The Press recently praised Ministers Pierre Fitzgibbon and François-Philippe Champagne for their harmonized and complementary efforts to promote the country’s aviation industry at the Farnborough Air Show. I am also among those who believe that we are lucky to be able to count on these two competent, determined and hyperactive ministers to promote the country’s economy on the international scene. But are they hitting the right nail?
Posted yesterday at 11:00 a.m.
There is no doubt that Canada and Quebec in particular are recognized worldwide for their know-how in aeronautics. Already in 1969, Canada was the first country to set foot on the Moon with the famous moon landing gear made by Héroux Machine Parts Limited (now Héroux-Devtek), in Longueuil. And what about the Avro Arrow? Yes, our aerospace industry has successes worthy of our pride.
Unfortunately, thinking about it a bit, a question should come to mind.
Wouldn’t it be worthwhile for the two ministers to redirect their combined efforts towards the eco-responsibility of the aeronautical industry rather than its simple growth?
In fact, if our companies succeeded in selling more parts, or even entire aircraft, it means that carriers would fly more. And if that were the case, it’s because we, travelers, want more!
However, a recent study carried out by the University of Leeds, in the United Kingdom, and mentioned by The Press in the wake of the publication of the IPCC report in the spring, highlighted the essential changes to the Western way of life to reduce GHG emissions. Among the solutions, there was this one: people must take the plane for a short flight (three hours or less) at most once every three years, and at most once every eight years for a long flight.
By limiting ourselves in this way, we would have to forget the growth of the sector, such as refusing the development of the Montreal–Saint-Hubert airport in Longueuil, which wants to attract large carriers and offer inexpensive flights. This renunciation is essential, even vital, but unfortunately will not be done without negative repercussions in the aeronautics sector.
Yet, if many of us decry Alberta’s oil industry and want it to convert to cleaner energy, why do we want the unlimited growth of our aerospace industry? Why isn’t the enthusiasm of our ministers directed more towards the eco-responsibility of our flagship? If they are serious about the fight against climate change, why don’t our governments instead try to kill several birds with one stone: finance the energy transition in aeronautics and the research and development that underpins it, impose a carbon budget or eco-taxation measures on carriers, help workers who would be affected by this transition and, until this is achieved, make travelers aware of the importance of doing violence to themselves by curbing their tourism ambitions?
So it’s up to us.
First and foremost, the ball is in our court, we travellers. Waiting for government action no longer holds up, like waiting for its action in other sectors, moreover, which also deserve a conversion. Too little, too late. We ourselves have to painfully renounce certain pleasures. It seems to me that giving up air travel would be one of those.