Alarm Over 315th Page In Bill

www.blacklocks.ca
Air industry executives are expressing alarm over a little-noticed clause in a budget bill they warn is federal over-reach that compromises a 20-year old airports policy. The amendments were inserted in the 315th page of a 478-page omnibus bill.

“We must tread carefully,” said Daniel-Robert Gooch, president of the Canadian Airports Council; “I’m not really sure what the Minister’s intentions are.”

Amendments to the Aeronautics Act grant cabinet new authority over management of any airport: “The Minister may make an order prohibiting the development or expansion of a given aerodrome or any change to the operation of a given aerodrome, if in the Minister’s opinion the proposed development, expansion or change is likely to adversely affect aviation safety or is not in the public interest.”

Witnesses testifying at the Senate transport committee said the wording appeared vague and far-reaching, and opened the door to political meddling in local airport management. “Your concerns I think are legitimate,” said Senator Pana Merchant (Liberal-Sask.); “These amendments are buried in a bill where they don’t belong”; “With these omnibus bills, everything is thrown in there and there’s very little time to really analyze,” Merchant said.

Transport Canada has suggested the amendment is intended to monitor development of new, private airports. Nationwide there are some 5,000 small unregistered airfields, the Senate committee heard.

“There may be valid reasons for the Minister to have additional regulatory powers in this area for the aerodromes in question,” said the Airports Council’s Gooch. “However, the language goes far beyond the kind of small, private aerodromes we understand to be the source of the Minister’s concern.”

“This Is Not Appropriate”

“The additional language being proposed for the Aeronautics Act is too broad and captures a far greater share of the nation’s airports than we understand was intended,” he said; “How would a determination of ‘public interest’ be made? What kind of operational changes would be subject to Ministerial intervention? We do not know.”

Under a 1994 National Airports Policy the federal government retained 26 of the biggest airports, now managed under lease, and transferred control of more than 100 small airports to local authorities from Campbell River, British Columbia to Deer Lake, Newfoundland & Labrador.

“All operational and financial responsibilities for airports are handled locally,” Gooch said. “This change involved a well-considered and deliberate de-politicization of the kinds of decisions that would seem to come back under the Minister’s control if these amendments go through.”

Kevin Psutka, president and CEO of the Canadian Owners & Pilots Association, said his members were never told of the amendment and questioned its purpose. “There is no crisis in Canada with aerodromes being built left, right and centre,” Psutka said.

“I am here because of a failure in the process,” he told the Senate committee; “As a minimum, the significant change should have been discussed with the industry before it had reached this stage. Instead we find ourselves having to educate Parliament in very short bursts and in hastily arranged appearances before committees on the complexities of aviation and the far-reaching implications that the act amendment will have. This is not an appropriate forum for this discussion.”

The hefty omnibus Bill C-43 was introduced in the Commons October 23, passed Second Reading in eleven days, and is currently undergoing committee hearings in both the House and Senate.