:
Good morning, everybody.
I regret that we're not starting exactly on time. We do have guests here today, and it's important that we move forward.
I need approval from the committee. We've had a request for a media person to attend with cameras. Normally that request is made 24 hours in advance. It wasn't, so we need approval from the committee to allow that to happen.
Is everybody okay with that?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
The Chair: Okay.
Secondly, I want to read something into the record, more just for the history. It will allow the committee to refer back to the reports from previous sessions. Basically, we would refer to the motion that the evidence and documentation received by the committee in the second session of the 40th parliament, the study we did on safety management systems, be allowed to be brought forward as part of the discussion.
Okay, with that everything is good.
We welcome our guests today to the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities. Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), we are studying aviation safety and security.
Joining us today are Mr. Marc Grégoire, assistant deputy minister of safety and security; Ms. Nicole Girard, director of policy and regulatory services, civil aviation; Mr. Don Sherritt, director, standards, civil aviation; and, by request, Ms. Yaprak Baltacioglu asked if she could....
:
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Again, thanks to the committee for accepting last-minute witness changes.
We would like to deliver short opening remarks. My colleague, Marc Grégoire, who is responsible for safety and security in Transport Canada, will deliver our opening remarks.
Briefly at the outset, however, I believe the transport department was last in front of this committee in November. We're very pleased to be here to report on our progress since then, because a lot has been done since November. My colleagues and I are pleased to be here to expand on that.
My second point is that this is about the safety of Canadians and Canadian travellers. We are very much interested in hearing the views of the committee, receiving the recommendations, and hopefully acting on them, because in safety we cannot compromise and we must always strive to make it better for Canadians.
I'm going to turn it over to my colleague.
Mr. Chair, you have already introduced our other members, who gracefully accepted to replace Martin Eley at the last minute.
Our appearance today coincides with the international high-level safety conference that Mr. Laframboise mentioned, which is being held this week at the International Civil Aviation Organization headquarters in Montreal. I was there yesterday and so was the minister.
Our purpose at the conference is to help enhance aviation safety at a global level, promote the international recognition of the Canadian civil aviation program, and engage in concurrent aviation safety issues with our international partners.
[Translation]
The conference began yesterday and the minister addressed the delegates at the end of the first day of talks. The minister, Mr. Baird, confirmed his commitment to aviation safety and security. He also underscored the importance of our airline industry to the Canadian economy and defended our position on the international scene.
The ICAO continues to recognize Canada's leading position when it comes to air transportation safety. The ICAO also recognizes that Canada is a global leader in the development and implementation of safety management systems, or SMS. Globalization has prompted the industry to question past practices and provided an opportunity to propose improvements for the future. We continue working closely with our international partners to harmonize rules as much as possible.
[English]
In fact, at this week's conference Canada was one of the few selected states invited to present a paper on the status of the development of Canada's state safety program. I have copies of this paper with me for the committee in English and French.
As I indicated when I spoke to you in November, ICAO is currently developing a standard and recommended practice for a state safety program. Canada already has the main elements in place, the regulations, standards, guidelines, and education to promote a safe and harmonized aviation system. We anticipate that when the ICAO standard comes into effect, Canada will be well placed to meet this requirement.
I would now like to give you an update on what's happened since I last appeared before the committee in November to discuss the subject of aviation safety, in particular safety management system implementation.
[Translation]
The associate assistant deputy minister, Gerard McDonald, and I have travelled across Canada and held group discussions with inspectors—our inspectors—and their bargaining agents, giving them the opportunity to share their opinions on how to go about implementing safety management systems in the future.
A total of 21 sessions were held in the regions and four were held here in Ottawa. Furthermore, Martin Eley, director general of Civil Aviation, met with most Civil Aviation employees across the country, not only the inspectors at headquarters, but also in the regions. The comments received were positive and I was very encouraged by the response from the unions and constructive dialogues held with them.
We are taking action to respond to the issues and concerns that were raised. We have made some adjustments to continue moving the program forward. We will continue to listen to these groups and make other adjustments as needed. We are determined to improve the already high level of security, thanks to SMS implementation.
The large commercial operators have finished implementing the SMS, and the information gleaned from their experience will help fine tune the plan for the next phase, namely, implementing the SMS in small commercial operators. Based on comments from inspectors and the aeronautics industry, Transport Canada has changed the implementation schedule for the SMS, giving smaller operators at least another year. This will allow us to fine-tune the procedures and documents, and will allow us to give inspectors updated training.
[English]
Inspectors play an important role and have several key oversight responsibilities, including determining the effectiveness of a company's SMS, verifying compliance with regulatory requirements, and measuring the effectiveness of corrective actions taken by the company. Inspectors carry out planned and unplanned surveillance. The tools they use to conduct these activities include inspections, audits, validations, and assessments. As a result of these activities, the Civil Aviation Organization can establish whether the company should be subject to routine monitoring, enhanced monitoring, enforcement, or certificate action.
Although inspectors have already been trained, updated training to reflect the changes to procedures is under development. A request for proposal for the development of surveillance procedures training was awarded on March 4. The design and development phases will be completed by June 1, with a pilot course being delivered later that month. Following any necessary revisions further to the pilot course, course delivery to all our inspectors will commence early September 2010.
[Translation]
We take our supervision role very seriously. Approximately three-quarters of the budget allocated to aviation safety is dedicated to supervision activities. These activities are conducted in accordance with established policies and procedures, and they were updated in February to clarify what is expected of inspectors.
Furthermore, the world is watching us. Other countries continue to draw inspiration from our experience and consult us for advice on how to implement SMS. Canada is part of the safety management international collaboration group, which was created last year to foster a common understanding of the principles and requirements of SMS, as well as how to implement them within the entire international aviation community.
[English]
As you can tell, a lot of work has been done and we're continuing to make improvements to an already very solid system. I'm confident that this work will go a long way towards improving the understanding of SMS by our employees and the public. The bottom line is that Canadians can be confident in the aviation safety surveillance program.
Aviation safety has received some negative attention in the media in the last year, which ultimately has had an impact on public confidence. This is unfortunate, because these reports have often contained incorrect, misleading, or outdated information. The real story in the Canadian aviation industry is that every day things go very right.
[Translation]
In 2008, there were 12% fewer accidents than in 2007. There were 251 accidents in 2008, compared to 284 in 2007. That is a record low. The 2008 accident rate, 5.7 accidents per 100,000 hours flown, is the lowest in the last 10 years. These statistics are a crucial factor in maintaining public trust, which is an important element of the decision-making process for the program.
Transport Canada works hard every day to ensure that Canadians continue to have confidence in flight safety every time they fly.
[English]
Thank you, and we look forward to answering your questions and receiving your suggestions.
During your presentation, you mentioned that you were here in November, when you gave a presentation on the safety system. That is true, you spoke to us about the improvements that had been made.
However, you failed to mention that since November, we have learned from a report released by the Transportation Safety Board of Canada that 12 airplane accidents that led to 28 deaths were caused by pilot fatigue. I am not sure if you are aware that you failed to mention that, but I think this shows a problem.
Upon listening to, looking at and reading the statements by Mr. Eley, director general of Civil Aviation, we learned that Transport Canada received a report in 2001 that recommended adjusting pilots' schedules based on their circadian rhythms. Mr. Eley said that Transport Canada never followed through on those recommendations. He admitted that the recommendations did not elicit much interest at the time and they were not part of Transport Canada's priorities. What he said is important.
Was Transport Canada focusing too much on safety management systems, when it should have been paying more attention to pilot fatigue? That would be a reasonable conclusion, based on what Mr. Eley said.
You had some other concerns, besides pilot fatigue, which is troubling. Indeed, you are telling us that you are the global leader in safety management systems. I have already had the opportunity to tell you that we thought you wanted to reduce costs by handing this management system over to private enterprise. You have since changed your position. You just told us that you will be putting more emphasis on your oversight role over the next few years, but I cannot help but think you have overlooked a big part of safety, namely, pilot fatigue.
Please try to reassure me.
Thank you for being here today on this very important issue.
I think I'm going to pick up on a portion of Mr. Bevington's questioning. One of the things I have discovered is that when you want to know how something you're doing is working or whether it's being implemented properly you should talk to the people who were involved with it, whether it is people who were involved in implementing it or whether it is people who were affected by it.
I come from a very agricultural riding. When I want to know what is going on in agriculture, I go talk to farmers. I also have a lot of tourism in my riding, and when I want to know what's happening in the tourism industry, I go speak to people who are operating the various tourism products. I think you get the idea that the most important thing is to determine what the effects will be on those people directly affected by the changes being made.
I would like to just hear a little bit more from you in terms of what you've done, and what you plan to do going forward, in terms of consultation and speaking directly with those most affected. Obviously they are the inspectors and the people who are actually on the ground involved in implementing changes, but also those who will be affected by them, the operators.
What have you done in terms of consultations? What is your plan going forward with that?
:
Thank you very much for that question.
I will start, and my colleague who's the responsible ADM will expand on the consultations and discussions that he has held.
Since I started as the Deputy Minister of Transport, I have crossed the country at least once, if not twice. Every time that I have been in one of our regions, I have spent time with our inspectors without any management present. So that's what I have been doing. Now we are going to take that to the next level. We're instituting an advisory group of inspectors to the deputy minister, so we will have our front-line inspectors as advisers to me so that I get to actually hear the front-line issues and the concerns as they hear them. We feel that this is an important avenue for our front-line staff to have access to senior management.
We have been working with the unions. Our union meetings are not only at the specific branch and responsibility area level, but department-wide. Our executive group meets with the unions, all our unions, now every four months. Actually, this afternoon we're having our meetings with the unions. We met with them previously, I think, in the last couple of months. So an enhanced engagement with our unions is important.
Regarding the industry, we work closely with industry within the rules and within the clear understanding that we are the regulator and we regulate them. However, safety is not the responsibility of just one party. It is the responsibility of the government, it is the responsibility of industry, and it is the responsibility of the travellers. We have to make sure that all these pieces come together so that Canadians have the best safety in the world.
Maybe my colleague can give you a sense of what he and his staff have done, but also the general conclusions that he has brought home.
First of all, if I go back to both of your questions, we have communicated extensively over the last ten years both with industry and our inspectors. But what we haven't done enough is perhaps distinguish the role of the inspector, or the oversight role, versus the SMS philosophy. What we realized in the past year is that everybody bought into the concept of SMS, the philosophy of SMS, but the issues were all around the actual implementation of it or the role of the department within SMS.
I should have said that one of the factors that helped me understand this is when I read the listeriosis report and I tried to make analogies between what happened in the food sector versus what we were going through. The bottom line is that implementing a safety management system is a major cultural change both for our employees and for the industry.
I was an inspector in the department. I started a long time ago as an inspector. I value the work of our inspectors tremendously, and like you, I agree on the importance of going on the ground to listen to the concerns of those affected, both our inspectors and the airlines.
In terms of the air carriers, smaller operators and airlines, we have held a lot of conferences on the subject. We have gone around the country with SMS sessions, inviting, in some cases, 300 or more participants. These are owners and operators of companies learning how to implement SMS in their company.
In regard to the fact that we're slowing down the implementation of SMS, we are doing it mainly to catch up with our own inspector workforce, to bring them the appropriate training and tools to do their job, but I've heard from many air carriers that they're sorry about the delay because they're anxious to be regulated under regulations 703 and 704.
:
The government already has whistle-blower legislation with a commissioner, and there are avenues for government employees to go to.
However, my view of management is that I'm hoping that before it comes to whistle-blowing, we have systems and processes in our department so that my colleagues who are the managers of the safety and security program and I, as the manager of the department, get to hear from our own people. That's why I mentioned I am having this inspectors advisory group to meet with me, so I hear these things. That's an important issue.
Now, if the issue is whistle-blowing with regard to what is happening in the aviation industry or specific companies, a whole culture change needs to happen. This is not really about whistle-blowing; it is about companies being open and transparent about having a safety incident and taking steps. We want people, we want the companies to come forward. We want to know if they're having safety issues, because if everybody is worried about getting in trouble with the regulator and hiding the problems, then we're not going to have transparency in the system.
I believe in 2008 we got reports of 1.8% more incidents from the aviation industry. This is a small step, but it is showing that the system is starting to change. Companies are letting us know when they're running into problems, so we are fully aware of what's going on in the industry.
So there are two sides to the.... I answered both your questions, but I don't know if I....
:
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to our witnesses for being here.
Prior to my election a year and a half ago, I worked in the health and safety industry. Our company provided consultations on health and safety to many of Canada's largest companies, including in the manufacturing industry, forestry industry, and food industry, given that everybody has incidents. Our area of focus was on return-to-work programs and on providing companies assistance with workers compensation, basically in any province. However, over the time that we've been in business, we have seen a real evolution in safety—and it's an issue of safety management, because it's a matter of risk assessment in whatever industry you're in. For example, we've seen a change in the medical system, as we now engage ergonomists, kinesiologists, and physiologists, all of whom are involved in the return-to-work process.
However, what has always been the case is that it's been an incident, or sometimes a catastrophe, that brings our services in the door. What a company has to do first of all is an audit of the system it has in place, an assessment of its compliance with the regulations, and then constantly to do that review and audit process, so the company is constantly improving.
I guess my first question for you deals with the point that the change in the medical system that we've seen is also happening in technology. There's an evolution going on in the aviation industry as well, where companies must always be doing their assessments, coming into compliance, reviewing their processes and putting in place new ones. So I wonder if you could speak, first of all, to how technology is changing this for the aviation industry.
Second, how is Transport Canada ensuring that SMS is being followed properly, given that, as in the health and safety area, there are any number of providers who put together manuals or documentation to meet the regulations? How is Transport Canada doing that constant assessment of the industry to ensure that is in place?
:
Mr. Chair, the honourable member is correct about changes in regulatory approaches and about the evolution all systems in the world have been going through.
In aviation, technology is a critical element in terms of ensuring safety. As technology improves, human error is reduced. However, incidents and accidents in aviation are also because of human error, organizational error, and environmental issues. We have found that prescriptive regulations don't always ensure safety, because you can't anticipate everything. You can't say that you have to do only A, B, C, D, E, and F. There are other things. What if there is a G?
The theory behind SMS is exactly what you have said: It is to ingrain safety as a culture in an organization in its day-to-day operations. It's very important to be clear. I don't think I'm saying anything new to this committee, which has done a lot of in-depth work. SMS is not about having no government oversight. It is about proper government oversight. It is about using our resources in the weakest areas. It is not about deregulation. It is about smarter regulation. It is not about self-regulation by industry. There is a role for the industry to play, but oversight is extremely important.
In that context, as we are looking to implement SMS, that is an important thing to remember. When you're putting in place new systems and new procedures, sometimes telling the whole story is forgotten. I think that's something we hear from the industry, but we also hear it from our own staff.
Marc, would you like to add something on technology?
First of all, again, I made some corrections on delegation, so I'll do it again on partnership. We're not partners with the industry. We work in partnership in certain areas, but we're the regulator of the industry. I think that is a very important point.
Secondly, on fatigue, what we have in our flight and duty time is precisely that. It's not only the flight time, but it's flight and duty time. So if a pilot reports to work in the morning at six o'clock and his departure is only at ten o'clock because of a variety of delays, and then he starts his route and he's delayed in various places, he can only work 14 hours, starting at six o'clock in the morning. Now, other countries, on the contrary, use the hours of flight in a day, but here, for now, we use flight and duty time.
I think all of the points that you mentioned can and should be considered by the committee, by the working group of CARC that will be looking at pilot fatigue in June.
Mr. Grégoire referenced a working paper that was presented by Canada for the International Civil Aviation Organization with some conclusions, and I have a copy of that in both official languages to table to the committee, if I may, just for their interest. It has some conclusions, etc., if I may give that to the clerk.
Being one of the people who has been around this table for about five years talking about SMS, over the last year it appears we've seen some changes. We've seen some changes in the direction of the department. Certainly the deputy minister has alluded to some changes the department's going through as far as the implementation of SMS. First, I wonder why. I know the deputy minister has been there, I think, eight or nine months now.
Secondly, what has the department done over the last nine months in relation to the inspectors, the deputy minister? How many inspectors have you had discussions with? What kinds of working groups have you had, and how are you going forward from this stage as a result of those discussions with the inspectors?
I'd like to know how many you've consulted and how many stakeholders in the industry itself.
:
I believe upwards of 500. There have been 21 sessions dedicated to SMS all across the country. My colleagues, Mr. Grégoire and Mr. McDonald, have gone across the country, and so have I.
It's important to stress that they did these sessions in small groups, because we can have 500 people in one room and we can't really have a debate. The tenor of the conversations with our inspectors was to listen to them, because they are on the ground. They know what's happening on the ground with the operators. They have a sense of how these things are being implemented.
As my colleague said, what we heard is that all our inspectors, all the industry, and all our unions agree that if anything is going to improve the safety of the flying public, that is a very good thing. What we heard is that as we're implementing SMS, we have to make sure our inspectors have the right tools, the right training. Government oversight is absolutely clear, and how it would be implemented is clear, so we are clarifying all those things. We are moving on the training modules, as my colleague has said.
We have changed our approach to our unions. They are our partners in this. There has been new management. Just to clarify, Mr. Martin Eley has been in his job as director general of civil aviation for less than a year, or maybe--