Jermechanic
Well Known Member
Please take the time to read the following letter written by the president of our flying club. Please take the time to write our minister to save our present and potential airports.
Thanks Jeremy
Since pretty much the end of WWII, aviation and pretty much everything connected to it including airports, has fallen under the federal jurisdiction of Transport Canada and the Aeronautics Act. Since Federal jurisdiction trumps Provincial jurisdiction, which in turn trumps Municipal jurisdiction, this state of affairs pretty much ensured that a municipal government could not prevent a landowner from using their land as an airport so long as Transport Canada had no safety concerns. A number of Municipalities challenged this all the way to the Supreme Court, with COPA defending the cases. Finally the Supreme Court ruled in the airport owners’ favor and the matter was settled once and for all – or so we thought.
The municipalities were not happy and have now got the ear of the Minister of Transport, The Hon. Lisa Raitt. She is now seriously contemplating amending the Aeronautics Act to give Municipal Governments influence into any decision as to whether or not an airport is approved. Additionally, the wishes of the local government would become one of the criteria for TC approval, and de facto, almost assuredly a requirement. Additionally, it is almost assured that some municipalities would seek to close existing airdromes claiming that they were improperly approved originally. The pictures above illustrate what often happens when local governments gain control of airports.
Before Transport Canada can change the Aeronautics Act they must consult with “stakeholders” (that’s you) under the CARAC process. (Canadian Aviation Regulation Advisory Council). The process has started and Transport Canada was surprised, and I suspect a little disappointed, that they have only received 15 submissions from individuals. It is vitally important that everyone send an email expressing their concerns with these proposed amendments. The cynic in all of us thinks “What’s the point?”, but there are two key points to remember: All governments work on the theory that one letter represents 100 votes, and more importantly, Transport Canada need “stakeholder feedback” in order to stand any chance of making a case to the Minister that this is not a good idea. For the time it takes to watch a reality TV show, you could make a big difference in the future of aviation in Canada. Unfortunately the deadline for submissions is noon this Friday. Emails need to be sent to both Lisa Raitt, Minister of Transport at: [email protected] and also Transport Canada CARAC: [email protected] . Also please send a copy to [email protected] .
A few thoughts in no particular order:
1) Transport Canada has the jurisdiction and responsibility to regulate and manage aviation in Canada for the benefit of all Canadians, much like the National Energy Board does with respect to pipelines or the Ministry of Finance does with taxation. Transport Canada should no more abdicate this responsibility to municipalities than should the National Energy Board or Revenue Canada abdicate their responsibilities to lower levels of government.
2) Municipalities do not often understand the long term benefits of an airport or aerodrome in their community until it is well established. The ability to host air ambulance service, the tourism and business benefits, the increased tax base, are often only apparent after they exist. A small vocal minority of voting NIMBY’s is very apparent before an airport even gets under construction and many small town politicians don’t have the ability to take the broader longer term view.
3) Conversely, some municipal governments covet the aviation real estate for higher density development, thereby placing the municipalities in a position of conflict of interest with the developers of an airport.
4) Aviation is a “top down” industry in Canada. Pretty much every ME and pilot working in commercial aviation got there thanks to much smaller airports. Whether it was their training or their early jobs, without the smaller GA airports, the glitzy high dollar end of the industry would be struggling. This can be seen in other parts of the world that don’t have strong general aviation heritage – severe pilot and AME shortages that are leaving brand new airplanes parked! For Canada to start down this road will in time doom our thriving aviation industry to a similar fate, depriving the government and the country of tax dollars and jobs.
5) The aviation infrastructure is based on a network of airports. Whether out of economic necessity or for reasons of safety, this network cannot tolerate localized “holes” in it to any degree. If you close 50% of the airports in the country over time, you do not reduce aviation activity by 50% - you reduce by much more, probably closer to 90%. An example of this is the sharing of truck loads of fuel between airports. Without the neighboring airport , this doesn’t happen. Aviation is an activity that requires critical mass to function so small scale local repression of airports and airdromes has much more profound effects.
PLEASE. If you just do just one thing this year for aviation, write to the two above mentioned emails today before 12pm deadline and make your thoughts known. If you aren’t a COPA member, now would be a good time to join even if you don’t like some of the stuff they have or haven’t done in the past. They are the biggest (and at this point only) private aircraft owners group who will take this on. Please feel free to forward this to any other aviation folks that you know.
Thanks Jeremy
Since pretty much the end of WWII, aviation and pretty much everything connected to it including airports, has fallen under the federal jurisdiction of Transport Canada and the Aeronautics Act. Since Federal jurisdiction trumps Provincial jurisdiction, which in turn trumps Municipal jurisdiction, this state of affairs pretty much ensured that a municipal government could not prevent a landowner from using their land as an airport so long as Transport Canada had no safety concerns. A number of Municipalities challenged this all the way to the Supreme Court, with COPA defending the cases. Finally the Supreme Court ruled in the airport owners’ favor and the matter was settled once and for all – or so we thought.
The municipalities were not happy and have now got the ear of the Minister of Transport, The Hon. Lisa Raitt. She is now seriously contemplating amending the Aeronautics Act to give Municipal Governments influence into any decision as to whether or not an airport is approved. Additionally, the wishes of the local government would become one of the criteria for TC approval, and de facto, almost assuredly a requirement. Additionally, it is almost assured that some municipalities would seek to close existing airdromes claiming that they were improperly approved originally. The pictures above illustrate what often happens when local governments gain control of airports.
Before Transport Canada can change the Aeronautics Act they must consult with “stakeholders” (that’s you) under the CARAC process. (Canadian Aviation Regulation Advisory Council). The process has started and Transport Canada was surprised, and I suspect a little disappointed, that they have only received 15 submissions from individuals. It is vitally important that everyone send an email expressing their concerns with these proposed amendments. The cynic in all of us thinks “What’s the point?”, but there are two key points to remember: All governments work on the theory that one letter represents 100 votes, and more importantly, Transport Canada need “stakeholder feedback” in order to stand any chance of making a case to the Minister that this is not a good idea. For the time it takes to watch a reality TV show, you could make a big difference in the future of aviation in Canada. Unfortunately the deadline for submissions is noon this Friday. Emails need to be sent to both Lisa Raitt, Minister of Transport at: [email protected] and also Transport Canada CARAC: [email protected] . Also please send a copy to [email protected] .
A few thoughts in no particular order:
1) Transport Canada has the jurisdiction and responsibility to regulate and manage aviation in Canada for the benefit of all Canadians, much like the National Energy Board does with respect to pipelines or the Ministry of Finance does with taxation. Transport Canada should no more abdicate this responsibility to municipalities than should the National Energy Board or Revenue Canada abdicate their responsibilities to lower levels of government.
2) Municipalities do not often understand the long term benefits of an airport or aerodrome in their community until it is well established. The ability to host air ambulance service, the tourism and business benefits, the increased tax base, are often only apparent after they exist. A small vocal minority of voting NIMBY’s is very apparent before an airport even gets under construction and many small town politicians don’t have the ability to take the broader longer term view.
3) Conversely, some municipal governments covet the aviation real estate for higher density development, thereby placing the municipalities in a position of conflict of interest with the developers of an airport.
4) Aviation is a “top down” industry in Canada. Pretty much every ME and pilot working in commercial aviation got there thanks to much smaller airports. Whether it was their training or their early jobs, without the smaller GA airports, the glitzy high dollar end of the industry would be struggling. This can be seen in other parts of the world that don’t have strong general aviation heritage – severe pilot and AME shortages that are leaving brand new airplanes parked! For Canada to start down this road will in time doom our thriving aviation industry to a similar fate, depriving the government and the country of tax dollars and jobs.
5) The aviation infrastructure is based on a network of airports. Whether out of economic necessity or for reasons of safety, this network cannot tolerate localized “holes” in it to any degree. If you close 50% of the airports in the country over time, you do not reduce aviation activity by 50% - you reduce by much more, probably closer to 90%. An example of this is the sharing of truck loads of fuel between airports. Without the neighboring airport , this doesn’t happen. Aviation is an activity that requires critical mass to function so small scale local repression of airports and airdromes has much more profound effects.
PLEASE. If you just do just one thing this year for aviation, write to the two above mentioned emails today before 12pm deadline and make your thoughts known. If you aren’t a COPA member, now would be a good time to join even if you don’t like some of the stuff they have or haven’t done in the past. They are the biggest (and at this point only) private aircraft owners group who will take this on. Please feel free to forward this to any other aviation folks that you know.
Last edited:
