CANADA House of Commons Debates VOLUME 138 Ï NUMBER 091 Ï 2nd SESSION Ï 37th PARLIAMENT OFFICIAL REPORT (HANSARD) Tuesday, April 29, 2003 Part A Speaker: The Honourable Peter Milliken CONTENTS (Table of Contents appears at back of this issue.) All parliamentary publications are available on the ``Parliamentary Internet Parlementaire´´ at the following address: http://www.parl.gc.ca 5517 HOUSE OF COMMONS Tuesday, April 29, 2003 The House met at 10 a.m. GOVERNEMENT ORDERS [English] Prayers CANADA AIRPORTS ACT Ï (1000) The House resumed from April 28 consideration of the motion [Translation] that Bill C-27, an act respecting airport authorities and other airport INTERPARLIAMENTARY DELEGATIONS operators and amending other acts, be read the second time and referred to a committee. The Deputy Speaker: I have the honour to lay upon the table the report of the Canadian parliamentary delegation that travelled to Mr. Stan Keyes (Hamilton West, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, as I started Austria and Hungary from March 3 to 8, 2003. to say in my remarks late yesterday before the House adjourned its regular business, there is extreme concern in the airport community that Bill C-27, if not amended, would cripple an airport's ability to continue to work in what is clearly a very competitive international ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS market. Ï (1005) Yesterday I spoke about how the air transportation industry has [Translation] had an enormous impact on the Canadian economy. I pointed out GOVERNMENT RESPONSE TO PETITIONS that the viability of Canada's air transportation system is threatened Mr. Geoff Regan (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of and the consequences for Canada are enormous. I also gave reasons the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, why the industry is in crisis today. I said that airports must adjust to pursuant to Standing Order 36(8) I have the honour to table, in both the new realities of air travel, reduced frequency and the withdrawal official languages, the government's response to 22 petitions. of service. This means airports will have to reduce costs in order to minimize impacts on airlines and air travellers. *** [English] I stressed that the federal government too must act to cut costs to airports so these may be passed along to airlines in the form of lower INTERPARLIAMENTARY DELEGATIONS fees and charges, and to air travellers in the form of lower air fares. Mr. John Godfrey (Don Valley West, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 34(1) I have the honour to present, in Ironically, at a time when the federal government should be both official languages, the report of the Canadian delegation of the reducing the operating costs of airports, the proposed Canada Interparliamentary Forum of the Americas to the second plenary airports act, Bill C-27, does just the opposite. The proposed act, session in Panama City, Panama, February 20 to 21, 2003. which would effectively re-regulate an economic sector that the government effectively and successfully deregulated eight years ago, *** piles one administrative redundancy upon another and introduces QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER over 40 areas in which the minister may pass regulations, adding to the administrative burden of Canada's small airports. Mr. Geoff Regan (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I The government is introducing these drastic measures without a ask that all questions be allowed to stand. single, overarching public demand for change and without having Ï (1010) conducted a single regulatory impact or cost benefit analysis. In fact, The Deputy Speaker: Is that agreed? a number of independent and government commissioned studies recommended a course of action substantially different from the Some hon. members: Agreed. government's proposed legislation. 5518 COMMONS DEBATES April 29, 2003 Government Orders I declared my bias and it is called John C. Munro Hamilton entities into full cost recovery operations under the principle of user International Airport. I quoted from a letter to me from Mr. Tony pay. The government's vision document “Straight Ahead” says: Battaglia, president and CEO of TradePort International Corporation, operator of Hamilton airport. I read from his letter which said: Transportation policy must provide market frameworks that allow carriers and The act will have a profound impact on the growth of John C. Munro Hamilton infrastructure providers to adapt, innovate, remain competitive and serve the public. International Airport. The act's one size fits all approach to airport government conflicts with Hamilton's unique and award winning public private partnership between the city of Hamilton and TradePort International, a private company Yet Bill C-27 creates a static, inflexible governance regime. The operating the airport under terms of a 40 year lease. The act impedes the ability of the private operator to innovate and adapt to changing market conditions and customer devolution of the Hamilton airport, for example, to local ownership needs in order to improve service and reduce costs. The act significantly erodes local and management has been an overwhelming success. By 2002 the control by the community—a founding principle of the Canada Airports Policy local operator, TradePort, had invested over $25 million and (1995). attracted another $48 million in private sector investment at our Those are the concerns of a smaller airport like Hamilton, but airport. what about larger airports like the Vancouver International Airport authority? Hamilton International Airport's economic impact study com- YVR is concerned that Bill C-27 would diminish Canada's pleted in 2002 found that there were 1,550 direct jobs at the airport, reputation as a well respected source for excellent foreign up over 116% since TradePort took over its management. international airport operators such as the Vancouver International Airport authority and its subsidiary YVR Airport Services Limited. It says that the bill would cripple or kill the ability of progressive Hamilton International Airport's direct contribution to GDP is airport managers, such as YVRAS, to compete in the international $170 million and that is up 129% since 1996. Its total economic arena and provide much needed management and operator expertise output is $410 million, up 224% over the same period. Taxes paid to to small and medium sized domestic airports. It also would three levels of government by the airport community exceed $32 negatively impact on small airports that need the type of manage- million. ment and operational expertise that larger airports can provide through consultant or management services in the manner that In spite of all these successes, the Canada airports act includes 210 YVRAA provides through its subsidiary, YVRAS airports, to places sections to micromanage the country's airports. By way of like Kamloops, Cranbrook, Fort St. John and to more medium sized comparison, the entire Canada Transportation Act, which as we airports such as Moncton and my home town of Hamilton. know governs rail, transit, marine and airlines, has only 280 sections. YVR says that the bill would reduce or eliminate opportunities and employment for Canadian architects, engineers, lawyers, professional advisors, designers and project managers in the field My fear is that Bill C-27 embeds in legislation that which is of overseas management and development of foreign airports. normally dealt with through regulation. The bill will go before the Standing Committee on Transport shortly and I for one will be Ï (1015) keeping an eye on this legislation. Foreign governments are particularly attracted to the management skills of well run airports such as Vancouver. The fact that YVRAS has developed to the point that it should be able to stand on its own It is quite obvious that we have a success story since deregulation. reputation is clouded by the views of foreign governments. They According to the airports and the airport authorities that have want the reputation, expertise and backup like an airport like contacted many of us here in the House, and my particular concern is Vancouver International can provide. for Hamilton airport, I think demonstrates that a return from a deregulated industry of the mid-1990s to a re-regulated industry Realistically the development of these types of businesses and serves no useful purpose. positive effects that it has on the Canadian economy is based on well run large Canadian airport authorities exporting reputation, expertise, technology and technical services through subsidiary airport operator Again, I look forward to seeing the bill at committee stage when management corporations and/or joint ventures. we conclude our second reading debate. I think it will be very important to go clause by clause through the bill and have these The market for foreign airport privatization is huge. Today, while witnesses come before us to demonstrate to us why the government less than 5% of the world's airports are privatized, the World Bank should proceed in the way it is proceeding and why we should not do forecasts that the operation of 150 airports will be transferred from everything we can possible to help the industry, not through re- government to the private sector within just the next few years. regulating the industry but through those administrative practices Several leading companies have identified airport privatization as a that can encourage them to grow, to continue to grow in the fashion new strategic industry for the 21st century. This creates huge they are growing. opportunities for Canadians that should not be stifled. That is the view of an airport such as Vancouver. Mr. James Moore (Port Moody—Coquitlam—Port Coqui- Devolution of airports to local control has been instrumental in the tlam, Canadian Alliance): Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments evolution of Canadian airports from money losing government run by the member for Hamilton West very much.