Airline: The Last Six Months
Of Federal Activity

About

This Report

This is a computer-generated report that shows all of the federal activity with respect to the keyword "Airline" over the last six months. This is a demonstration of the power of our government relations automation software.

Hansard

House: 44 Speeches
Senate: 9 Speeches

House Senate

Bills

Active: 0

Regulations

Filed: 1
Proposed: 0

Regulations

The House

Mr. Robert Aubin (Trois-Rivières, NDP)

June 7th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...on's powers in their sights. In 2011, the commissioner blocked a deal between Air Canada and United Airlines because it would have eliminated competition and raised the cost of flying. Under Bill C-49, the minister will have sole authority to approve such deals, and it just so happens that Air Canada and United Airlines are planning to resubmit the exact same proposal.

If the commissioner rejects the dea...”

Hon. Pierre Poilievre (Carleton, CPC)

June 5th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...avel from a distant airport to a downtown business centre, and of course that would have led Porter Airlines to buy more jets from Bombardier, right?

The government says that the island airport ...”

Hon. Marc Garneau (Minister of Transport, Lib.)

June 5th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...hip restrictions for Canadian air carriers; develop a clear and predictable process for approval of airline joint ventures; improve access, transparency, efficiency, and sustainable long-term investment in the freight rail sector; and, increase the safety of transportation in Canada by requiring railways to install voice and video recorders in locomotives.

Before I explain each of these in greater detail, let me first make clear that action in these areas reflects the priorities identified by Canadians.

We undertook extensive consultations over the past year following the release of Canada Transportation Act review report. We heard from more than 300 Canadian transportation and trade stakeholders, including indigenous groups and the provinces and territories, about how to ensure that the national transportation system continues to support Canada's international competitiveness, trade, and prosperity.

We also heard from individual Canadians in communities, large and small, all across the country regarding their concerns about our transportation system. Canadians have expressed their disappointment with their air travel experiences. I am committed to improving those experiences. (2155) [English]

The concerns of Canadians have been highlighted in recent weeks with much-publicized cases of the unacceptable treatment of air travellers both in this country and south of the border. Stories of passengers forcibly removed from flights and other unacceptable industry practices that have significant impact on consumers have made the news headlines.

The bill, if passed, would provide assurance to Canadians that if they choose to travel by air, they would be aware of their rights, and should they feel that their rights have been violated, they would have a clear, simple, and timely mechanism for resolution.

Bill C-49 proposes to mandate the Canadian Transportation Agency to develop, in partnership with Transport Canada, new regulations to enhance Canada's air passenger rights. These new rules would ensure air passenger rights are clear, consistent, and fair for both travellers and air carriers.

I believe that when passengers purchase an airline ticket, they expect and deserve the airline to fulfill its part of the transaction. When that agreement is not fulfilled, passengers des...”

Hon. Marc Garneau

June 5th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...ics of the passenger bill of rights.

They will do this by consulting with Canadians, with the airlines, and looking at practices in other countries, so that they can come up with a bill of right...”

Mr. Robert Aubin (Trois-Rivières, NDP)

June 5th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...te for or against something that is not really there, and what does the minister mean when he tells airlines that, in the meantime, he would like them to respect the spirit of the law, which has absol...”

Mr. Anthony Housefather (Mount Royal, Lib.)

June 5th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...estion for the minister. We all understand that there are maximums in compensation that differ from airline to airline, but will these regulations also consider setting a minimum amount of compensation, as well ...”

Mrs. Kelly Block (Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, CPC)

June 5th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...s here, I travel a lot and only have positive things to say about all the employees working for the airlines and at our airports. Of course, on occasion, flights do not go as we hope, but the Minister of Transport appears to be willing to pit passengers against airlines rather than fixing the structural problems in Canada's aviation regime.

This legislation does not spell out what the compensation regime will be, just that there will be one. The bill states that after consulting with only the Minister of Transport, the Canadian Transportation Agency will make regulations concerning carriers' obligations toward passengers. However, for even greater clarity, subsection (2) of proposed section 86.11 states that the Canadian Transportation Agency must comply with any instruction from the minister with regard to setting regulations concerning carriers' obligations to passengers.

What this means is that the Canadian Transportation Agency is tentatively responsible for setting what financial penalties a carrier would have to pay to the passenger in the case of a service breach, unless the minister is dissatisfied with the level of prescribed compensation that the CTA decides is appropriate, in which case he or she can dictate what that level of compensation will be.

It is noteworthy that the agency will, by law, only be allowed to consult with the Minister of Transport concerning the setting of these regulations, and not with consumer advocate groups, airlines, airports, Nav Canada and other stakeholders in the sector. (2225)

I do not understand what the purpose of consulting only the minister is. If the Canadian Transportation Agency is to be an arm's-length organization, this legislation clearly diminishes its independence. If the minister will not allow the agency to independently set the parameters of the passenger compensation regime, he should just spell out in legislation what it will be and let members of Parliament and stakeholder groups decide whether this is a good proposal or not.

If this legislation were truly aimed at reducing the cost of travel for the passenger, while increasing service and convenience, the minister would immediately lobby to have the government's carbon tax, which will make every single flight more expensive, withdrawn. He would reform the air passenger security system, which was universally identified as a major irritant for all passengers during the Canada Transportation Act review by all the organizations that participated in the process.

While it would be preferable to have the sections of the bill dealing with air and rail examined as stand-alone pieces of legislation, I can only surmise that the government's complete mismanagement of the House's agenda has led us to the point where an omnibus transportation bill is what we have in front of us today. At least we have finally begun debating something in the transport sector, now that we are two years into the government's mandate. So far, the only achievement the minister has to show in terms of legislation is the act to amend the Air Canada Public Participation Act.

Let us talk about Bill S-2, an act to amend the Motor Vehicle Safety Act and to make a consequential amendment to another act. This was first introduced by the government's representative in the Senate 13 months ago and passed third reading in the Senate on February 2. The minister claimed that Bill S-2 was a priority in his speech to the Montreal Chamber of Commerce in November 2016, yet it has not been touched since.

On May 12, just days before the introduction of the legislation we are debating today, the Minister of Transport introduced the oil tanker moratorium act, a bill that his own officials conceded would only impact the future development of Canada's oil sands and no other activity in northern British Columbia. Equally concerning about this oil tanker moratorium, which could be renamed the oil pipeline moratorium, is that there is considerable support among first nations on B.C.'s coast for energy development opportunities, but the wishes of these first nations are being ignored. For the Liberals to move forward with this tanker moratorium without properly consulting coastal first nations is extremely hypocritical.

The Liberals go to painstaking lengths to emphasize the amount of consultation they undertake, but it is becoming more and more apparent that their interest in consulting is about being told what they want to hear and not about listening to differing views. If anyone needs further proof that Bill C-48 was introduced only for political purposes, it is that this moratorium has been introduced as a stand-alone bill and not as part of this omnibus package we are debating today.

The Minister of Transport's silence and inaction on critical and time-sensitive transport issues, especially rail transport, is leading to uncertainty for both shippers and the railroads, which both want certainty as they negotiate shipping rates for the season.

That is why over the past several months I have asked many times whether the government intends to renew the sunsetting measures in Bill C-30 before they expire on August 1, 2017. The response I have been given time and time again is that the government recognizes the urgency to get this done and that legislation is forthcoming. Unfortunately, the Liberals have made a muck of this, and the key measures in Bill C-30 will sunset before any replacement legislation can receive royal assent and become law.

Last week in the transport committee, a Liberal member moved a motion calling on the committee to begin its consideration of this bill, Bill C-49, in September, before the House begins sitting, to expedite the study of the sections of the bill that deal with the shipping of grain. While Conservatives have no objection to considering this legislation in September before the House returns from the summer break, government members fail to realize that our producers needed them to turn their attention to this months ago, as the measures will sunset on August 1 of this year. At best, there will be a two-and-a-half-month gap between when the measures in Bill C-30 sunset and replacement legislation is in place. (2230)

By the time this legislation has passed, the majority of contracts for this year will have been negotiated with the law in flux. Because of the government's mismanagement of the legislative agenda, these popular measures will sunset without replacement, and shippers will be the worse off.

This is important to note, because for a combination of reasons, including a lack of rail capacity, preparedness by railways and shippers, weather, and the size of the crop, western Canada's 2013-14 grain crop did not get to market in a timely manner. Consequently, the previous Conservative government introduced Bill C-30, which gave the Canada Transportation Agency the power to allow shippers access to regulated interswitching up to 160 kilometres, mandated that CN and CP both haul at least 500 tonnes of grain per week, and introduced a new definition of adequate and suitable service levels. With this extension, the number of primary grain elevators with access to more than one railroad with the extended interswitching limits increased from 48 to 261.

These measures were met with universal support from the members of the shipping community, because even if they did not use interswitching, they could use it as a tool to increase their negotiating position with the railways, as the shippers knew exactly how much the interswitch portion of the haul would cost them.

At the same time, the government announced that the Canada Transportation Act statutory review would be expedited, and it began a year early to provide long-term solutions to the grain backlog of the 2013-14 shipping season and other problems in the transport sector within Canada. The hon. David Emerson, a former Liberal and Conservative cabinet minister, was tasked with leading the review. This review was completed in the fall of 2015 and was on the Minister of Transport's desk shortly before Christmas. The minister then tabled this report in mid-February 2016 and promised wide consultations on the report. As the key measures of Bill C-30 were going to sunset on August 1, 2016, and parliamentarians were hearing from the shipping community that it would like to see these extended, Parliament voted in June 2016 to extend those provisions for one year.

In the fall of 2016, the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities undertook a study of Bill C-30 and held a number of meetings on the merits of these measures and whether they should be allowed to sunset. We were assured that if we lived with this extension, these issues would be dealt with by August 1, 2017.

The vast majority of the testimony heard was supportive of maintaining the 160-kilometre regulated interswitching limit at committee, which is why the committee's first recommendation was the following:

That the Canadian Transportation Agency retain the flexibility provided under the Canada Transportation Act by the Fair Rail For Grain Farmers Act to set interswitching distances up to 160 km, in order to maintain a more competitive operating environment for rail shippers with direct access to only one railway company.

Anyone who has read this bill will know that the government ignored the committee's main recommendation. At some point during this debate, I hope to hear from Liberal members on the transport committee about whether they believe that the government was right to ignore the committee's recommendations, and if so, whether the entire committee study was just a waste of time.

Basically, what the government is proposing with this legislation is to replace the 160-kilometre interswitching limit with the creation of a new long-haul interswitching tool that would be in effect between Windsor and Kamloops on hauls of up to 1,200 kilometres, or up to 50% of the length of the entire haul. Shippers would be charged the regulated interswitching rate for the first 30 kilometres of the haul and then a Canada Transportation Agency-determined rate, which would be determined on a case-by-case basis based on the price of a similar haul, for the remainder of the distance to the interswitch point. Shippers would only be able to interswitch at the first available interswitch point within the zone.

What the government has done is take a little-used existing remedy, called a competitive line rate, and rename it long-haul interswitching. (2235)

Under a competitive line rate, a shipper could apply to the agency to set the amount of the competitive line rate, the designation of the continuous route, the designation of the nearest interchange, and the manner in which the local carrier would fulfill its service obligations. We know from history that this remedy was infrequently used because of the prerequisite that the shipper first reach an agreement with the connecting carrier, and the two main carriers effectively declined to compete with one another through CLRs. What we do not know is what the difference will be at a practical level between this new long-haul interswitching and the existing competitive line rates.

Like competitive line rates, long-haul interswitching is a much more complicated system for shippers to use, and the jury is still out on whether this will achieve the minister's stated objective of improving rail access for captive shippers. When Bill C-30 was first introduced, there was universal support among shippers for the extended interswitching. So far, very few organizations I have spoken to can say that this tool is better.

In conclusion, this much is certain: the key measures in Bill C-30 will be allowed to sunset on August 1, before this legislation receives royal assent. The Liberals have had nearly a full year to get new legislation in place but failed to do so, and shippers will suffer the consequences.

Canada remains one of the most expensive jurisdictions in which to operate an airline, and it is about to become even more so with the imposition of a national carbon tax. This b...”

Mr. Robert Aubin (Trois-Rivières, NDP)

June 5th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...hen present us with his bill later.

In fact, I find it rather puzzling that the minister asks airlines to comply with the spirit of the law while we are studying Bill C-49 and while the transportation agency will be drafting regulations that the minister could well reject, which would delay the process even more.

Could someone explain to me the spirit of an empty shell? I simply cannot understand it.

The foreign ownership limit for air carriers, which I asked about earlier, will increase from 25% to 49%. What is this decision based on? It is based on a recommendation of the Emerson report, which does not show beyond any doubt, or even with some doubt, the relevance of this measure when it comes to market competitiveness and the results or positive impact that it could have for passengers in terms of air ticket costs, for example.

A study by the University of Manitoba shows the exact opposite. It shows, beyond any doubt, that an increase in the foreign ownership of a Canadian airline cannot be linked to an effect on airfares.

Again, why is the government introducing this measure? I do not know. Bill C-49 is nebulous. I do not think we will be able to solve this issue given the short amount of time that will be available to the committee to study a bill as large as this one. There is another serious problem here, namely the Liberal bulldozer. The Liberals dragged their feet on introducing measures, that is, if there are even any in the bill, and they are now trying to rush the bill through.

I would like to come back to the agreements between airlines, which the minister also talked about. Again, like we have seen many times before, the legislation enhances the powers of the minister. I must say that every time that happens, a little light goes on. It tells me that we should be worried about what is happening. What powers does the minister want, and what good comes from it?

Basically, these joint venture agreements are nothing but a type of partial merger that is approved when rules of competition continue to apply. That is why entities like the Competition Bureau, which is the competition tribunal, exist. (2300)

Members will recall the joint venture between Air Canada and United Continental Holdings. These two airlines asked to merge their operations for 15 air routes. At the time, the Competition Bureau appr...”

Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP)

June 5th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...the rights of air passengers. Does the member think that these rights are adequately protected when airlines sell more tickets than there are seats available?”

Mr. Joe Peschisolido (Steveston—Richmond East, Lib.)

June 5th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...nting on Bill C-49, I will be focusing on the liberalization of the international rules of Canadian airlines.

Canadian travellers and their experiences are top of mind for our government. During consultations conducted by the Minister of Transport, we asked Canadian travellers for their feedback and they were clear. They wanted lower cost air travel, more opportunities for leisure and business travel, and they wanted to see Canada become a more attractive travel destination for visitors. They asked for long-term sustainable competition, which would allow for the introduction of additional air services, improved air connectivity, and perhaps above all, more choice. The government has listened and is committed to achieving tangible improvements to the traveller experience.

As a result of the feedback we received, a number of proposals have been introduced in Bill C-49 to help improve the traveller experience in Canada.

For example, the government intends to liberalize international ownership restrictions for Canadian air carriers. What does this mean for Canadian travellers? Let me begin by briefly describing this initiative.

Like most countries, Canada limits international ownership and control of domestic air carriers. Under the Canada Transportation Act, non-Canadians currently cannot possess more than 25% of the voting shares of a Canadian carrier. Additionally, Canadian air carriers must also be controlled by Canadians, which means they may not be subject to controlling influence by international investors.

Limits on foreign ownership and control of air carriers are the norm around the world. For instance, in the United States, the limit is 25%, while the European Union, Korea, Australia, and New Zealand allow up to 49%, and Japan allows 33.3%. Limits vary depending on the circumstances of each country and the circumstances of each region.

However, Canada's current ownership limits may be acting as a barrier to new services and enhanced competition. Two prospective ultra low-cost carriers, Canada Jetlines and Enerjet, have already applied for and received exemptions to the current limits on international ownership from the Minister of Transport. Both companies successfully argued that under the current 25% limit, there was insufficient risk capital in the Canadian market to support the launch of new services.

Reflecting on this reality and the Canada Transportation Act review recommendations, the government is proposing changes that would allow international investors to own up to 49% of the voting shares of Canadian air carriers by introducing legislation that would amend the act and all other relevant acts.

As mentioned earlier, countries have different approaches to international ownership of air carriers, and our government wants to ensure that Canadian carriers compete on a level playing field. To protect the competitiveness of our air sector and support connectivity, no single international investor or any combination of international air carriers will be allowed to own more than 25%.

The direct impact of higher levels of international investment is that Canadian air carriers would have access to a wider pool of risk capital. This would allow air carriers to be better funded and could allow new carriers, which are otherwise not able to find sufficient risk capital, to enter the Canadian market.

New carriers, including ultra low-cost carriers offering extremely competitive prices, are expected to bring more competition into the entire Canadian air travel sector. This could in turn reduce the cost of air transportation and open new markets to Canadian consumers and shippers. (2325)

Small markets currently underserved by existing carriers could also benefit from services by new carriers. For instance, airports in smaller cities that currently offer services to a very limited number of destinations could benefit from the addition of new services, since we know that ultra-low-cost carriers use these smaller airports as their hubs. All of this could lead to more choice when purchasing an airline ticket; more travel destinations for all travellers, including those from smaller cities; and lower prices for Canadian travellers. Additionally, there could also be benefits for airports and suppliers and the entire country as more jobs and more prosperity are added to the Canadian economy.

To finish, let me underscore that the experience of Canadian air travellers is a great priority for the Government of Canada. We know that it is also a priority for Canadians. This is why we have proposed to increase international ownership restrictions for Canadian air carriers. If this initiative is implemented, we believe it could significantly improve the travel experience for all Canadians. Once in place, it could also help lower prices, support increased competition among air carriers, provide more choice to Canadians when it comes to purchasing an airline ticket, and ultimately improve service and connectivity for Canadian travellers.”

Mr. Joe Peschisolido

June 5th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...acation somewhere. Changing the rules will mean more choices for Canadians. That is very important. Airlines must have the ability to do that. I am completely in favour of making those changes.”

Mr. Lloyd Longfield (Guelph, Lib.)

June 5th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...air carriers to a smaller community to go to other smaller communities, communities that the larger airlines would never service, communities that we could not get the larger airlines into even if we wanted to because of the cost of their operations versus the cost of the other lower-cost airlines that we are talking about in the bill tonight.

When we talk about choice, there is choice between airlines, but there is also choice at the local level in getting air service into communities. Could...”

Mr. Alain Rayes (Richmond—Arthabaska, CPC)

June 5th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...r carriers; enables the Minister of Transport to consider and approve joint ventures by two or more airlines; updates the Canadian freight system; requires railways to install audio-video recorders in...”

Mr. Todd Doherty

June 1st
Hansard Link

Business of Supply

“... had acquaintances, friends, or loved ones who had been impacted negatively or lost a job. Even our airlines took a hit, with direct flights cancelled between Calgary, Prince George, Terrace, Brandon,...”

Ms. Hélène Laverdière (Laurier—Sainte-Marie, NDP)

May 17th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...e Prime Minister said urgent action was needed to repeal the Conservative regulation that prohibits airlines from allowing a person to board a plane if their appearance does not match the gender on th...”

Mrs. Kelly Block (Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, CPC)

May 17th
Hansard Link

Privilege

“...islation for a passenger bill of rights Tuesday in a move that will set a national standard for how airline passengers are treated in Canada”. The bill's summary reads, on page 2:

With respect to air transportation, it amends the Canada Transportation Act to require the Canadian Transportation Agency to make regulations establishing a new air passenger rights regime and to authorize the Governor in Council to make regulations requiring air carriers and other persons providing services in relation to air transportation to report on different aspects of their performance with respect to passenger experience or quality of service.

CTV National News offered more information to its viewers on this legislation during its broadcast Monday night. It stated, “CTV News has learned the government will mandate minimum levels of reimbursement for travel disruptions and lost luggage.” I was watching the news at the time and was extremely surprised to see such detail being made public for a bill that had not yet been made public in Parliament. Later in the same CTV report, I heard, “Under the bill Transport Minister...will table tomorrow, airlines would provide clear and transparent rules so passengers know when they're entitled to compensation; airlines would compensate travellers for flights delayed or cancelled, though not for weather or air traffic...”

Turning to clause 19 of Bill C-49, we see that CTV News was reporting on the proposed new paragraphs 86.11(1)(a),(b), and (c) of the bill.

Meanwhile, on CBC's The National, viewers were told, “CBC News has learned the legislation is also expected to stop airlines from charging parents extra to sit with their kids.” In this case, CBC was reporting on the proposed new paragraph 86.11(1)(d) from the bill, which says, “respecting the carrier’s obligation to facilitate the assignment of seats to children under the age of 14 years in close proximity to a parent, guardian or tutor at no additional cost.” This is specific detail of the legislation that could not have been guessed at ahead of time by the CBC. Details of the bill were clearly leaked. (1645)

Furthermore, the CBC report noted “don't expect exact compensation levels tomorrow. They won't be written into the law.”

If you were watching CTV Monday night, Mr. Speaker, you would have known that “The exact rates for compensation under the new rules will be set at a later date by the Canadian Transportation Agency and reviewed regularly.”

This was in reference to the proposed new subsection 86.11(1) of the bill, which reads, “The Agency shall, after consulting with the Minister, make regulations in relation to flights to, from and within Canada, including connecting flights.”

It is clear this was no simple, accidental leak, though that would also be inexcusable, but, rather, this appears to be the result of a systemic advance briefing of the media about pending legislation as there would be no other way for them to know such specific detail about the bill. Details such as airlines not being able to charge extra for parents to sit next to their children, or that the fines would not be detailed in the bill, or that airlines would be forced to compensate travellers for delays and missed flights could only be known ...”

Ms. Pam Goldsmith-Jones (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade, Lib.)

May 17th
Hansard Link

Business of Supply

“... broke all records. No airport has ever won this eight years in a row. As well, YVR has six Chinese airlines flying across the Pacific, which is two more than its closest competitor in North America. ...”

Tony Clement (Conservative)

April 12th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...of Transport went out to the public and said that there is a national security threat involving our airlines. The minister will not tell passengers or Canadians what the nature of the threat is. He will not say where it is coming from. He will not say how people can protect themselves against the threat.

The Prime Minister and his government are showing the sensitivity of United Airlines. When are they going to come clean and tell passengers how they can protect themselves and ...”

Justin Trudeau (Liberal)

April 12th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...is why we work with our police and security agencies, with our international partners, and with our airlines to determine how best to keep air travellers safe. I can reassure Canadians that we always ...”

Marc Garneau (Liberal)

April 3rd
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...issions in the transportation sector. We are also very proud of the role we played last fall in the airline industry at the International Civil Aviation Organization.

Under budget 2017, $57 million will be invested to support work on clear greenhouse gas emission regulations in the airline, maritime, rail, and automotive sectors.

We are heading in the right direction.”

Greg Fergus (Liberal)

March 21st
Hansard Link

Business of Supply

“...es that the rights of Canadian air travellers need to be made clearer and fairer for passengers and airlines. That is why the Minister of Transport is establishing more predictable and reasonable air passenger rights. To that end he will introduce a bill mandating the Canadian Transportation Agency to develop regulations that would create a new air passenger bill of rights.

Although the exact details are established by the Agency's regulatory process, the new bill of rights will establish clear standards for treating people travelling with children and travellers who end up in trying situations, such as flight delays or cancellations, which will also include compensation in some cases.

The bill of rights will also ensure that passengers are clearly informed of their rights and will allow Transport Canada to gather more data on airline performance. The government intends to take a balanced approach in this file by assuring the airlines that their ability to compete will not be compromised and that they will not be made to bear an excessive burden that could potentially affect the cost of air travel. (1205) [English]

The transport minister will pursue legislative changes to allow international investors to own up to 49% of the voting shares of Canadian air carriers, which is up from the current 25%.

As some members may know, other countries have different approaches to international ownership of air carriers. It is important to ensure that Canadian carriers compete on a level playing field. To protect the competitiveness of our air sector and support connectivity, no single international investor or any combination of international air carriers will be allowed to own more than 25%.

Liberalizing international ownership restrictions means that Canadian air carriers will have access to more investment capital, allowing them the opportunity to be better funded. This new measure is expected to facilitate more competition in the Canadian air sector, and lead to more choice and lower prices for Canadians, as well as benefits for airports and suppliers, including new employment opportunities.

In the interim, in December of last year, the minister granted exemptions to the current international ownership restrictions to two companies that are looking to establish new ultra-low-cost carriers: Canada Jetlines in Vancouver and Calgary's Enerjet. This action is intended to allow these companies to go ahead with their financing efforts while the new legislation is being developed. [Translation]

Furthermore, as he announced in November 2016, the Minister of Transport remains determined to establish world-class service standards for aviation screening in Canadian airports.

Also, the government continues to improve the experience of air passengers by negotiating new and expanded air transport agreements with international partners, which will enable airlines to expand Canada's links to the rest of the world.

Air transport agreements provide Canadian passengers with access to more airlines, destinations, and flights.

Canada has signed air transport agreements with 120 bilateral partners. In recent months we have expanded our air transport agreements with key aviation partners such as Mexico, China, and Australia. These expansion efforts made it possible for Air Canada to launch daily service between Vancouver and Brisbane, Australia, in 2016.

In closing, I want to point out that the experience of Canadian air passengers is an important priority for the Government of Canada. The initiatives that I have just described contribute greatly to improving the experience of Canadian passengers. They will help lower prices, provide more choice, improve connectivity, and clarify the rights of air passengers while ensuring the viability and competitiveness of Canadian airlines.”

Matthew Dubé (NDP)

March 21st
Hansard Link

Business of Supply

“...ublic infrastructure and charge more fees to consumers. This will also have a significant impact on airlines.

My riding is on Montreal's south shore. My constituents can go to Montréal-Pierre Elliott Trudeau, or they can go to U.S. airports to avoid paying what they see as sky-high prices. Many people choose the latter. Airport authorities and airlines say that privatization will make things even worse. Instead of departing from Canadian airp...”

Thomas Mulcair (NDP)

March 20th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...re. They never talked about it. Airport privatization is no small detail. It will increase fees for airline passengers across Canada.

Either the Prime Minister is making it up as he goes or he a...”

Marc Garneau (Liberal)

March 9th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...r air passengers. Those are the factors that guide us in our decisions with respect to airports and airlines.”

Pierre-Luc Dusseault (NDP)

March 9th
Hansard Link

Adjournment Proceedings

“... and others are ready to move forward. Sherbrooke had even signed an agreement in principle with an airline for commercial flights. Unfortunately, one of the conditions of the agreement was that secur...”

Karen McCrimmon (Liberal)

March 9th
Hansard Link

Adjournment Proceedings

“...creening services from CATSA. Many of them have indicated that security screening will help attract airlines that could then offer routes to larger, designated airports, thereby increasing the airport...”

Pierre-Luc Dusseault (NDP)

March 9th
Hansard Link

Adjournment Proceedings

“...or that.

She clearly understands the issue, which is that there is very little chance that an airline will decide to establish an air link between a non-designated airport and a designated one. That is the main problem for Sherbrooke. We have had difficultly getting air links for a long time because the airlines are not interested in landing in Sherbrooke, as my colleague said.

I am therefore won...”

Marc Garneau (Liberal)

March 8th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...giving them a bill of rights. That is what is motivating us when we talk about our airports and our airlines.”

Marc Garneau (Liberal)

March 8th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...ard the fact that we made the decision last November to increase the international ownership in our airlines from 25% to 49% in order to increase competition. I also announced at that time a bill of r...”

Marc Garneau (Liberal)

March 8th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...ve rights. Improving passenger service is what motivates us when we talk about our airports and our airlines.”

Ralph Goodale (Liberal)

March 6th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“..., but they are specifically not carried when those CBSA officers are dealing with passengers inside airline terminals. That is the rule that applies to CBSA. Governed by the principle of reciprocity, that is exactly the same rule that will apply to U.S. officers operating in Canada. They will not carry firearms when they are dealing with passengers inside airline terminals. That is the principle of reciprocity, and it is perfectly mutual in all respects ...”

Rachael Harder (Conservative)

March 6th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“... pre-clear passengers starting with a pilot project in 1952. A formal pre-clearance arrangement for airline passengers was then signed in 1974, with further implementing legislation in the 1999 Precle...”

Kelly McCauley (Conservative)

March 6th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...dividuals so that we can be certain of the financial implications of this legislation.

Third, airlines and air carriers are important stakeholders with respect to border security and public safety, and this legislation would impact their operations. Given that airlines are a critical stakeholder affected by this bill, we have to ensure that they are substanti...”

Chandra Arya (Liberal)

March 6th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...nada. As well, some pre-inspection sites serve rail and cruise ship lines on the west coast. In the airline industry alone, every year some 12 million passengers are pre-screened before boarding planes in Canada, avoiding lengthy customs lines in the U.S. and improving air security. It also allows airlines and travellers to gain direct access from Canada to airports in the U.S. that do not have local customs facilities.

We know that pre-clearance already provides tangible economic benefits to our national and local economies while enhancing security and border integrity. It only makes sense to find ways to make these benefits available to a greater number of Canadians. That is exactly what Bill C-23 would do.

This legislation would replace the current Preclearance Act, 1999, which only applies to air transportation. In doing so, it would preserve the benefits of the existing regime for air travellers and the airline industry while opening up opportunities for pre-clearance in other modes of travel, as well ...”

Candice Bergen (Conservative)

February 23rd
Hansard Link

Statements by Members

“...t we as Manitoba MPs and all of their customers were helped and listened to.

We all know that airlines can be frustrating at times, but people like Glenn, Janice, and Don make the experience a g...”

James Bezan (Conservative)

February 22nd
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...Canadians went through pre-clearance when travelling to the United States. This is significant. Our airlines want this. More airports and train stations want to capitalize on this. We look forward to ...”

James Bezan (Conservative)

February 22nd
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...ets the need of what Canada wants, which is more pre-clearance operations across the country so our airline companies, our railways, those who do business, those who tour around, have the opportunity ...”

Randeep Sarai (Liberal)

February 22nd
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...rom Canada to the U.S. It has opened new markets for business and tourism by making it possible for airlines to fly directly to smaller U.S. airports that do not have their own customs operations on s...”

Tony Clement (Conservative)

February 21st
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...rtant stakeholders, such as civil liberties groups, the Customs and Immigration Union, the National Airlines Council of Canada, important groups that deal with the issues raised in this legislation ea...”

Michel Picard (Liberal)

February 21st
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...rtening connection times and adding some predictability to their travel plans.

Passengers and airlines also benefit from the fact that they can now fly directly to domestic airports in the U.S. ...”

Diane Finley (Conservative)

February 8th
Hansard Link

Oral Questions

“...wed the expansion of the runway at Billy Bishop Airport. If the Liberals had done that, then Porter Airlines would have bought more C-Series planes from Bombardier, and Bombardier could have made its ...”

Darshan Singh Kang (Liberal)

February 8th
Hansard Link

Government Orders

“...t. It is going to take time. Mr. Lougheed tried to diversify the economy. He bought Pacific Western Airlines and Telus and tried to diversify the economy. It is not going to happen overnight. He had s...”

David Yurdiga (Conservative)

February 7th
Hansard Link

Statements by Members

“Mr. Speaker, today I would like to pay tribute to WestJet airlines for a truly remarkable Christmas surprise and for its heroic evacuation efforts during the ...”

Ahmed Hussen (Liberal)

January 31st
Hansard Link

S. O. 52

“...e situation closely with the Minister of Transport and his department who are in daily contact with airlines on these matters. (1935)

To reiterate, we were advised by United States authorities ...”


The Senate

Senator Plett

May 30th
Hansard Link

Canada Labour Code Bill to Amend—Message from Commons—Motion for Non-Insistence Upon Senate Amendments—Debate Adjourned

“...certain question I asked because it was too partisan. I don't think this is partisan at all when an airline such as WestJet has a union vote.

Let me ask again, Mr. Leader: Do you know how many p...”

Hon. Michael L. MacDonald

May 16th
Hansard Link

Ban on Shark Fin Importation Bill Bill to Amend—Second Reading—Debate Adjourned

“... and, earlier this year, Air China announced that it is banning shark fin cargo, becoming the first airline in mainland China to do so. They join at least 35 other airlines and 17 global container shipping lines worldwide to ban shark fin cargo.

Yet despite ...”

Hon. Leo Housakos

April 13th
Hansard Link

Transport and Communications Motion to Authorize Committee to Study Issues Related to Federal Public Money on Loan to Bombardier Inc.—Motion in Amendment—Debate Continued

“...ntly with taxpayers' money. Minister Flaherty attached conditions in the government's deal with the airline, including a freeze on executive compensation tied to the rate of inflation, a ban on specia...”

Hon. Denise Batters

April 12th
Hansard Link

The Senate Rules of the Senate—Modernization

“... ago Liberal Party Leader Justin Trudeau made a political choice to — how would the CEO of United Airlines put this — "re-accommodate" Liberal senators with years of parliamentary knowledge and ex...”

Hon. Pierrette Ringuette

April 6th
Hansard Link

Canada Labour Code Bill to Amend—Third Reading—Motion in Amendment—Debate Continued

“...ate greed can begin to cloud safety, which seem to be the major issues for the pilots. Safety at an airline or any corporation is paramount and crucial.

(1450)

I will touch on one area of ...”

Senator Ringuette

April 6th
Hansard Link

Canada Labour Code Bill to Amend—Third Reading—Motion in Amendment—Debate Continued

“...egard to the WestJet issue coming from the union. From the reading of the email that I got from the airline pilots and from the reading that you had excerpted in regard to management sending email to all the employees concerning that union, there is certainly a grey zone. On that management letter, I have seen many in regard to management trying to deter unionization. But there is a grey line between deterring and intimidation. You have brought up the issue of unions intimidating the employees, but bear in mind that union campaigning cannot take place in the workplace. Yes, the people have to go knock on your door. If you're an airline pilot or airline attendant and you're in a situation of being overworked and you have to stay in hotel rooms,...”

Hon. Leo Housakos,

April 6th
Hansard Link

Transport and Communications Motion to Authorize Committee to Study Issues Related to Federal Public Money on Loan to Bombardier Inc.—Debate Adjourned

“...or flippantly with taxpayers' money. Flaherty attached conditions in the government's deal with the airline, including a freeze on executive compensation tied to the rate of inflation, a ban on specia...”

Senator Tannas

April 5th
Hansard Link

Canada Labour Code Bill to Amend—Third Reading—Motion in Amendment—Debate Continued

“... you're co-workers, and we want you to sign this card.'' Or when you go to the hotel and you are an airline pilot for WestJet, someone is there and your co-pilot is a big union supporter and you're no...”

Hon. Tony Dean

February 14th
Hansard Link

Canada Labour Code Bill to Amend—Third Reading—Debate Suspended

“...imple majority of those choosing to vote. A recent failed certification process at a major Canadian airline, in which the employer was actively involved in challenging evidence of employee support, ha...”


Filed Regulations

Regulations Amending the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations

April 13, 2017 SOR/2017-53
Registration SOR/2017-53 April 13, 2017 IMMIGRATION AND REFUGEE PROTECTION ACT
Gazette Link

“...as the Integrated Primary Inspection Line (IPIL) Air application. The IAPI system functions as the eTA’s main enforcement mechanism by flagging for airlines instances where a foreign national does not hold a prescribed document.

Canada has, for many years, closely collaborated with the Uni...”

“...IAPI system and the Integrated Primary Inspection Line Air application. IAPI serves as a validation mechanism for all eTA clients by communicating to airlines whether passengers are properly documented for travel to Canada before they board a plane.

Service standards

Applications resulting ...”


Was This Useful? Try Our Real-Time Alerts Product: Free Trial

About FederalMonitor.ca

FederalMonitor is a government monitoring software company. Our real-time alert technology has been used in Ontario since 2011 and in Europe since 2014.

Our Office

19 Yorkville Ave, 3rd Floor
Toronto, Canada
M4W 1L1
+1 647-466-7748

Free Trial

The best way to evaluate FederalMonitor.ca is to try it out. There's no obligation to buy and no payment information required to get started.

Created by Addison Cameron-Huff, technology lawyer.