Transport Canada proposes aviation security revamp
Changes 'long overdue': security expert
Last Updated: Friday, May 14, 2010 | 4:04 PM ET Comments18Recommend19
By Angela Gilbert, CBC News
Transport Canada wants a three-level security alert system at major airports across Canada to address higher risk conditions. (Michael Dwyer/Associated Press) Transport Canada is looking to implement a three-level security alert system at major airports across the country to address "higher risk" conditions, CBC News has learned.
The proposal, outlined in the Canada Gazette, the official newspaper of the Government of Canada, calls on airports to run their operations according to:
- Level 1: normal operations.
- Level 2: increased risk of a probable incident.
- Level 3: an incident is imminent or underway.
Unlike the alert system in the United States, the public will not automatically be notified when threat levels change. Instead, alerting the public would be "considered on a case by case basis," Transport Canada told CBC News.
The proposed changes were first suggested more than four years ago in a report, tabled in Parliament, which raised serious concerns about a lack of coordination between aviation security agencies.
Reg Whitaker, one of the authors of the report, told CBC News that the three-level alert system is "long overdue." He said the current system is "pretty loose" and can lead to confusion in the event of possible security breaches.
In researching the report, it was found that security personnel were sometimes reluctant to call police when they suspected an explosive device, concerned that the police would prematurely shut down the airport.
"They were very loath to call for police intervention when there was a possibility of say, an explosive device," Whitaker said.
Lack of co-ordination
Whitaker attributed the reluctance to alert authorities to the absence of co-ordination, which a three-tier system might provide.
"Say if [airport security personnel] scan something in a bag and they didn’t like the look of it … if they immediately press the alarm button that said 'suspected bomb', then they were shutting the airport down, because the police were coming in and saying 'everybody out,'" he said.
"You don't want to go to that level until you've got some pretty good reason to think that it's [a bomb]. But on the other hand, you don't want to not go there if it turns out that it's going to happen."
Whitaker said proposed changes should give personnel a clear understanding of their roles.
"Here's what we do when things are normal; here's what we do when there is a generalized risk; and here's what we do when we're into an out and out emergency."
Transport Canada told CBC News it would define each level but would not give details on how appropriate reactions to each level would be determined.
"For reasons of national security, the determination of actions will not be made public," the department said in an email.
The suggested improvements to security co-ordination follow two recent high-profile incidents and come on the eve of a highly anticipated report on the 1985 Air India bombing.
In a March 27 Notice of Intent, published in the Canada Gazette, Transport Canada pointed to the Dec. 25 attempted bombing of a Northwest Airlines flight into Detroit as an example of the need for new regulations.
Two weeks after that incident, Transport Canada came under scrutiny when it issued a blanket memo to aviation security regulators asking for "increased vigilance." Initially it was reported that the notice was prompted by new intelligence that terrorists were trying to enter Canada to get to the U.S., but according to a report in The Hill Times, Transport Canada said that was not the case.
In January, a CBC News story exposed a lack of co-ordination between Transport Canada and security at Toronto’s Pearson International Airport when a top-secret ministerial security measure related to explosives was ordered for Pakistan International Airlines (PIA).
A security official at Pearson, who did not wish to be named for fear of losing his job, told CBC News the order was not handled in accordance with the airport authority's security protocols. A PIA representative also told CBC News that even though the order was directed at PIA, the airline was not told what the security concerns were, or that there was a ministerial order concerning its aircraft.
June will mark the 25th anniversary of the bombing of Air India flight 182. The pending report of Justice John Major on the findings of the Commission of Inquiry into the bombing is expected to comment at length about Canada’s co-ordination on threats to security.
Private sector
But critics say the intended changes will put too much responsibility in the hands of the private sector.
Some of the proposed changes call for airports and their tenants — caterers, cargo and de-icing companies — to "develop and implement … security programs."
Liberal Senator Colin Kenny said this places security interests behind business interests.
"You're biasing very strongly towards what — towards competitiveness. Because if you're coming from the bottom up, they don't like security."
Kenny is the former chairman of the Senate Standing Committee on National Security and Defence. He believes security improvements are desperately needed, but said turning to the private sector is the wrong first step.
"You don't ask a police officer on how best to market a product, and you shouldn't ask somebody who is marketing a product how best to secure it."
Whitaker agreed there is a danger in leaving security in the hands of airport tenants.
"On the one hand, security, and on the other hand, efficiency and sort of the profit motive and so on," he said.
If the intended amendments are implemented, Transport Canada would have to set clear requirements and enforce them, he added.
"Much of it will come down to how well in fact that the performance is evaluated," Whitaker said.
"The danger would be if they're setting this kind of a system up so that they're just kind of reducing their role and gearing down and saying we're kind of tuning out here because we can now leave it to these guys."
Transport Canada proposes it will approve the "programs as well as continue to inspect airports to ensure they comply with all requirements."
The 2006 report that inspired the proposed changes — called Flight Plan: Managing the Risks in Aviation Security — pushes for Transport Canada to move to Security Management Systems (SeMS), a program that allows the government to set security standards and make tenants, airports and the like attain them, their performance being assessed by Transport Canada.
A similar system, already regulating air carriers for ensuring proper maintenance and safety checks on aircraft, has been criticized for leaving too much responsibility in the hands of businesses, balancing both safety and their budgets.
Airport and tenant security programs are the first steps towards SeMS, or performance-based regulations, according to Flight Plan.
Whitaker said the shift to performance-based regulations is needed because the current regulations are too nonspecific and some airport security agencies in the country are being forced to adhere to counter-productive regulations.
"You start with Pearson, which is one of the biggest airports in the world, and you go down to some pretty small ones — and one size doesn't fit all in terms of how you manage security," he said.
Whitaker said the current regulatory framework is dangerous because of its inflexibility.
"One of the problems is that obviously the threat is evolving all the time. Terrorists are not stupid. They’re looking to see how the systems are operated and where they can find new vulnerabilities and develop new ways of beating the system and endangering it. And consequently, to draw up a set of security standards at one point in time and say. 'OK this is how you keep an airport secure' and then you keep on assessing how well they're doing simply by [checking] are they applying these rules? Well that lacks flexibility and means that you may in fact fall well behind the threat."
Transport Canada did not mention SeMS in its Notice of Intent, but said it's planning to allow airports "flexibility in how they will achieve the highest degree of security."
When CBC News asked the department in an email what its intentions were in regards to SeMS, it replied: "In consultation and partnership with industry, Transport Canada is in the early stages of exploring a Security Management System framework for aviation that would complement existing regulations."
Whatever framework the revamped regulations may take, both Whitaker and Kenny say there are two holes that exist in aviation security related to airport tenants: non-passengers in restricted areas, and cargo. Neither is directly addressed in the Notice of Intent.
Random screenings
Restricted area workers are subject to random screenings by the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority before they are allowed entry to a restricted area. But both Whitaker and Kenny say the random checks are deficient, and Flight Plan urges, "Non-passenger and vehicle screening should be used together with much more rigorous access control at Canada's major airports."
Kenny said non-passengers in secure areas are possibly putting travellers at risk.
"Doesn't it stand to reason that if there are people who are going to the very same planes that we're going to fly on, be checked to see what they're bringing in when they come to work as well? I don't see anything [in the Notice of Intent] that addresses that."
Whitaker too, sees a problem. Catering companies, taking food to gate-area restaurants and onto planes are not screened 100 per cent of the time. Using them as an example, he again points to co-ordination to make it work.
"They would have to have an appropriate program that says, 'here's what we're doing to ensure that nothing dangerous is in fact being brought through.' And [those procedures] would be approved by the airport and be ultimately approved by Transport Canada."
Kenny said that on a trip to Pearson airport last year with Transport and Infrastructure Minister John Baird, the pair witnessed first-hand a lack of security in cargo facilities.
"The only thing stopping something from going through is whether or not the individuals working there are honest or not."
Whitaker also criticized Transport Canada when it comes to cargo facilities.
"Air cargo is really a weak point and it's curious that it's been so poorly addressed. It's been poorly addressed and slowly addressed in this country and also in the U.S."
Should the proposed changes come to be, it should not be left to private companies to ensure cargo screening, Whitaker maintains.
"It has to come from Transport Canada itself in terms of clear and decisive rules as to how cargo is screened and how secure the facilities are in which the cargo is assembled and brought into the airports," he said.
Transport Canada also proposes revamping the structure and format of the regulations and increased transparency in certain confidential security measures. In an email to CBC News, the department said secrecy needs have changed.
"Transport Canada is evaluating whether certain confidential security measures could be made public without putting aviation security and the public at risk," the department said.
The Notice of Intent called for public opinions on the proposed changes, but the deadline for comment was April 28. Transport Canada said it received only a few submissions. There will be another chance to comment when specific amendments are published in the Canada Gazette later in the year.
No comments:
Post a Comment