SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 241 - Oct/27/23

Oct/27/23 10:26:39 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am glad this bill would require the airport authorities to inform the public about diversity among the directors and senior management. Back when I met the board members of the Ottawa airport, I had to point out the lack of diversity among the members. My question is regarding airport noise and the complaint process. I am glad a new requirement is being brought in. Unfortunately, it does not cover aircraft noise from low-flying aircraft, such as from flying clubs. In my riding of Nepean, there is a community called Country Place, which has been directly affected by the noise made by low-flying aircraft. To prove how low they are flying, they are also dealing with the federal government and Nav Canada. Is there any chance that a mechanism will be established to deal with noise complaints about low-flying aircraft?

145 words

Context: House Hansard - 241 - Oct/27/23

Mr. Vance Badawey

Oct/27/23 10:27:35 a.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-52

Madam Speaker, this bill, Bill C-52, does not propose but would impose a process by which complaints are received and dealt with. It would do this in a way that is grassroots. It would attach the local municipality, the residents, the airline and any others identified within the complaint to enter into, first of all, creating a committee. With the dialogue they would otherwise have at that committee, regardless of what that complaint may be, as outlined by the member, there would be a resolve to that. It would allow us, as a government, to ensure that transparency and accountability are undertaken and, therefore, solutions are brought forward to deal with the complaints brought to our attention and to the attention of the airlines.

125 words

Context: House Hansard - 241 - Oct/27/23

Mr. Mark Strahl

Oct/27/23 10:56:15 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it adds insult to injury when a passenger has experienced a significant delay or a flight cancellation and has tried to get it resolved with the airline, for the airline to say no, that it does not meet the criteria and that it does not believe the passenger is entitled to compensation. Then, when the passenger disagrees, they file a complaint with the agency of the government that is supposed to adjudicate these things independently. The passenger not only has the insult of having slept on the floor of an airport. They now have to wait 18 months to even have their complaint heard by the agency that is supposed to be there to protect them. That system is also broken. The government has not resourced it well enough. It has not held it accountable enough. I did not get into this in my speech, but the latest information that we have shows that the government has given bonuses to senior executives. All of them have received maximum bonuses for the last two years. We do not have the data for this year yet, but rather than holding them accountable, the government pays them bonuses for their inability to serve Canadian passengers. That is not right. This bill does not address the failures of the CTA, which is another reason we should not support it.

227 words

Context: House Hansard - 241 - Oct/27/23

Mr. Mark Strahl

Oct/27/23 10:58:24 a.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I have no problem with part 2 of the legislation, which would increase transparency and visibility for Canadians with disabilities and would provide a response to the Auditor General's report. I said that quite clearly. With the noise complaints, it is interesting to see the different approaches and contradictions within the bill itself. The noise complaint portion of the bill includes what constitutes proper notice of meeting and what constitutes quorum. It is very prescriptive. The government has decided that it knows how that should be meted out, but for the parts of the bill that deal with passenger protection and that sort of thing, it is all left to regulation. The government should make up its mind. I think that part is very prescriptive. It would impose a very strong standard on airports, and unlike other portions of the bill, it would not leave it to regulation. I am unclear on why that portion was so prescriptive and other portions are left entirely to the minister and cabinet.

172 words

Context: House Hansard - 241 - Oct/27/23

Mr. Gabriel Ste-Marie

Oct/27/23 12:49:08 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his important question and his deep outrage. We are all outraged that big companies can behave like this. Our system is one where, when there is a payment transaction for airline service, the customer is entitled to receive good service. Our current federal legislation is inadequate when that is not the case. Again, I want to mention the work of my colleague from Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, who sits on the Standing Committee on Transport, among others, and his colleagues, who are working to change this. Under the current legislation, large airlines have a financial incentive to take more risks to maximize their profits. When their service falls short—if there are not enough seats on a flight because they have oversold tickets, for example—the result is that the consumer has to file a complaint with the Canadian Transportation Agency and wait several years to perhaps receive a positive outcome. The cost of those complaints, given the flawed legislation, means that airlines feel it is worth taking so many risks. This has to change. We need to work on it.

196 words

Context: House Hansard - 241 - Oct/27/23

Mr. Chandra Arya (Nepean, Lib.)

Oct/27/23 1:09:04 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the hon. member mentioned airport noise and the noise complaint process. My riding of Nepean has a problem with small, low-flying aircraft from a flying club. This act does not deal with the noise generated by these aircraft. The data are controlled by Nav Canada, which the residents in my riding do not have access to. Does the member agree that, if possible, an amendment must be made at committee to include noise pollution caused by small aircraft at flying clubs and that the complaint resolution process should be made much easier for residents of affected localities?

100 words