A former security guard said Wednesday he believes Air India Flight 182 left Montreal without a full baggage search because airline officials decided it would be too costly to keep the plane on the ground.

Daniel Lalonde worked with Corrections Canada before joining the OPP.
(CBC)

Daniel Lalonde, who worked for the private firm Burns Security at Mirabel airport the night the doomed flight left Canada, said he remembers a conversation involving an Air India official named John and an official from either Air Canada or Transport Canada.

Lalonde, who was 18 years old at the time of the June 1985 disaster, said the conversation took place after three suspicious bags destined for the flight had been identified, which should have triggered a search of all bags.

While Lalonde said he doesn't remember the exact wording of the conversation, he said he recalls what it was about.

"Essentially, the conversation had to do with time and money and how much it cost for a flight to be kept on the ground," said Lalonde, who is now an Ontario Provincial Police sergeant.

"I think … the money or cost of keeping the plane on the tarmac was very high and pretty much … they decided to send the plane because of that factor."

Flight 182 stopped in Montreal after leaving Toronto, headed for London's Heathrow Airport and then India. The explosives — allegedly planted by Sikh extremists in luggage that was loaded in Vancouver — exploded off the west coast of Ireland and killed 329 people on board, mostly Canadians.

Norm Boxall, a lawyer for the families of the Air India victims, said it's the first time he's heard hard evidence that cost was a factor in letting the plane leave Montreal.

"Human lives are nothing compared to the money," said Usha Sharma, relative of an Air India victim.

Air India official checks bags

Lalonde said when he arrived at Mirabel in the late afternoon or early evening of June 22, there were more RCMP or police than usual. He said his Burns co-workers, used by Air India to screen its baggage, believed there was some kind of higher alert, but hadn't received any specific warnings.

Mark Freiman, the lead lawyer for the commission, later introduced an RCMP document noting that at Air India's request, the security level had been increased to Level 4 that evening. The second-highest airline security level, it requires baggage searches and the use of explosives-sniffing dogs.

Retired Supreme Court judge John Major is heading the inquiry into the disaster.
(CBC)

Lalonde said he was helping to process checked luggage through a large X-ray machine when the three suspicious bags were noted. They appeared to show wires or circuitry, he said.

That's when a tall, large man wearing a fez hat, who identified himself as John from Air India, arrived to examine the bags, said Lalonde. He said the bags should not be loaded on the flight and asked to speak with officials from Transport Canada or Air Canada, said Lalonde.

"My understanding is he was making decisions on what was going on with the plane," he said.

Freiman later read a CSIS report, which included a statement from Air India security head John D'Souza, who has since died. In the report, D'Souza, who was on the flight from Toronto to Montreal, wrote that he instructed a "Mr. Daniel" to remove the suspicious suitcases.

In it, D'Souza made no reference to cost issues, but did acknowledge he decided not to hold the flight or to recall it once it was in the air.

Left out of earlier statement

Lalonde said he was instructed to take the suitcases to an isolated part of the airport for further examination and then on to an explosives facility.

His testimony on Wednesday differs from his official statement provided to RCMP and lawyers for Burns Security within days of the disaster, in which he said he didn't pay any attention to the conversation.

Lalonde said he deliberately decided not to put it in his 1985 statement, suggesting he was intimidated by the presence of the two lawyers and two RCMP officers, who he said grew impatient during the interview.

He said he decided to come forward after hearing recent public testimony, including revelations from a former Quebec police dog handler who said he didn't get a chance to check the flight because it left before he got to the airport.

"I was trying to be helpful and clarify, if it was pertinent," said Lalonde.

The flight had been cleared for takeoff in Montreal even though the baggage screening system at Toronto's Pearson airport had broken down and a bomb-sniffing dog and his handler were still on their way.

No RCMP bomb-sniffing dog was on duty at Toronto's airport because all of the force's dogs and their handlers were at a course, the inquiry heard Tuesday.

No hand searches were conducted. In addition, an X-ray machine broke down and Burns Security had to resort to an electronic sniffer — called a PD4 — that had failed its initial explosives-detection test.

Bags properly screened: Air India

Gary Clarke, a former RCMP airport security chief, testified Tuesday that there was no doubt the threat level at that time was high.

"We all knew that this threat assessment was high. We knew there was a severe danger," he said.

But Clarke added that cost is always an issue.

"I mentioned this before that when an airline is operating, they only make money when the airplane is in the air," he told the inquiry.

A lawyer for Air India told CBC News Tuesday that the airline never even considered delaying the flight because she said the bags were adequately screened.

"Certainly a high-security flight but there was no specific threat and there was never any intention of holding the flight in Montreal or having a dog sniff the flight or anything other than the three suspicious bags," Carol McCall said.

Air India's position is that the bags were checked with hand-held bomb sniffers when the X-ray machine broke down.

With files from the Canadian Press