Speech (committee meeting)

{
    "time": "2020-11-24 16:05:00",
    "attribution": {
        "en": "Mr. Chris Moore",
        "fr": "M. Chris Moore"
    },
    "content": {
        "en": "<p data-HoCid=\"6408080\" data-originallang=\"en\">I agree with exactly what Paul stated. Peter DeFazio, chair of the transportation and infrastructure committee in Congress, did a fantastic job of uncovering a lot of issues, but there are still a lot of details we do not know anything about. For instance, there's the whole idea of issuing an airworthiness directive. I did my own calculation, and I figure they passed the threshold for issuing an airworthiness directive by a factor of 5,000. That is incomprehensible. You would think there would be something in the regulations stating that once you get to a certain threshold, you must at least consider grounding a plane. That's quite a large factor.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6408081\" data-originallang=\"en\">There are a number of things or facts we don't know\u2014for instance, how these engineers had approved that plane. It almost sounds like there was one person who was behind the curtain, but there must have been a whole fleet of engineers reviewing this aircraft. I have to call the whole professional engineering association into question. Is there any group looking at that?</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6408082\" data-originallang=\"en\">How a second crash could happen is beyond me. That's what I want to get down to. This doesn't usually happen. We think Transport Canada played a role in it. Even though perhaps they were hoodwinked initially, they could have at least prevented the second crash by flagging it and saying, \u201cYou know, there's a problem here.\u201d There obviously was one. </p>",
        "fr": "<p data-HoCid=\"6408080\" data-originallang=\"en\">Je suis tout \u00e0 fait d'accord avec M. Njoroge. Peter DeFazio, le pr\u00e9sident du Comit\u00e9 des transports et de l'infrastructure au Congr\u00e8s, a fait un travail fantastique pour mettre au jour de nombreux probl\u00e8mes, mais il reste encore beaucoup de d\u00e9tails que nous ignorons. Par exemple, il y a toute l'id\u00e9e d'\u00e9mettre une directive sur la navigabilit\u00e9. J'ai fait mes propres calculs, et je pense qu'ils ont d\u00e9pass\u00e9 le seuil pour \u00e9mettre une directive sur la navigabilit\u00e9 d'un facteur de 5 000. C'est incompr\u00e9hensible. On pourrait penser qu'il y a une disposition dans le r\u00e8glement qui stipule qu'une fois que l'on atteint un seuil donn\u00e9, on doit \u00e0 tout le moins envisager d'immobiliser un avion au sol. C'est un facteur assez important.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6408081\" data-originallang=\"en\">Il y a un certain nombre d'\u00e9l\u00e9ments et de faits que nous ignorons, notamment comment ces ing\u00e9nieurs avaient approuv\u00e9 cet avion. On dirait presque qu'il y avait une personne derri\u00e8re le rideau, mais toute une \u00e9quipe d'ing\u00e9nieurs a d\u00fb examiner cet avion. Je dois remettre en question toute l'association professionnelle des ing\u00e9nieurs. Y a-t-il un groupe qui se penche l\u00e0-dessus?</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"6408082\" data-originallang=\"en\">Comment un deuxi\u00e8me \u00e9crasement ait pu se produire me d\u00e9passe. C'est de cela dont je veux parler. Cela n'arrive pas d'habitude. Nous pensons que Transports Canada a jou\u00e9 un r\u00f4le dans cette situation. M\u00eame s'il a peut-\u00eatre \u00e9t\u00e9 dup\u00e9 au d\u00e9part, il aurait au moins pu emp\u00eacher le deuxi\u00e8me \u00e9crasement en disant, \u00ab Vous savez, il y a un probl\u00e8me ici \u00bb. Il y en avait manifestement un.</p>"
    },
    "url": "/committees/transport/43-2/6/chris-moore-4/",
    "politician_url": null,
    "politician_membership_url": null,
    "procedural": false,
    "source_id": "11032253",
    "document_url": "/committees/transport/43-2/6/",
    "related": {
        "document_speeches_url": "/speeches/?document=%2Fcommittees%2Ftransport%2F43-2%2F6%2F"
    }
}