols were followed.
So you think that people have grounds to complain until you get down to the line that says, “in no circumstances will airlines be permitted to exceed this time, unless they’re prevented for reasons of blah, blah, blah.” Of course, they’re always prevented by those reasons. There isn’t a crew to take you off the plane, or there isn’t safety.
What is the point of having a Passengers Bill of Rights if it’s completely unenforceable?
Mr. Alghabra: Senator, I hear your frustration, and I understand where it’s coming from.
Let me just say that, regarding the bill of rights, the rules are clear; however, there is an opportunity, as I said, to further clarify the rules. You gave a good example of where, sometimes, airlines may use labour shortage as an explanation for why they are not responsible for compensating passengers.
First, the Canadian Transportation Agency ruled that’s not allowed. Second, our opportunity — and this is what Transport Canada is working on right now — is to further clarify the rules to ensure that the rules are a lot more defined and that there’s no confusion about what is acceptable and what is not acceptable.
We still have to allow for extraordinary circumstances. We don’t want airlines to travel in risky conditions. However, you’re right; there is confusion, and we need to clarify these rules.
Senator Simons: The ambit of this study is to talk about resiliency in the face of climate change. This relates to planes and trains. We had situations over Christmas where people were trapped on trains and planes for more than 10 and 12 hours. I know the weather was severe, but it’s Canada in the winter. The weather is often severe. Surely, we have to have emergency protocols in place to evacuate a plane or a train and not keep people held hostage without food, beverages and access to working toilets in unconscionable conditions for such an extended period of time.
Mr. Alghabra: You’re making a lot of sense, senator. If you think I’m going to argue with you, I am not. In fact, I’m here to tell you that I’m going to further clarify the rules to help get us there.
Senator Simons: We need to actually have emergency protocols in place. We need to have the training and the equipment.
As it stands, the airlines, the trains and VIA Rail will always be able to say that they didn’t have the personnel, they didn’t have something else, it wasn’t safe to do that. But we have to make sure there are protocols in place. I think we got off very lucky this Christmas. There could have been a major health crisis if somebody on those planes had a heart attack or gone into labour.
I find it unfathomable that, in Vancouver, it’s impossible to slide people out on an emergency slide or take them down the steps if that is required to evacuate a plane in a time of crisis.
Mr. Alghabra: Again, senator, the airlines need to have standard operating procedures in place to ensure that the protocols you’re describing are in place.
VIA has hired a third party to review what happened. The third party will offer recommendations for updating their protocols.
The one thing about airlines, since they are not government-owned, unlike VIA, we can make sure that we hold the rules in place so the airlines can avoid being found in violation of those rules — that they create these protocols.
Let me just add, by the way, that the Canadian Transportation Agency announced, yesterday, that there were two fines issued to two separate airlines after a review had taken place. One was to Sunwing and one to WestJet. Both were or one of them was over a $100,000 fine. So the Canadian Transportation Agency has done some review, and there were some fines issued. CTA issued a press release about those yesterday.
Senator Simons: If your office can get me the number of how many CTA complaints there have been and how many have been resolved, that would be very helpful.
Senator Cardozo: Thank you, minister, for being here.
Let me try to come at this from the opposite end. I don’t want to be seen to be letting the government off the hook, but I look at this whole situation — COVID; post-COVID; climate change; the critical labour shortages in the airports, with the airlines and the rail lines, I look at energy prices and at what is happening in the world overall — and are we dreaming in Technicolor if we think we can actually get travel back to what it was five years ago. Should we all not accept that, because of some of these major worldwide changes I’ve just mentioned, we just can’t get there and we have to have a different expectation about travel?
When we travel, I think we’re all taking a few smaller precautions: We don’t check our bags, and we don’t plan to do something as soon as we arrive, because we’re probably not going to be able to be on time. We’re beginning to make some accommodations, but should we just reduce our expectations a lot more for the next few years before the transport industry and the economy gets back on track?
Mr. Alghabra: Senator, thank you for the question.
I’ll just tell you that during the pandemic, in the briefings that I was offered by Transport Canada or airlines, they didn’t expect the airlines to recover to 2019 levels until 2025 or 2026. That’s not what is happening. In fact, we are almost at 2019 levels now, depending on the time of the year. At Christmas time, we were almost at 2019 levels.
What happened was an imbalance between demand and supply. Airlines and airports, and many providers in the air sector, had laid off a significant number of their employees during COVID. While they are working on recruiting and hiring as many people as they can, the demand has come back a lot faster than their ability to hire people. So we’re seeing this imbalance, and we’re seeing that manifest in the delays and cancellations, particularly last summer.
But we’re not just seeing it in Canada. We saw it in the U.S. We saw it in Europe. We saw it across the globe, because almost everyone in the world had a similar experience to what we had here.
All that is to say that I’m not making excuses, because if I were a passenger — and believe me, I am a passenger on many occasions — I want to expect the best service from our sector. I want to feel that my rights are protected.
There is an asymmetry between the power that airlines have over their customers. If I’m a customer sitting onboard that plane, I am stuck. I have no power over the airline. I can’t go find my luggage on my own, et cetera. So there is asymmetry here for which there is a role for government to correct.
We tried to do that, and we did that with the Passenger Bill of Rights; however, the pandemic experience exposed vulnerabilities. We are learning. We’re not hiding from our responsibilities as a government. We’re explaining why this happened, but we’re committing to fixing it, at least to our best ability as a government.
That’s why we’re going to strengthen the Passenger Bill of Rights. That’s why we’re going to find ways to invest more in airports and give airport authorities more tools to deal with it. That’s why we’re going to give the Canadian transportation agencies more tools and more power to deal with these things.
We’re going to do whatever we can to improve the experience of passengers. We’re going to work with airlines. I know it’s fashionable sometimes to demonize airlines, but airlines, at the end of the day, are made up of hundreds of thousands of employees who want to do their best to serve their customers. We want to work with them to make sure that every customer feels satisfied. There will be the occasional time that doesn’t happen, but we want to set in place the system to protect passengers’ rights.
Senator Cardozo: With regards to the areas of the country that aren’t served as much as people would like, what powers do you have? Is it just sort of cajoling and asking airlines to go to smaller airports in areas of lower population?
Mr. Alghabra: Senator, in almost every conversation I have with airlines, I ask them about their plans to improve connectivity to different regions of the country because it is in the interests of our economy and in the interests of Canadians to see our regions conveniently and properly connected.
Ultimately, airlines make their operational decisions based on the demand they see and their own different priorities. I understood that, with the recovery of COVID, there were routes that they prioritized over others for operational reasons. I’m hopeful that we’re seeing better connectivity happening soon.
I am seeing more competition come into the marketplace. I talked about Porter, how they are expanding their service; Lynx, Jetlines, Flair, there are more airlines competing and providing more services. There are limited tools to how we can dictate to airlines which destinations they have to take. I will reiterate an invitation to this committee to provide advice on what else we can do to do that.
Senator Dasko: Well, everybody has their horror stories with travel, don’t they? Mine has to do with Toronto Pearson Airport. I go through Pearson twice a week almost every week, and it has been an absolute horror story. I think it has gotten a bit better, but don’t check your luggage. It may go to Australia. You will never survive the experience of going through Pearson.
In any case, I am happy to hear that air travel is back. It is a good sign for the economy that people are travelling again and are keen to travel.
My main question, like Senator Simons’s questions, is about compensation. I was interested in the volume of complaints that the CTA is getting and whether it has been able to clear the complaints. Is there a backlog? I think you suggested that this is something the airlines were using to perhaps get off the hook or push over to the CTA to deal with.
As you said earlier, a lot of airlines were saying that passengers were not eligible or entitled to compensation, but they really should have been entitled to compensation. Have you been able to tell which airlines have been more culpable in this respect? You must have the data there. It may well be public. Are there some perpetrators who have been worse than others? You are looking over to the side.
Mr. Alghabra: Senator, I will defer to officials about numbers. But let me just say, the number of complaints skyrocketed as we are recovering from the pandemic. Earlier I explained the dynamics, the surge in demand with lack of ability to service that demand. That caused a lot of delays and cancellations and, by extension, a lot of complaints. There has been an avalanche of complaints that started last summer.
The Canadian Transportation Agency is the agency responsible for enforcing those complaints and making sure that they review the practices of the airlines and, if necessary, impose a fine. I don’t want to speak on behalf of the CTA and what it has found. I don’t want to be prejudicial. Again, the CTA is an arm’s length, quasi-judicial body. It would be irresponsible of me to make declarations and to be prejudicial. I don’t know if you invited the CTA. They can provide a lot of information, but I’m sure the officials here can give you information about the number of complaints recently.
Mr. Hutton: As the minister indicated, some of the detailed questions should be better directed to the Canadian Transportation Agency. The CTA reported a 38,000-complaint backlog that they are working through. They said 97% of complaints are resolved by facilitation, and since the regime came into place, about 25,000 complaints have been resolved by different dispute mechanisms they offer. That can be facilitation, arbitration and so on. Their ability to process has increased as they found efficiency in how to do that. The government has also provided some additional resources to the agency so they are able to tackle that backlog as well as deal with the incoming.
Senator Dasko: Thank you. Minister, you said the crisis has revealed weaknesses in the system. Can you elaborate on that in the time we have left?
Mr. Alghabra: Sure. I used an example — there are clauses that say the airline will not be responsible if safety was at risk. Then there was confusion about what that means. If we are short on crew that, by extension, jeopardizes safety; therefore the airlines are no longer responsible. That’s an example where we need to clarify that. In my opinion, the airline is responsible for having the crew. If they sold a plane full of seats, they must have the crew to service that plane.
Another example is that the rules the CTA uses the authorities to deal with the claim — so I talked about reversing the onus, so that the airlines will have an incentive to settle a claim before having to go to the CTA. Those are all lessons we learned.
One other one is luggage. I think the initial version of the air passenger bill of rights was not very explicit about the responsibility and the rules for luggage. In fact, we had a court ruling from that said they upheld the passenger bill of rights. The only clause that they said was not clear in the passenger bill of rights was luggage delay, so we’re going to clarify that.
Senator Dasko: Thank you very much.
[Translation]
Senator Miville-Dechêne: Unlike my colleagues, I don’t fly home — I’m lucky enough to live two hours away. However, I have taken the train many times in my life and was absolutely horrified by the events of last Christmas, when some people were stuck on a train for 18 hours without food or toilets. We’re talking about Cobourg, 100 kilometres from Toronto, not Nunavut or the Yukon. This is not an unpopulated area.
You met with officials on January 11, two weeks after the disaster. Did you get any specific answers? I know you got excuses, but that’s not the point: it is necessary to feed people, to have supplies, to have cans of food; we’re not on a plane, we’re on a train. We’re in Canada where we have snowmobiles. We can find help, and especially food. It’s amazing how we were unable to bounce back in this case. I was blown away. Did you ask why there were no supplies on these trains? There is plenty of room to store them.
[English]
Mr. Alghabra: Thank you, senator, for that question.
Let me repeat, the specific example that you are referring to was really unacceptable. Waiting on a train for 19 hours without information, without supplies, without any offer of hope — I can only imagine what I would have done if I were sitting on that train. I would have wanted to get off that train. Of course, I would not advise anybody to leave the train. Let me be clear, I’m not recommending that anybody does that, but I would have been very frustrated and upset. There were other train delays, by the way, that happened because of extreme weather on that particular day or the day after. None of them, though, experienced the same thing that particular train experienced. There were many factors that contributed to it. Not that I’m making excuses for it, but there were many factors. You are right. It is clear that VIA’s protocols failed in that incident, and it was unacceptable.
Senator Miville-Dechêne: What you are telling us is that they had nothing in terms of [Technical difficulties] in case something happened.
Mr. Alghabra: They did not have it on board the train. They didn’t find a way to get it there. They should have. They should have provided information to customers. They should have found a way to either transport customers off that train safely or at least provide support while they were stuck on that train.
What I said earlier is that VIA has currently retained a third party to assess what happened and to provide recommendations on what they need to fix on that particular incident. I am waiting anxiously to see that report. As you know, VIA itself recognized their failings of that particular journey. They expressed an apology. They compensated customers who were on board that train. Still, to me that was an unacceptable situation. Compensating alone does not address the fundamental problem here. The fundamental problem needs to be addressed.
Senator Miville-Dechêne: Thank you.
The Chair: Minister, I heard many of the questions, and I heard your answers, and clearly there is a need to tighten up regulation and legislation. But the truth of the matter is that we already had legislation and regulation put into place in 2019. The problem is enforcement. From what I understand, when you have thousands of complaints not being dealt with in a timely fashion, it is not the fault of the airlines or the airports, it’s the fault of the government. That’s why we know there is a lot of frustration among the Canadian public. Hopefully, at the end of our work as parliamentarians and at the end of your deliberations, the government fixes what is broken.
My question is the following, minister: We made a decision many decades ago in this country to support, through legislation and regulation, our national airlines. We want Canadian national airlines to be successful. All these companies — Air Canada, WestJet — are flagship companies, and we are very proud of them. But one of the requirements in exchange for cabotage laws — for not having open skies in this country — is that we expect the airlines to provide service in areas where Canada does not have profitability. We don’t have economy of scale. That’s Canada. Certain places in New Brunswick, Saskatchewan and Northern Quebec are not moneymakers. But if we are going to protect these corporations through legislation like cabotage and not open skies to competition, in exchange they have to give us some sort of guarantee that they are providing national services. That’s what Canada is all about.
As legislators, when we make that sacrifice to protect and close our gates to competition to the benefit of these corporations, what can you assure we will get back from them as guarantees that they’ll provide services in all these areas that you have visited, minister? You’ve heard these messages.
Mr. Alghabra: Senator, there are a few things, because you touched on two points. First, let me talk about the number of complaints. Respectfully, I think the idea here is not just to fix how complaints are being dealt with. The idea is to actually reduce the number of complaints. It is to avoid these violations taking place. That is ultimately the best remedy to the system. You know, I think airlines also want to achieve that goal because, as a former business person, I know that it serves no one if your customers are unhappy. I think the priority for me and for our government is to reduce the number of complaints.
Second, let me talk about the idea that if we opened our skies or prevented Canadian ownership rules we would have better connectivity. First, let me just say that these rules are not put in place to protect the corporation. These rules are put in place to protect workers and employees. That’s why these rules are in place.
Let’s contemplate the idea of open skies for a second. Do you think that would mean regional, remote areas would be better served? That’s the question to you. What are we trying to solve? Will opening up the skies really address the problem we’re trying to solve? My response is no, I don’t think so.
How do we fix this problem? We need to work together with the airlines to figure out what the best option is to address this public policy objective.
The Chair: Thank you. Look, I don’t have the answer, minister. At the end of the day, as a parliamentarian, I am articulating the problems. I will say this to you, though. We know why we have all these regulations in place to protect the airline industries. I will bring up something called Avios, for example. We know in that instance where we failed to protect Canadian workers at Air Canada, and those jobs were transferred to Mexico.
I understand the good intentions of this legislation, and I have been on this committee for a long time. We’ve been grappling with these issues. You are right, we don’t have easy solutions to them, minister.
We do thank you, minister, for coming before our committee on such short notice and being as transparent and open about the issues as you have been. We appreciate having you.
For our second panel, we are pleased to welcome Andrew Gibbons, Vice President, External Affairs, WestJet; from Air Canada, via video conference, David Rheault, Vice President, Government and Community Relations; and Kevin O’Connor, Vice President, System Operations Control.
We welcome you and thank you for joining us this evening. We will begin with opening remarks from WestJet followed by Air Canada. Each guest will have five minutes before we turn it over to questions and answers. Mr. Gibbons, you have the floor, sir.
[Translation]
Andrew Gibbons, Vice President, External Affairs, WestJet: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Honourable senators, it is a privilege and an honour to be here tonight to take part in the discussion about bills and other matters.
[English]
Thank you for inviting me here tonight to participate in your important study. I look forward to our discussion and engagement with you to improve air travel in Canada. My remarks tonight will focus on WestJet’s growth strategy which is purpose-built to ensure that Canada has a profitable and entrepreneurial WestJet coming out of the pandemic. This plan is starting to take shape in communities across Canada. I will then focus on the issue of resilience as it relates to climate change and will outline the areas in which WestJet and our employees are working toward a lower carbon footprint.
Issues as they relate to travel disruptions are well documented. I am pleased to discuss with you the need for shared accountability for our guests and how consumer protection can be better applied in Canada. Our guests deserve and need a regime that provides transparency, performance measurement and fairness across all service providers.
Coming out of the devastation of COVID-19, WestJet is rolling out its plan for growth that will see an overall network capacity increase of 30% and the hiring of 2,200 employees. The plan consists of the following components. One, we will continue to be Canada’s leader and grow our leisure business from coast to coast. This is what Canadians love from WestJet and we will be delivering more of it.
In the east — it depends on where I am when I say east; here, I mean Ontario east — we are transitioning to a focus on east-west connectivity and north-south connectivity. This transition will take a bit of time to fully come to fruition, but I want to state clearly that it is our intention to grow in the east but that the nature of our investments will evolve. One small example is Monday’s announcement of direct flights to Moncton and Charlottetown from Edmonton. There will be more of these to come soon.
In the west, we will continue to be the number one carrier with few exceptions and expand capacity on existing routes, house our wide-body aircraft exclusively in service in Calgary and expand point-to-point flights that communities want and need. The foundation of this growth will be the largest current order book in Canada as we will be taking delivery of up to 65 of the 737 MAX aircraft in the coming years, to great benefit for the men and women who work in our aerospace sector.
We will be returning to our low-cost culture, affordable family service and the company Canadians have supported and made such a great success over 27 years. We understand this growth must be sustainable. To this end, we have chartered a similarly ambitious course toward a reduced carbon footprint. In addition to being Canada’s friendly, affordable airline, we are striving for a sustainable record to be one of our competitive advantages. The importance of operating a business with purpose is key to our employees, our customers and our business. We understand this.
Finally, on the subject of consumer protection, our request is clear of the government, namely, to address the largest gap in consumer protection today. That is, the fact that only airlines, and no one else, are subject to any penalties or regulations for the services they provide the travelling public. We believe that is the biggest and most glaring gap in consumer protection in Canada. We believe it should be the priority of this committee to make recommendations along those lines.
There are a number of ways and changes that would make this possible. First, we believe there should be a shared accountability framework for air travel and that the government should expand the regulations to all those accountable. This includes communications protocols, performance reporting and measurement, service level agreements with users and a mechanism to allow for airlines to recoup APPR costs from other entities.
Second, the government should end what is called the small-carrier provision which treats travellers equally on the same route. To a passenger, a WestJet flight from Calgary to Toronto is no different than flying that same route on another carrier. Often, it is the same plane. But under APPR, they have completely different compensation rules and rebooking obligations. For a passenger rights regime to be effective, all passengers need to be treated equally.
Third, we believe the government should not be imposing major new costs on consumers nor increasing pressures on airlines at a time when we are recovering from the pandemic. The root problem — and the minister said this in his final comments — is the need to improve the overall guest experience. We agree with that. But we also submit that a piecemeal approach singling out airlines will not deliver the new era of air travel that we all seek.
Canada is a different market from the U.S. and Europe. While comparisons can be made against rights regimes in other countries, we have a vastly different climate, geography and population base. There are few regulatory environments or regulations that could capture the complexity of the challenges we have faced this year. Shared accountability will provide a better and more seamless passenger experience. I believe that, in the context of our sector’s recovery, these recommendations are both reasonable and responsible. They represent the best path toward our shared objective. Our guests are rightfully asking for improvements to the traveller experience, and we believe that shared accountability will reduce complaints, improve transparency for all guests and more properly reflect the root causes of delays and cancellations.
On a final note, I want to repeat my comments from the house committee two weeks ago and to issue a sincere apology to any of our guests who felt let down by our services, who were let down by our communications or who had baggage issues. No one hates delays and cancels operational challenges for a traveller more than the men and women who work for our company. It is difficult for them and difficult for the guests. We all have an obligation to do better. We’ve made that commitment to the travelling public and I make that commitment to senators tonight. Thank you very much.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Gibbons.
[Translation]
David Rheault, Vice President, Government and Community Relations, Air Canada: Thank you for this opportunity to discuss the impact of climate change on critical aviation infrastructure.
[English]
I’m with Kevin O’Connor, Vice President System Operations Control. Mr. O’Connor is responsible for the daily operations at Air Canada.
Air Canada has significantly improved its environmental footprint, and we continue to build resiliency to be positioned to recover quickly when our operations are impacted by weather events.
First, let me speak about our environmental commitments. Our approach is twofold: Leave less and do more. Air Canada has improved fuel efficiency by close to 45% since 1990 through investments in aircraft, route optimization and other measures. Despite the pandemic, we strengthened and formalized our commitment. We have adopted an ambitious Climate Action Plan and set a goal of net-zero emissions by 2050 with interim targets for 2030.
Air Canada is taking a multifaceted approach. This includes continuing to deploy a modern fleet, with more of our Canadian-made A220 aircraft. In total, we will have 60 A220s, which are all built in Quebec. Minimizing single-use plastic on board, and through our corporate LEAVE LESS travel program, providing a sustainable travel offering to our corporate consumer.
[Translation]
Last fall, we announced the purchase of 30 hybrid electric aircraft under development by Heart Aerospace of Sweden. Our investments in sustainable aviation fuel also are among our most important initiatives. Since our first demonstration flight with a biofuel-powered aircraft in 2012, we have been involved in alternative fuel research. We will invest $50 million in sustainable aviation fuel research and other carbon-reducing technologies.
The affordable supply of sustainable aviation fuel is essential. Governments have a fundamental role to play. In August 2022, the U.S. government passed legislation that provides fuel producers with credits and incentives to meet the target of 3 billion gallons of sustainable aviation fuel produced annually by 2030. Canada does not have a similar policy and production of sustainable aviation fuel is limited. The Canadian government must support the production of sustainable aviation fuel in this country.
[English]
Moreover, the U.S. is investing heavily in airport infrastructure. The recent infrastructure bill provides $15 billion for airport projects. Similar investments in infrastructure are needed in Canada to ensure the system is robust enough to withstand irregular operations, especially given the effect of climate change.
The International Civil Aviation Organization, or ICAO, has issued a report that discusses at length these impacts. It notes that storms are projected to become stronger. As well, more extreme cold temperature days in northern climates and extreme cold spells can cause equipment underperformance, increased aircraft turnaround times leading to congestion, fuelling delays due to equipment freezing and issues within the terminal facilities themselves.
[Translation]
In an appearance before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities on January 12, airport authority representatives pointed out that, despite significant technological development, the infrastructure will not have the capacity to carry us into the next decade, and that many of the facilities are antiquated. Like other countries, Canada needs to adopt policies that reflect the importance of our air transport infrastructure by supporting it financially.
In June 2012, this committee released a report that concluded that the Government of Canada must stop treating airports as a source of government revenue and instead view them as economic engines. One of the recommendations of the report was to stop charging rent to airports. It is worth noting that in 2019, airports paid over $400 million in rent, and the pandemic has only exacerbated these problems.
With the sharp decline in users, a number of institutions, including airports and NAV CANADA, have increased their fees and deferred infrastructure investments. Airports and airlines have joined together to call for a reinvestment in the system that would allow for the modernization of infrastructure and the adoption of green technologies and initiatives to enhance the efficiency and resilience of the system.
To return to the incidents of the holiday season, I note that over 2 million people travelled with Air Canada between December 22 and January 8. Most importantly, they did so safely. It was the dedication of our 35,000 employees, more than at the same time in 2019, that allowed us to transport our customers and restore our operations quickly following the weather events.
On behalf of Air Canada, I want to acknowledge and thank our employees for the exceptional work they do, often under very difficult conditions. We apologize to and sympathize with all customers whose travel plans have been changed. We share their disappointment and understand the importance of travel.
While there has been much talk of changes to the passenger rights regime, although this is not explicitly the subject at hand, I must stress the importance of a shared responsibility model. Airlines cannot continue to be the only ones with enforceable service standards and financial responsibility under the Air Passenger Protection Regulations, when the system is highly interconnected and circumstances beyond our control will continue to exacerbate current problematic situations across the system.
Thank you very much. I would be happy to answer your questions.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
[English]
Senator Simons: Thank you very much, gentlemen. As you know, we’re speaking with you tonight under the umbrella of our study on the resilience of our transportation system in the face of climate change. Winter in Canada is always exciting, and it’s likely to get more exciting as climate change accelerates. Yet what we saw this Christmas was that airlines were not prepared to deal with Canadian winter weather. You didn’t have the necessary pilots, ground crews or baggage handling protocols, and perhaps most frustrating for passengers, you didn’t have anybody to answer the phone or work at the customer service desk when desperate, worried people were asking for help.
I want to understand, as your airlines prepare for a world of increasing weather delays and weather interruptions, what protocols you have in place to make sure that Canadians who travel get information in a timely way about their future flight and about rebooking. Because I must tell you, Mr. Gibbons, when things were being cancelled at Christmastime and the WestJet message was that you can leave a message and we will get back to you in four business days — after Christmas — it’s a pretty frustrating message to hear for people who are desperate to get home.
Mr. Gibbons: Thank you for the opportunity to address the issues you raised. We feel and have heard that guest frustration. That is why in our testimony before the House committee we said that we have identified two priority areas and lessons learned from what happened at Christmas. The first, senator, is that we’re going to improve our guest communications. We’ve heard that message. While we did a lot of very good things on behalf of our guests at Christmas — I’m happy to go through all those items for you — we did fail in some instances, and we’ve identified those failures and we’ll address those failures.
I do want to be clear on weather. On December 23, 9 out of 10 provinces had extreme weather warnings, and in your province of Alberta the wait for a tow truck was 3.5 days. The tow truck companies aren’t ill-prepared for weather, they’ve seen weather before as well, but the nature of these storms were profound. They were incredible, and we don’t own and operate our own infrastructure. That is the reality of our business.
Both things are true, we have extraordinary sympathy and empathy for our guests and we work very hard to do the right thing. We gave our employees bonuses at Christmastime. Every front-line corporate employee came into our airports. This is what our people do for a living, and they feel it, and they care, but we did have failings and we’re addressing those, thank you.
Senator Simons: For our friends at Air Canada, we’ve seen stories that people had to literally call the police to get their luggage back. You can’t control the weather, but what you can control is having customer service for people who have been hugely put out by weather delays.
Kevin O’Connor, Vice President, System Operations Control, Air Canada: Thank you for allowing me to participate. I didn’t have a chance to make opening remarks, but I appreciate this opportunity.
You’re absolutely correct in the issues we had with baggage. There’s that story that we’re all aware of. Again, it goes back to how we communicate and how we inform customers. In the first place, when we have the baggage issues that we did over the holidays, which was impacted by the severe weather, a lot of that was out of our control from the equipment that we use at airports that were not functioning. That is something that we’re working with our partners at airports that has to improve. That was the situation in the summer. The situation at Christmas. [Technical difficulties] so the bag doesn’t get lost in the first place. However, once it is, it’s on our accountability and it’s our responsibility to reimburse, track down, deliver, communicate and update. Clearly, we failed.
I can speak only for Air Canada, but I can tell you, senator, we are investing millions of dollars in new technology in baggage tracing, knowing where bags are and scanning throughout the process so the bags don’t get lost or mishandled, and if they are, where they are, and what the recovery plan is. That is ongoing. That had started previously. The investments are coming and vendors are being chosen. But we acknowledge that as important as it is to get the customer to the destination, their valuable baggage is just as important.
To clarify something the senator said earlier — and I think he’s right — we’re all doing different things. Someone said they are taking carry-on bags because confidence isn’t there with checked luggage. We have to get confidence as an industry — airlines, airport authorities and others — so that people can feel safe to check bags, because the answer of bringing carry-on bags onto an aircraft, causes more issues, more delays and less comfort on board the aircraft.
As a whole, baggage handling is a key priority for us. We will continue to invest, and we hope that others will invest as well through airport authorities, and hopefully the government will also see that as an investment opportunity. Thank you.
Senator Simons: I have one more question about staffing levels. We talked about customer service, but it’s my observation that there’s a shortage of pilots and there’s a shortage of ground crew. Pilots take a long time to train, and it’s an expensive training process.
So what protocols do you need to have in place to make sure that you have access to the highly trained technical people that you need to make your operations function?
Mr. O’Connor: On behalf of Air Canada, I want to clarify a point. It’s very important that everyone understands this: We have more pilots today at Air Canada than we did in 2019 or before the pandemic. There are more trained and more on the line, but we’re not yet at the 2019 flying schedule. We will continue to hire.
I must say that we’re very fortunate at Air Canada. A number of people want to fly for Air Canada and become pilots and have a long career. As far as that goes, we continue to hire on a regular basis. Right now, we are receiving many applicants for that.
Regarding ground crews — if I could quickly talk about airport ground staff, above the wing and below the wing — there’s no question that we continue to ramp up. We’ve hired thousands and thousands of people since last year. We started hiring prior to the summer.
Training is an issue, but with labour shortages, it is hard to get the volume of employees. We’re doing much better. Our resource levels are nowhere where they were in the summer, and we’re much more confident going forward that we have the right resources in place who will be trained to where we did prior to the pandemic.
Mr. Gibbons: I would like to touch on [Technical difficulties] you raised in the last round. I think it’s very important. I can give a more detailed answer for you on staffing.
I want to note that we signed a comprehensive MOU with the provincial government of Alberta to address a lot of the issues you’re talking about to make sure we have that pipeline, that we’re working with post-secondary institutions and the private sector to make sure that in our home province, where employment levels and investments are so critical, we have that long-term supply and that the support is it there to make sure that our investments can fully come to life.
So we’re fully on top of that. Our staffing levels are appropriate for the schedule that we publish. Our schedule is not published on a cocktail napkin; it’s a very deliberate process that takes into consideration many matters, including whether we have the appropriate staff to fly those aircraft.
That is our commitment. We agree that if you’re selling a ticket on a flight, you’d better have the staff to fly it; we couldn’t agree more.
Senator Wallin: I just have a few comments about communication that totally predate COVID, winter storms or anything else.
When you’re sitting at the gate or on the tarmac for half an hour, an hour or two hours, and nobody will tell you why — you need to tell them, because somebody is going to pick you up at the airport. You have to cancel a meeting. You’re not going to make the funeral. This is just basic stuff.
I was sitting on an airplane the other day — again, no communication about why we were delayed and sitting there with the door open. Finally, I hear the pilot, and he says, “Yes, I could get out and close the door to the plane, but I’m the pilot, and then I’ll be outside the plane.” That does not inspire confidence and trust in running an airline.
That is the point we’ve gotten to.
I’m glad you’re both going to work on that, but it’s a really big problem.
For my question as opposed to my rant, we’ve just had a conversation with the minister, who said, with great ease, that it’s over to the airline. “It’s your fault; I’m not going to tell them what to do. I don’t own them. You figure it out at the committee” — everybody passing the bucks. The airports are a different structure than the airlines and are a different structure than the passenger.
So what are we going to do? We’ll hear from both Air Canada and WestJet. You have said, Mr. Gibbons, that you’re open to more or expanded government regulation to demand certain — so there is an expectation and accountability. I don’t know if Air Canada feels the same — if Mr. O’Connor would like to comment on that — but we’ll start with Mr. Gibbons. We will see if you can solve the minister’s problem for him.
Mr. Gibbons: Thank you very much for the question.
Maybe we were both trying to solve the same problem and have different solutions. Our solution, and the one we’ve put forward, would make sure that anyone who offers a delay or a cancellation — and the minister said this himself before the House committee — not just airlines offer delays and cancels; multiple parties do, and they all should be accountable just like we are. That’s how we’re going to improve the system. At the end of the day, if your flight is delayed or cancelled, whether it’s because of a NAV CANADA ground delay program for safety or staffing, a baggage belt at an airport, de-icing fluid — whatever the reason is — every Canadian who has been delayed ends up at our counter, talking to our employee, looking for a solution, wanting that hotel voucher or compensation.
So we have a frustration ourselves about this — rightfully — because our employees have been through a lot, and they’re the ones on the front lines dealing with this.
So we’re making an observation, senator, that we may be imperfectly held to account, but we are held to account. There is regulation, we do pay compensation and there is a system that provides for that. But we are the only ones.
The example I sometimes use — and I’m not picking on NAV CANADA, because they’re an extraordinary partner and do great things for Canada — but if there is a ground delay program, we do believe that they should be on Twitter to communicate with Canadians and say, “Tonight at airport X, we instituted a ground delay program that unfortunately resulted in delays and cancellations. To learn more about ground delay programs, click here.” We need that next level of communication protocols, transparency and accountability. We hope we can have your support for that, and we think that should include performance metrics.
I hope you can support us on that.
Senator Wallin: I’d like to hear from Mr. O’Connor on that question. My point to the minister was that there is an obligation, I believe, on the part of government, but on the part of airlines too, to service the entire country. We all have a right to be able to get from point A to point B in a country that is this large, particularly when it involves getting to work. It’s not just senators; it’s oil and gas workers going from Newfoundland to Fort McMurray or wherever it might be. It’s lawyers flying to meetings. In a country this big, this is how we move.
So what is your answer, Mr. O’Connor, for your obligation to see that Canadians are equally serviced in their needs to travel?
Mr. O’Connor: Thank you, senator. I appreciate that.
Just so you know, Saskatchewan service is important to me. My family is from Saskatchewan, I’m from the West and my wife is from Saskatchewan. Service to Regina and Saskatoon is certainly important.
But I was saying that this is obviously a vast country, from coast to coast. Air Canada does value regional markets, so much so that when almost no one was flying during the pandemic, even government officials — the Government of Canada stopped a lot of people from travelling — we continued to carry on a lot of extra service to move health care workers around and mining companies’ employees around. We brought oil and gas workers from the east to the west. That was at a time when planes were flying with very low load factors. We saw that. As a national carrier during the pandemic, we were not flying profitable routes, but we maintained service.
Yes, we did retreat from some. The fact of the matter is that we want to be known and we want to be in the small markets and serve all parts of Canada.
Can we do it perfectly? Is it a perfect industry right now? I can’t honestly say it is. But I can tell you that our colleagues that I work with talk frequently about the level of service, the right types of aircraft, schedule, volume and what size of airplane should go in.
I can tell you wholeheartedly, senator, regional markets are important to us, and we strive to do better. It is hard when you’ve lost billions of dollars over the last many years during the pandemic to try to invest in those regional markets if they’re not profitable, but we maintain our commitment to all regions of Canada and all provinces. Thank you.
[Translation]
Mr. Rheault: If I may comment on the issue of accountability that was raised by my colleague, I must say that we also support the idea of having a system of shared responsibility. It is a system that recognizes that the industry is an ecosystem and that the contribution of several stakeholders is essential to the proper functioning of the airport infrastructure, NAV CANADA or the government agencies, among others, that are involved in passenger transportation.
We also believe that having clear and transparent service standards should be applicable to all those companies involved in transport, and that this is the right way to improve efficiency and the passenger rights regime. Thank you.
[English]
Mr. Gibbons: On Friday morning in Saskatoon, we’re making a major announcement that will address the biggest air service gap in Saskatchewan today, so I hope everyone will pay attention to that announcement, because we’re stepping up for the community. But also on a per capita basis for the WestJet group, both of our markets in Saskatchewan, Regina and Saskatoon, have the same level of seats as equivalent markets — Edmonton, Victoria, et cetera. Saskatchewan in our network and among the WestJet group is not treated less than. It has its per capita share, and this summer we’ll be increasing investment, and more details will come.
One additional comment on regional air travel is that, coming out of the pandemic, it’s obvious that air travel is the essential mode of transport for most of this country. Yet we have what we call an “intermodal inequity” in Canada. Nothing against passenger rail or VIA Rail — it’s not personal — but the Government of Canada currently subsidizes VIA Rail and subsidizes passengers from Montréal to Moncton. The last number I saw was $350 per passenger, while aviation, which is the critical and essential mode of transport for most of Canada, has a user-pay system. So your constituents and residents are paying for that system, and they’re paying for a rail subsidy in a province they don’t live in. That’s an observation.
Senator Wallin: Believe me, I know.
Senator Manning: We don’t have to worry about VIA Rail in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Senator Wallin: Saskatchewan either.
Senator Manning: They took that a long time ago on us. But I do agree that if there are financial penalties, it should be more than the airlines. It should be across the board if the minister is heading in that direction to address the ongoing concerns.
I want to touch on a couple of things with you, Mr. Gibbons, first. You mentioned in your opening remarks that WestJet is rolling out its plan, coast-to-coast, east-to-west connectivity, south-to-north. Can you take this opportunity to touch on the plans for Atlantic Canada in that new rollout, especially when it comes to Newfoundland and Labrador?
Mr. Gibbons: I can do that, thank you, senator. As I indicated in our remarks, our investment mix is changing in Atlantic Canada. It’s essentially changing from what we were pre-COVID, which was regional connectivity, point-to-point in the east, but a traditional mix of line, and where we’re heading toward — and you’re starting to see the transition — but it will take a bit of time. I want to be transparent about that. We are transitioning to north-south flying and east-west flying.
The future state for Newfoundland and Labrador and all Atlantic provinces will be, roughly, increased connectivity between Western Canada and Atlantic Canada through direct flights and point-to-point flights, but also enhanced north-south leisure flying. That is the direction we’re heading in Atlantic Canada.
We did, unfortunately, have to suspend our transatlantic flights from Halifax to Europe, and we know how popular and important those were for the visitor economy in the region. I just want to note that we consider that a temporary suspension, and we’re reviewing that in a year. But those are leisure flights, and we know how well received they’ve been. It is a transition.
Senator Manning: The rumour mill runs amok when it comes to these things, so WestJet leaving Newfoundland and Labrador completely is true or false?
Mr. Gibbons: Completely false. We’re not leaving Newfoundland and Labrador. Completely false.
Senator Manning: That answers that question.
Senator Wallin: You can come to Saskatchewan, Senator Manning.
Senator Manning: Yes, via rail.
This question is for both our guests. You can’t control the weather. I’m from Newfoundland and Labrador, and we get four seasons in one day, so controlling the weather is not something. Can you touch on, Mr. Gibbons first and then to the Air Canada people, the three main issues that the company is dealing with today in providing quality service to your customers? I’m not talking about the weather or issues that are out of your control, but issues within your control such as baggage handlers and gates. And what are you doing to address those three top issues?
Mr. Gibbons: If you look at 2022 from start to finish, there are three main crises we went through. First was Omicron, second was the late spring, early summer “crisis,” as we’ll call it, maybe an overused word, and then the winter troubles. Outside of those three unpredictable and extraordinary events, we run a very good airline for Canada. We lead the country in on-time performance and completion factor, and we are very reliable. Our guests know that, and they’re loyal to us.
It is what happens when these extraordinary events happen. As I said at the House committee, we need to improve our communications; we need to improve our baggage handling and reporting. We’ve heard that from senators, we’ve heard that from members of parliament and we’ve heard it from your constituents.
So those are the main challenges we have, and on top of that, I would say we just haven’t had six months of stability to get our feet on the ground. It’s just been one thing after another, and we’ve been pleading with the government — and we did this in the summer — we just need six months of stability. This relates to air passenger rights, because if you look at the testimony of the CTA before the House committee, the fiscal year before COVID, the CTA received 1,700 complaints. In August alone, they received 5,800 complaints. The number of complaints is directly correlated to the nature of these major events.
We’ve had three of them in one calendar year that you probably would not have in 25 years, and so we’re just pleading with the government: Let things settle in our sector properly, and let’s clear that backlog, because we don’t think our guests should wait 18 months either. That’s unacceptable, especially when they hear from us within 30 days. That’s a problem we need resolved.
Senator Manning: Would any of the officials from Air Canada like to respond?
[Translation]
Mr. Rheault: Yes, thank you very much. We also invest a lot in improving the resilience of our operations. If you look at what happened over the holiday season, Air Canada recovered very quickly from the weather events, which shows that we had the operational capacity and the reserves in place. We had 15 aircraft on standby and we added extra flights — over 300 extra flights — to carry passengers; that’s a testament to the resilience of our operations. In terms of Newfoundland and Labrador, we’ve always maintained our operations there, even in the worst of the pandemic.
[English]
So we are really committed to the Newfoundland and Labrador market. We stayed in Newfoundland and Labrador even during the worst of the pandemic. We have also added new services to our Montreal hub, from cities from Newfoundland and from Eastern Canada in general. We have relaunched our Boston flight from Halifax. We have relaunched our flight to London Heathrow from Halifax. There are cities much larger than Halifax and North America that don’t have London Heathrow services, but we’re proud of that service.
We’ve also launched a Halifax service to Vancouver. In December, we launched a Halifax service to New York, which used to be operated by an American carrier.
This shows our commitment to Atlantic Canada —
[Translation]
— and our commitment to improve our services.
[English]
With respect to Saskatchewan, we’re really committed to that market as well. We’re adding capacity this summer to our main global hubs, Toronto and Vancouver. We’re will have a Montreal service from both Regina and Saskatoon, and we’re going to connect Saskatchewan with the world through our major hubs in Canada, the three most powerful hubs in this country and among the top 50 in the world.
[Translation]
Senator Cormier: I thank the witnesses for being here. My question is really for Air Canada. I want to begin by saying that I wish to commend the work of Air Canada employees in general. The concerns I have are not directed at them specifically. The two words that come to mind when I think of Air Canada and the challenges it faces are “efficiency” and “flexibility.” My experience is not based on what happened during the holiday season, but on the last two weekends, February 4 and February 10. I will use those as examples, not to rehash my own concerns, but to highlight what Canadians are experiencing when they travel with Air Canada these days.
I flew from Ottawa to Moncton with a stopover in Toronto. The flight from Ottawa was delayed. After insisting, I was offered a seat on a flight from Toronto to Moncton leaving the next evening, even though I had a funeral to attend. I was finally able to get a flight to Moncton through WestJet. It took me 11 hours to fly back from Moncton to Ottawa. It was not because of a weather problem.
The second weekend, I flew from Ottawa to Bathurst. There were delays, and when we got to Bathurst, we couldn’t land. Nobody told us there was a problem. We all knew there was a weather issue, but Air Canada didn’t seem to see it. We only found out while flying over Bathurst. So we came back to Montreal.
At that point, I was told that it was impossible for me to board a flight leaving for Ottawa in the next half hour, because Air Canada’s computer system had been changed and now, as soon as the boarding for a flight has begun, it is no longer possible to accommodate other passengers. I finally arrived in Ottawa without any luggage. When I reported this situation, I received service in English only.
Do you see the lack of efficiency and flexibility? I believe in Air Canada as a company. However, how are you going to solve the problems that you still have today? What must Transport Canada do for you? How do you explain the delays, the technical and mechanical problems and the change in computer systems? In fact, the problems seem so great that I would like to know what solutions you have in mind to solve the problems I have experienced.
[English]
Mr. O’Connor: Perhaps I can take that, senator. Thank you. There’s a lot to digest there, so in the spirit of time, I will focus on what we’re trying to do to prevent and improve — but not for your specific flights.
Senator, we are undertaking, I would say, an almost revolutionary change at Air Canada, looking at everything from the customer service, the policies, technology, people, processes, training. I’ve been with Air Canada for 27 years; in that time, I have never seen a program that had been put into place for our front-line staff to give them tools, whether it be through automation, technology, training.
As far as reliability, we continue to work with our vendors, the aircraft manufacturers, the people who supply parts. There is no question there has been supply chain issues throughout the entire industry for all carriers. The reliability, as far as maintenance issues, is not a safety issue, but there have been supply chain issues. We see it throughout the world.
We continue to advocate and use our voice and use the power of Air Canada to move and get supplies into Canada. We’re preparing for the summer. There are a number of efforts through technology, people, processes, training and working with third-party vendors to stabilize things.
You can look at our on-time performance, our flight completion, in 2023, even February. Considering that we are a global carrier flying to six continents, our performance of late has drastically improved, and it is because of some of this innovation.
This is not a short-term project. This will cost millions of dollars. It is a long project that will improve all aspects of our company. Hopefully, you will see that in the near future, and I thank you for choosing us. We appreciate it.
[Translation]
Senator Cormier: My next question is for Mr. Rheault. The person who served me was very nice, but there was no service in French to retrieve luggage after a number of major flights. How is the language training program going at your company? How does it meet passengers’ expectations?
Mr. Rheault: Thank you for the question, Senator Cormier. In which airport did you not get service in French?
Senator Cormier: Ottawa.
Mr. Rheault: Offering service in the passengers’ preferred official language is an obligation and a priority for Air Canada. We continue to provide training and we have created new awareness modules that all employees follow online and that explain the importance of providing service in French or in the passengers’ preferred official language. If people are not bilingual, they must find a colleague who can provide the service.
We can check with Ottawa Airport to do a follow-up. We are aware that there is a large francophone community in the Ottawa region, and many Quebecers fly out of this airport. This is one of our service standards. I can tell you that we have a large proportion of bilingual employees in Ottawa.
I thank you for your comment; we will make sure to follow up. During your flights, did you receive service in French?
Senator Cormier: Yes, the service was in French, of course.
Mr. Rheault: In Bathurst, I think all our staff are bilingual. So, I guess you get good service there?
Senator Cormier: Yes, I know the staff.
Mr. Rheault: Yes, I can imagine.
[English]
Senator Cardozo: First, Mr. Gibbons, I have a matter of clarification. You talked about only the airlines being affected by the travellers’ bill of rights. Could you just specify who else you think should be subject to the travellers’ bill of rights?
Mr. Gibbons: Any agency, government or otherwise, that provides a service to the traveller can result in a delay or cancellation. The short-form list would be airport authorities, NAV CANADA and CBSA, to start. And there should be regular performance reporting to this committee and to Parliament — including ourselves. That could be a starting point so we can improve the overall travel experience that we’re discussing tonight.
Mr. Rheault: I would add to that list CATSA as well. They provide the security screening at airports. They should have an enforceable service standard.
Senator Cardozo: Just as everyone is talking about horror stories, at the beginning of January, I went through Toronto airport, and I hate to admit this publicly but I left my laptop behind at security. Two weeks later, I actually got it back. I only knew the time when I left it behind and the brand. I didn’t have my name or anything on it. Once in a while, sometimes, an angel somewhere helps you out.
I have a question for both of you. With all the kinds of challenges we talked about, such as the critical labour shortages and the weather — and climate change is probably making things worse — are we as passengers expecting too much of you? Should we be lowering our expectations, and we will all be happier that way?
Mr. Gibbons: I sure hope that’s not the case, and if that’s the case, then the hard-working people who wear a uniform and serve you every day will have failed. No, I hope that’s not the case. We hope you have high expectations, and we hope that those expectations are met. That’s been the record of our company for the most part, for 27 years, and it’s our intention to continue that. We’ve had some very public failings over the last little while, but we have also been failed by others who have impacted our brand and our standing, and that is at the heart of our recommendations.
No, we definitely don’t want to be in a situation in Canada where people are expecting less of us. We want them to expect more and receive more.
Mr. Rheault: I would say, in the 10 years before the pandemic, we grew the size of our company by 50%. Air Canada carried 50% more passengers in 2019 than 10 years before. We did that by achieving and surpassing consumer expectations. We are committed to render a service that people will appreciate and that will make our country proud here and around the world.
Definitely, we have high expectations, but as we said, air transportation is also a team sport. Many people have a role to play.
If you look at the report that was done by this committee in 2012, it studied how policies are applicable to air transportation in Canada compared to other countries. It found that Canada is unique in the way they tax passengers and airports. From a policy perspective, I would invite this committee to look at supportive policies that the government can put in place to help airlines and help the system to meet passenger expectations. Thank you.
Senator Cardozo: [Technical difficulties] a blip and things will be smoother and better over the next period?
Mr. Gibbons: Well, we sure hope so. The challenges that our guests have had over the last year are not exclusively as a result of actions that our people did or did not take. That’s the point of our recommendation. Yes, we hope so. We need that. The country needs that, and that’s what we are working toward every day, absolutely.
Senator Cardozo: Do you think that all the players can pull together and have a better service going forward?
Mr. Gibbons: I hope so. We have to; that’s the short answer. We have that obligation. I would also caution confusing a lot of things that happened at Christmas or these other events as a pure failure of system players. These have been really extraordinary events, and it’s hard to prescribe perfectly what the patient needs coming out of those events, but we are working hard to do that.
Senator Cardozo: As we look at the issue of climate change, if climate change is going to give us more of these dramatic weather events, will everyone say it is because of the weather and not because of — I don’t mean this rudely — because of you? With climate change, will we just have more severe events at different times of the year?
Mr. Gibbons: I can’t answer that.
Senator Cardozo: Well, can we cope with it?
Mr. O’Connor: It is a great question. Senator, to answer your question, yes, we are seeing more severe, significant systems. It is how airlines recover that is going to be the key, as well as the creativity that we use and the resiliency that we have and what we learn. We go through major events on a regular basis, and then we do debriefs and we learn from them.
This will require investment. We can’t use the same infrastructure that we used in the 1980s, the 1990s or the 2000s and expect the industry to be the same, no. We need to foresee the climate issues, better prepare for them, have more resiliency as an industry — and we have talked about this as the ecosystem, everything from the airlines themselves to airport authorities to runway clearing in the winter to air traffic control, to predict significant summer thunderstorms. We can do this.
Canada, as we talked about, cannot lose aviation. It should be an investment as a whole so that we can succeed. Canada could use aviation as a major economic driver.
I believe what everyone has said, climate change is here, more severe storms. We are learning more from it. We will be better prepared. We will deal with it earlier. If we have better weather tools, we will have better information, better data, and we will make better decisions. I certainly hope and I commit us — that we want to get better.
The Chair: I also want to weigh in.
I listened attentively to what the minister said earlier and what the second panel has articulated here. Climate change certainly is one element. But let’s be clear: This winter has not been any more chaotic than previous winters in this country. More importantly, the chaos that we have experienced in our airports did not start on December 23. It started in the summer of 2022, and it has been an unprecedented crap show ever since. It was a crap show in the summer, it was a crap show in the fall — excuse my language — and it was throughout Christmas. If I listen to the government, climate change will all be resolved by adding a carbon tax. I don’t think that will solve the problem either.
This is what I see — correct me if I am wrong, from both witnesses — we have airports that are implicated in this mess, Transport Canada, a government that put in place a passenger rights bill in 2019 that the minister acknowledged has been a failure. The government acknowledged it has not been able, in a timely fashion, to respond to these passenger complaints. It is easy to lay the blame at the feet of airline companies. But I took the time to Google your third-quarter profits in 2022, and you already paid a huge price for this mess. At the end of the day, when you don’t provide timely service to your customers, you are penalized because you don’t make money. You lose money. Of course, your employees suffer, your shareholders suffer and the country suffers.
We need to look at the government’s sense of responsibility, because when you mess up, your bottom line feels it, but when the government messes up, they shrug their shoulders and say, “Well, we’ll put another bill of rights before the Senate and we’ll do it before spring.” It is three months away, and I bet you money we won’t get it here in the Senate before mid June and they will be begging us to pass it before we even review it.
I made a lot of comments, and we are running out of time, but I do believe, colleagues, that I have summarized the testimony of our witnesses here, that they think there is some responsibility to go around to airports, to Transport Canada, to CBSA, to CATSA and to the government. Now, because the clock has run out, I will say this: I do thank you — I will give the final word to the witnesses. You deserve the final word, anyway.
Mr. Gibbons: I want to thank the committee very much.
I want to get on the record about the passenger complaint volumes, because it did dominate the first hour of your hearing. I would like senators to know that 98.5% of claims that we receive are responded to within 30 days and they don’t end up at the CTA; 1.5% of these complaints go to the regulator, and they take 18 months to sort those out for our guests. We strongly encourage you to make sure that that backlog is dealt with. We don’t like the backlog. No one at the WestJet group games the system. We don’t do it. We have never done it, and we will not do it. I did want to put it on the record about how we actually manage our complaints, and I am happy to follow up with details to this committee.
[Translation]
Mr. Rheault: As a final word, I have to say that I don’t share your opinion that it has been a horror story since last summer, as you said. Operations improved steadily over the summer and they went very well in the fall. There was a problem during the holiday season.
However, let me remind you what the weather was like in Vancouver: They received as much snow in 12 hours as they normally do in a winter. The snow fell so fast that between the time the planes were de-icing and the time they arrived on the runway, they couldn’t take off because of the amount of snow on their wings, and the snow was heavy. This created congestion. The temperature was so cold that the baggage systems froze in Toronto. You have to look at those impacts to explain what happened. Despite all of this, at Air Canada we completed 98.5% of our international flights over the holiday season. We carried 2 million passengers. I want to sincerely thank our employees, who worked hard in the snow and the cold to accomplish these operations. Thank you.
The Chair: Thank you very much. See you next time, colleagues.
(The committee adjourned.)