House of Commons photoWon her last election, in 2006, with 46% of the vote.
Rail Strike March 23rd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, the minister's special advisor passed on his opinion and advice on a regular basis as the situation evolved. I think he has done his best to bring the parties together and, as we speak, Mr. Fraser's mandate has not expired yet. Therefore, no report has been tabled so far.
Rail Transport March 23rd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I hope that both parties want to settle this dispute in the next hour. It is up to them to settle this dispute in the short term, thus precluding government action. However, if they cannot do so, we will have to assume our responsibility. This has enormous economic consequences from coast to coast; jobs are being lost across the country. It is our duty to act.
I urge the Bloc Quebecois to take a very realistic look at the situation and the jobs that are being lost.
Rail Transport March 23rd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, as Minister of Labour, I am very happy to see that the mediator in the Port of Montreal dispute has succeeded in bringing the parties to agree to a voluntary resumption of work, without any act of Parliament. I hope that the mediator will also help the parties negotiate a collective agreement and that we will not experience another work stoppage at the Port of Montreal.
As far as the railways are concerned, that phase is already over. We have already tried to reach an agreement with the parties. We went through several phases involving conciliation, a conciliation commissioner, Department of Labour officials and even the minister herself to help the parties reach an agreement. Unfortunately, this did not happen and we must now take action.
Maintenance Of Railway Operations Act, 1995 March 22nd, 1995
moved that Bill C-77, an act to provide for the maintenance of railway operations and subsidiary services, be read the second time and referred to a committee.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce the Maintenance of Railway Operations Act, 1995. The primary aim of this bill is to put an end to the work stoppage paralysing the railway industry and to permit the resumption of activities in this sector. The bill also provides a solution, through a mediation-arbitration process, to the matters remaining in dispute between the companies and various unions.
My colleagues in the House are certainly aware that a major disruption in Canadian railway operations can have grave consequences on various sectors of the economy and on the thousands of railway passengers.
I had hoped we could avoid such a measure, but the government hardly has a choice anymore. Government intervention in this dispute has become unavoidable. We would be lacking in our duty to the people of Canada if we allowed a work stoppage in the railway sector to threaten the stability of our economy and the jobs of the thousands of workers affected by this dispute.
During negotiations between the railway companies and the unions concerned, it became clear that because of the position taken by the employers that substantial cuts in labour costs were necessary, it would be a long and arduous process. To cut costs, the railway companies are seeking major concessions with respect to job security and more flexibility in the distribution of tasks.
Negotiations between the employers and the unions have been going on for more than a year, and in most cases, the parties were assisted by a conciliator and a conciliation commissioner. My predecessor, the Minister of Human Resources Development, appointed Mr. Allan Hope as conciliation commissioner for the purposes of collective bargaining on eleven agreements involving the three railway companies. The report prepared by the conciliation commissioner was transmitted to the parties on February 22, 1995. This report proposes ways to reach a final settlement on issues on which the parties have failed to agree.
As I said earlier, the issue of job security was central to the concerns of the employer during these negotiations. If we look at the situation in the three railway companies concerned by the bill before the House today, CN and VIA Rail have proposed a gradual phasing out of this benefit, while Canadian Pacific suggested restructuring the provisions on job security so as to restrict employee eligibility.
The unions expressed their frustration with the emphasis placed on this issue during the bargaining process and were quick to point out that, from their point of view, job security was an advantage that had been obtained through collective bargaining in return for various concessions and trade-offs. The representatives of the unions, who see this advantage as a way to protect employees against loss of employment due to structural and technological change, maintain that the employer wants to remove this protection at a time when the job security of their members is threatened.
On the other hand, agreements concluded recently by Canadian Pacific with three of the unions that represent smaller bargaining units within the company are a clear indication that the process can work. The three unions-the Transportation Communications International Union, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and the Rail Canada Traffic Controllers-managed to agree with the company on wage increases, conditions relating to job security and a number of improvements to social benefits.
I have tried to give hon. members a quick rundown on the events that have taken place so far and the situation we are now facing, despite assistance provided on a massive scale to the parties, in an attempt to avoid any disruption in railway transportation and its consequences for Canadian producers and manufacturers whose economic survival depends on this mode of transportation.
As hon. members may be aware, I met with representatives of the rail companies and the unions in Montreal on Sunday afternoon. At that meeting I acknowledged their efforts in attempting to achieve a resolution of their respective differences.
I expressed concern over the economic damage which was being inflicted on the Canadian business and agricultural sectors as a result of the work stoppages. I asked the parties to give the negotiation process one final push in order to achieve either tentative settlements of the issues in dispute, or agree on a binding process to solve their differences and avoid the need for legislated intervention on the part of the government.
Unfortunately the companies and the unions have failed to reach any type of agreement on these matters. We are left with no choice but to assume our responsibility to the Canadian public and bring this feud to a conclusion.
Mr. Speaker, the purpose of the bill entitled Maintenance of Railway Operations Act, 1995, is to ensure that railway and subsidiary services continue or are forthwith resumed at Canadian National, Canadian Pacific and VIA Rail.
With respect to the dispute resolution process, the bill before my hon. colleagues calls for a mediation-arbitration commission to be established in respect of each bargaining unit prescribed. Each commission shall consist of one representative appointed by the employer, one representative appointed by the union and a chairperson appointed by the Minister of Labour.
Within 70 days after its establishment or such longer period as the minister may allow, each commission must endeavour to mediate all the matters referred to it, then hear the parties on the matters on which it was unable to bring about an agreement and render an arbitration decision on these matters. It must also fix a date for the termination of the new collective agreement, which date may not be earlier than December 31, 1997.
To ensure that each commission carries out its mandate with impartiality, the bill requires each commission to be guided by the need for terms and conditions of employment that are consistent with the economic viability and competitiveness of a coast-to-coast rail system in both the short and the long term, taking into account the importance of good labour-management relations.
I am convinced that this bill will not make all parties involved happy, but I know that it provides for a dispute resolution process that is both fair and speedy. With this legislation, the government sends a clear message to the railway companies and the unions. It is telling them that, while believing in the collective bargaining process, it is not prepared to let work stoppages in the railway sector interfere with the normal operation of the Canadian economy. I urge all hon. members to support this position by ensuring that this bill is passed as quickly as possible.
Rail Strike March 22nd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member understands the parliamentary process, he knows that legislation must first go through various stages. Then we can discuss any amendment which he may propose.
Rail Strike March 22nd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, if the NDP gives its support to the legislation we can discuss that in debate.
Rail Transport March 22nd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I wonder who does not understand anything in this case. Negotiations have been under way for over a year in this matter. All the Bloc Quebecois can do is tell me to forget about results, offer to talk some more and ask for mediation.
This government wants to achieve results. We are currently facing a major crisis from coast to coast and the government has a responsibility to take action instead of simply talking and trying to avoid the real problems.
Rail Transport March 22nd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, let us look at the facts. We should try to stay neutral in this dispute-and I think that is what the government is trying to do-and avoid siding with either the unions or the employers. I think it is up to them to negotiate their collective agreements. We want the unions to participate in the collective bargaining process as well.
Let us be realistic: Kruger is closed, while Bécancour, Alcan and Petromont are in the process of shutting down. Let us do something, Mr. Speaker.
Rail Transport March 22nd, 1995
Mr. Speaker, Bloc members seem to be overlooking the whole process. Negotiations in this sector have been under way for over a year, first with a conciliator and then with a conciliation commissioner.
We stand before a fait accompli: Railway operations are completely paralyzed. This has a huge economic impact from coast to coast. Even in Quebec, more plants shut down today. I am asking the Bloc Quebecois to be a little more sensitive to Quebec's economy, if they are unable to be sensitive to Canada's economy.
Rail Transport March 21st, 1995
Mr. Speaker, I think the concerns raised by the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi are entirely appropriate. In the passenger transportation sector, more than 70,000 people in Montreal and Toronto had no commuter trains and at least 20,000 passengers had to do without the services of VIA Rail.
As for the shutdown of services at CN, we see its impact everywhere on our economy. Ford has already closed its plant in Ontario and wants to close two more. Movements of coal and grain have been reduced by half. Kruger Inc. in Trois-Rivières is closed. Pétromont in Varennes is closed. Alcan has also cut production. We are seeing a tremendous impact on the economy, even in Quebec, and the Bloc Quebecois is preventing us from passing this legislation.