SoVote

Decentralized Democracy

House Hansard - 239

44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 25, 2023 02:00PM
Context: House Hansard - 239 - Oct/25/23
Mr. Dan Muys (Flamborough—Glanbrook, CPC)
  • Oct/25/23 6:19:02 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, my question for the hon. member proposing the motion and the change is this: Does he think this maybe should have gone through a more regular process, perhaps have been brought to the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities for a discussion so the various affected parties could weigh in on it?
55 words
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border
Context: House Hansard - 239 - Oct/25/23
Mr. Dan Muys (Flamborough—Glanbrook, CPC)
  • Oct/25/23 6:25:12 p.m.
  • Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is always an honour to rise in the House and engage in critical discussions about the policies that effect the lives of everyday Canadians. Today, we are being presented with a motion that calls for the adoption of International Civil Aviation Organization standards in Canada's airports for rescue and firefighting regulations. This could potentially increase fees imposed on passengers and shippers to cover the costs. Safety is paramount and is certainly something that unites all of us. Conservatives believe that this is an issue that deserve more study. We will be calling on the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, upon which I happen to sit, to take this issue up. We must carefully consider and evaluate the consequences of implementing these proposed changes. The mover of the motion just spoke about the fact that Canadian airports are exceptionally safe. That is something we are all proud of. What is the signal we are sending in debating this motion today? Are we giving the impression that it is lacking? Canada is not out of step with the rest of the world on this. Many countries, including our neighbours to the south, make necessary adjustments to ICAO standards to best suit their own unique circumstances. It is a standard practice that recognizes the need for flexibility, while maintaining high safety standards. Why are we signalling there are perhaps deficiencies in our safety regulations? Canadian aviation regulations are designed to be robust and thorough. They are tailored to the specific needs of communities and circumstances. In fact, in some areas, such as aircraft rescue and firefighting training, we even surpass ICAO standards by threefold, demonstrating our commitment to safety and preparedness. It is important to acknowledge that airport emergencies are well managed across Canada through close collaboration with community resource partners. Municipal police, ambulance services and firefighting resources play pivotal roles in emergency response. Airports cannot be expected to staff for every conceivable emergency scenario, so they rely on these mutual aid partners to ensure a comprehensive response. It is worth noting that all of our airports are already working closely with their local fire departments, actively planning and conducting exercises to ensure a swift and effective emergency response. We can talk about Hamilton International Airport, which I am proud to say is located in my constituency of Flamborough—Glanbrook. It is the fastest-growing cargo airport in the country, plus it serves over a million passengers a year. It is owned by the City of Hamilton, so naturally, there is a strong partnership with the Hamilton Fire Department. This partnership is already in place and exemplifies the importance of a well-coordinated approach to aviation safety. We have heard this from other airports across the country. They recognize the significance of a collaborative approach, which is why they have expressed concerns that the proposed regulation and added costs are unnecessary. That is why we need to study this further. It is essential to consider that these additional expenses would inevitably be passed onto travellers and shippers, and would further raise the costs associated with air travel in Canada, which is already expensive on a global scale. In a country where air travel and cargo is already subject to significant fees and taxes, these costs are going to be one more thing added onto the backs of Canadians at a time when we are already dealing with 40-year-high inflation. It is crucial to remember that increasing costs for passengers and shippers does not necessarily translate into increased safety. We must be mindful of the impact on Canadians' wallets. Additionally, the regulatory changes proposed in this motion are designed to provide a one-size-fits-all, Ottawa-knows-best approach. However, our vast and diverse Canadian landscape necessitates a more flexible approach to regulation. What works for one airport, may not be suitable for another. Flexibility in our regulations is essential to accommodate these variations. We must recognize the merits of our existing Canadian aviation regulations and the partnerships we have built with community resources to ensure the safety and well-being of airline passengers. Thorough studies have been conducted, and sound research has supported it, which demonstrates the effectiveness of our current approach. The proposed changes, while they may sound appealing on the surface, risk imposing unnecessary costs and red tape. There is just no clear evidence to suggest that this would result in a safer air travel environment. That is why we are proposing additional study on this.
755 words
All Topics
  • Hear!
  • Rabble!
  • star_border