Summary of stakeholder engagement – Montreal, Quebec

Pilotage Act Review Roundtable – Montreal, Quebec

November 14, 2017 – 9:00 am – 4:00 pm

• Summary of Discussion
• Governance
• Safety
• Labour
• Tariffs and Economic Concerns
• Enforcement
• Conclusion

Summary of Discussion

The participants presented their concerns and views on the Pilotage Act and potential areas for reform. The comments have been grouped under the following themes:

Governance

• Whether or not the current Canadian pilotage system should be modernized and alternative governance and operating models should be considered was discussed.
• Significant concerns were expressed that pilotage in Canada is a monopoly granted by law.
  • Pilotage corporations are not subject to the same legislative controls as Pilotage Authorities.
  • Service follows the guidelines of a monopoly: high costs, resistance to change, and little concern with regard to clients’ needs.
  • Two potential solutions to this problem were discussed: more rigorous regulation, and introducing competition.
• Lack of transparency by the pilot corporations with Pilotage Authorities and clients was a concern for some participants. In response, representatives of the pilot corporations suggested improvements in manners yet to be determined.
• The Governance research contract is examining six potential operating  models:  
  • Maintain the four Pilotage Authorities as distinct entities (status quo);
  • Amalgamate the four Pilotage Authorities into a single national entity;
  • Amalgamate the LPA and the GLPA;
  • Create two separate authorities (one in the East and one in the West);
  • Create a model based on the St. Lawrence Seaway; and
  • Create an organization like the NAVCAN model.
• There was strong support for a pilotage system that would regulate on a national level, while still considering regional interests.
  • It was argued that the pilotage system must be organized in a way that ensures its ability to coordinate and maintain relations among the various organizations involved in the pilotage system.
  • It was suggested that a consultation committee be created through the Pilotage Act to discuss, debate, and resolve issues; share information; and ensure continuous improvements.
  • There was discussion on how to determine if the current pilotage system is working in an effective manner, e.g. how to measure effectiveness, and what degree of effectiveness should depend on pilots’ performance.
• There was a consensus that directors of the Board should be neutral and recruited externally to ensure good governance.
  • It was suggested that the Pilotage Act should detail the areas of necessary expertise for board members; an obligation for the Board of Directors to seek continuous improvement of the organization; and an obligation for the Board of Directors to seek cost savings. 
  • There was strong agreement in allowing the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to be an ex-officio member on a Board of Directors.
• The meeting participants expressed a strong desire to review the research reports when they are available, and to organize a future meeting to further discuss potential governance structures.

Safety

• Maintaining safety was recognized as a top priority of the Pilotage Act Review: changes to the Act should not adversely affect safety, despite increasing costs.
• Strong concerns were expressed regarding the introduction, adoption, and role of technology.
  • There was no consensus regarding how many pilots are necessary due in the wake of new technologies.
  • Participants recognized that the ECDIS system is a valuable tool, but is in need of updating. Although the system has been updated to help with Arctic navigation, ECDIS still cannot display certain information useful to a ship’s pilots and crew.
  • Participants expressed desire for a better system to effectively manage maritime traffic using the latest technology.
    • Proactive and effective management of maritime traffic could reduce risks, and consequently, reduce the use of double-pilotage.
    • There was recognition that traffic management is an important part of a pilot’s responsibilities.
• There was strong concern that passage plans are not publically available.
  • Participants wanted to know why these documents are not shared openly since they would have the potential to increase the safety of a ship’s crew.
  • It was suggested that making passage plans public could be enshrined in the Pilotage Act.
  • Participants were reminded that while all ships require a passage plan by law, this should not be confused with the knowledge local pilots have with regard to their areas of expertise, which is tested during the certification exams.

Labour

• There were significant concerns regarding the pilot certification system and evaluation.
  • Certification programs differ around the world and even within the country.
  • There was little appetite to diminish the criteria for obtaining a certificate.
  • There was desire to make the certification process more accessible. Candidates should be made aware of who will be the evaluator and how they will be evaluated. It was suggested that simulators could be used as an evaluation tool.
  • There was openness among some participants to offer different evaluation options to candidates as long as the same criteria are met.
  • There was recognition that changes have already been made to the evaluation board to ensure that they are transparent.
  • Open discussion: Are the criteria to be a certified pilot too rigid in some regions and not enough in others? Should pilots be allowed to navigate on multiple ships of the same class?
• There was some concern regarding education, recruitment, and hiring practices.
  • There was some belief that the learning tools used to become a pilot are archaic. A counterpoint was made that pilots should be required to know how to draw a map and have the knowledge required to navigate without modern tools in case electronic systems on a ship fail.
  • There was some concern that ship captains are resigning to become pilots at an accelerated rate. There was a suggestion to require that individuals have at least 15 to 20 years of experience on a ship before being able to become a pilot.
  • There was discussion regarding Pilotage Authorities’ right to employ their own pilots. There was some concern that without their own pilots, Pilotage Authorities must exclusively trust the opinions of pilots of the pilot corporations, which can sometimes present a conflict of interest.

Tariffs and Economic Concerns

• Stakeholders are concerned about cost increases, and seek to mitigate increases in the future. Although there has been an increase in the amount of cargo that is transported, the costs have still risen considerably.
• There is some public concern about shipping and considerable sensitivity to risks, therefore, it will be important to mitigate risks in a cost-effective manner.
• Certain stakeholders had issue with the use of double pilotage. There was discussion about finding alternatives to double pilotage that could also contribute to reductions in risk. Also, in the past, billing for double pilotage would begin in November, while today it starts in January, and the service still starts in November. 
• Consideration has been given to offering double pilotage to ensure safety, without double billing. However, 80% of Authorities’ costs are for pilot compensation. It is important to understand that if pilot compensation is to be reduced, a solution might not be found. Furthermore, a change to the law is not required to find alternatives to double pilotage or to reduce its costs.
• The pilotage system must remain competitive while also contributing to safety. It will be difficult for the system to continue to operate in this way if the costs of pilotage services continue to grow.
• It was suggested that Canada could pay for pilotage services just as they do for other public services. This requires that pilotage be considered a public service.
• A tariff system of that would allow quick adjustments would be a great asset to the Authorities and clients alike.
• It is important to note that saying that there is a lack of investment in infrastructure is a mistake. There is a greater need for investment, but not a lack thereof.

Enforcement 

• There was strong appetite to introduce a system of continuous improvement to the Pilotage Act, including performance criteria for Pilotage Authorities and pilots.
  • Currently, pilots do not have any requirement to meet pre-established performance indicators.
  • There was a suggestion that industry should review corporate plans in addition to the Minister.
  • There was strong agreement that performance indicators for each of the Pilotage Authorities should be the same to allow for comparison between organizations.
  • There was appetite to ensure the Pilotage Act guarantees transparency, ensures that the performance indicators are the same throughout Canada, and formalizes the evaluation of quality assurance. There was a suggestion that an organization could be created through the Act to accomplish this goal.
• There was some discontent among Pilotage Authorities in not having enough power or authority to make decisions, exacerbated by limited internal pilot expertise.
• There was strong agreement that regulatory provisions should not be included in service contracts, especially when it comes to safety provisions.

Conclusion

Participants of the roundtable agreed that the key aspects of the Pilotage Act Review can be summarized in five key aspects:

• Technology,
• Transparency,
• Competitiveness,
• Communication, and
• Continuous Improvement.