Q&A: Porter CEO Robert Deluce on his plans to vanquish the anti–Island airport faction
There’s been relative peace on the island due in part to the ban on jets. Recently you announced you’d made a conditional purchase of 30 jets for Billy Bishop airport. Why jets and why now?
Our customers keep telling us that they want destinations a little farther afield: Vancouver, L.A., Florida, Las Vegas, the Caribbean. We looked into ways we could do that without having to stop to refuel, and were delighted to discover the Bombardier CS100 whisper jet.
Not everyone’s so delighted. The pro-business crowd thinks you’re a deity, but lefties on council and the Island residents think you’re the antichrist.
I agree that we’ve stimulated a good debate. If you turned your recorder off, I’d even describe it in a different way. Many of our detractors don’t realize that every single destination Porter has gone to has resulted in substantial reductions in fares. So they’re paying less, even if they’re using another airline.
Some of the opposition stems from the way you presented the plan—as a fait accompli just a few signatures away. Do you regret the way you laid it out?
I never intended to present it that way. I wanted to lay out our plan and to respectfully request consideration from the city, the federal government and the Toronto Port Authority, which are the three signatories to the jet ban.
There are fears that living on the waterfront will become as attractive as living on the tarmac at Pearson. You don’t buy that argument.
No. The CS100 whisper jet is four times quieter than any other jet operating in its class. It’s comparable in terms of noise to the existing Q400 turboprops that we operate now. You’d need sound measuring equipment to notice any difference. And keep in mind: we’re not looking to open the door to all types of jets. We’re simply looking to amend the agreement to allow this type of jet.
You live in Rosedale. How would you feel if jets, state-of-the-art or otherwise, were constantly soaring over your neighbourhood?
If living on the waterfront were a possibility for me, I would.
What’s stopping you?
My wife and I are settled in Rosedale. We have our neighbours and our family, and we’re comfortable there. It’s tough to uproot. But what I mean is that the people who have chosen to live on the waterfront were probably attracted by its proximity to the airport.
And you think that proximity outweighs the drawbacks?
Absolutely.
You’ll also need to extend the runway by 168 metres at each end. Councillor Adam Vaughan says that amounts to “paving the lake.” What do you make of his concerns?
Inflammatory nonsense, designed for Adam’s purposes, and he knows it. We wouldn’t extend beyond the airport boundaries that exist today. Would the canoeist, kayaker or sailor who circumnavigates those buoys be impacted? Not at all.
How does the backlash over your latest announcements compare to the controversial days of 2003, when Porter was trying to launch?
Back then there’d be the odd cocktail party where somebody would take me to task. Luckily I have a thick skin and can withstand a little abuse. Today, no one’s conjuring up images of an evil empire. They know that it’ll never become a big airport, because it’s limited by geography.
Porter lost $44.5 million in its first four years of operation. Some think that if Porter were thriving financially, introducing jets wouldn’t be necessary.
Porter has been turning a profit for the last two years. In 2011 and 2012, we paid out profit-sharing to all of our team members.
Is there an IPO in the near future?
We don’t see any immediate need. That could change, but there are other ways to
handle expansion if need be—like jets.
You co-chaired a trade mission to Chicago with Rob Ford. How do you think he’s doing as mayor?
I’m impressed by how he’s managed to control costs and privatize garbage collection. There’s a lot of noise around him, but I don’t get too focused on it.
On to more pressing matters: do you have plans to change the complimentary beer policy?
No. That’s staying intact.
He likes how FOrd privatized garbage… Hmm no surprise, he is leaving his fuel handlers on strike and not willing to pay them more then 12 dollars an hour. Anti union buisness man who wants more money and doenst give a cra about his workers or you. Dont kid yourself
Wow! You need hip waders to wallow through this utter bullsh*t. “If living on the waterfront were a possibility for me, I would.” Please. Deluce thinks people chose to live along the waterfront because of the proximity to the airport? Delusional.
It is not Islanders who are leading the opposition to Deluce’s jet expansion at the Island Airport. It is people living along the Waterfront and particularly the people who live in Bathurst Quay Neighbourhood.
Yes, he is Deluce-ional!
“…but lefties on council and the Island residents think you’re the antichrist.”
This is a straw man argument. What about the tens of thousands of residents on the waterfront that are not lefties on council and that are not island residents?
The man talks about honesty and being transparent, but at a community forum held yesterday at the Harbourfront Community Centre, he resolutely refused to answer questions from the floor re: noise levels for the CS100 and he refused to discuss the fact that he has requested that his flight slots be increased from 170 flight slots to 220 flight slots. In fact he yelled at the audience!
The big issue here is about land use, which for the increase in the airport that he is requesting, is unacceptable to the 12.5 million annual visitors to the waterfront and the 1.5 million visitors to the Island. His request is way past the tipping point of what is acceptable. Everyone should see what footprint the airport and marine exclusion zone will be once Transport Canada mandated changes are put in place. Truely unbelievable.
It is unacceptable for the three parties to the current tripartite agreement, which is in place until 2033, to support one man’s ambition versus the dwellers and visitors of (and to) the waterfront (and Island).
The real issue here is that Deluce is trying to pretty up his current dog of an airline, increase its capacity and then sell it to the highest bidder so he and his investors can recoup their losses (to date).
No jets at Billy Bishop Airport!
Bill, I agree. Porter and its paid lobbyists are trying to frame this as an islander’s squatter’s issue, which is but just the tip of the iceberg.
How much advertising would I have to send Toronto Life to get a puff piece like this?
hmmmmm.. I’ve lived at Bathurst and Queens Quay for 24 years. I sure as hell did not move down here because of the airport. I moved down here to be close to the water. I have no idea how my area can be compared to Rosedale but ok. If people want to fly to the Caribbean, then go to firiggin Pearson. All the Porter flights are pretty much empty anyway, Deluce just wants more money in his pocket. He doesn’t give a crap about anybody but himself and his rich buddies
I am shocked by the one sided untruthful nonsense that you are printing now.
I am neither lefty nor Bathurst Quay resident but chose to speak out to protect our beautiful waterfront from one greedy company. If Deluce wants jets, he can fly them over his home in Rosedale but the 12 million visitors a year to the waterfront want respect for the gem of Toronto. On his next trip to Chicago, he should check out the lovely park where their once mayor Daley, destroyed their waterfront airport for something more user friendly and vibrant! Chicago still thrives and so will Toronto!
The turboprops that Deluce is now using are so loud that if you are in the Music Garden for a concert and the wind is from the south or west (which is typical) and a Q400 is taxiing or taking off or doing an engine run-up you cannot hear the concert or speak with your neighbour at that time. Heaven help us if that is the volume of a whisper jet. The meaning of whisper is not what it used to be in fact it’s been turned on its head. This is a good example of double-speak from Deluce, always promoting never honest.
Ask Robert Deluce about his back-up plan. He will tell you he doesn’t have one! (Winnipeg Free Press 04/11/13). To say that he never intended to present the plan as a fait accompli is untruthful. Everything Deluce says and does is deliberate and calculated to his advantage. No back-up plan = corporate arrogance.
people who do not live near the waterfront have no voice in this. They are not affected and the people living on the waterfront/islands are. no-where in the world there is an airport like this. why? because everywhere else people recognize the danger. studies abound, showing that there is an increase of 10 to 20% in heart-decease when one lives in the flightpath of an airport (English study on 1.3 million people). with billy bishop, the neighbourhood is the airport. noise, air-pollution, discharge. the question is, what mayor would ok an airport that endangers his citizens? an irresponsible one. than there is the 9/11 factor; to ensure safety for all, the harbour front will have to turn onto a well secured place, leaving no room for the plans to revitalize the waterfront (on which one billion is spent) thereby, what’s with the tunnel to the airport paid for by tax-payers (80 million), and the fact that the leased land of billy bishop has tax owing of 50 million plus in unpaid tax?