Can I have a copy of that for my folks?
Lost her last election, in 2006, with 39% of the vote.
The Budget March 30th, 2004
Can I have a copy of that for my folks?
Justice March 8th, 2004
Mr. Speaker, today across Canada we are joining with friends around the world in celebrating International Women's Day.
Could the Minister of Justice tell the House what he is doing to help protect women who are innocent victims in such dreadful things as international sex trade transgressions and trafficking?
Contraventions Act February 24th, 2004
I will be voting no, Mr. Speaker.
Final Offer Arbitration in Respect of West Coast Ports Operations Act February 16th, 2004
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to join in this debate on Bill C-312. The bill proposes that the Minister of Labour be given the power to impose severe constraints on the use of the collective bargaining process in Canada's west coast ports. The impact of this bill's passage would be to take away the right to strike, as well as the employer's right to lock out employees, and then to impose a winner takes all settlement process from the outside.
I do not support this bill. Its provisions are contrary to the principles of the Canada Labour Code and it fails to provide the flexibility needed to deal with the kind of complex labour negotiations that are typical in Canada's west coast ports. For example, clause 4 of the bill states that:
Notwithstanding the provisions of the Canada Labour Code, where the Minister is of the opinion that a strike or lockout in a west coast port poses an immediate and substantial threat to the economy of Canada, or to the national interest, the Minister may, by order,
(a) suspend the right to strike or lockout in that port; and
(b) when a strike or lockout has occurred, direct the employer to resume operations and the employees to return to work, as the case may be.
Clause 5 of the bill provides that when such an order is issued, the minister shall also give notice that “the dispute is to be settled” by a process known as “final offer arbitration”, or what is also called final offer selection. These are strong powers and they are not consistent with the spirit of the Canada Labour Code or the tradition of labour negotiations that has evolved in Canada over the years.
The Minister of Labour has said on many occasions that the best way to settle workplace disputes is to encourage the parties to find the solution that best meets their particular needs. The minister can facilitate this approach by providing a conciliator or a mediator, for example, but the objective aims to help the parties toward a shared solution, not to impose one from the outside. Experience shows that this approach works. In recent years, 95% of workplace disputes under the Canada Labour Code have been resolved without a work stoppage. It is not always easy to keep operations going while working toward a negotiated settlement, but clearly it is possible.
Our position maintains that the role of the Minister of Labour should not be to impose solutions in cases of labour disputes, and especially not to impose a process that would pick one side or the other in a dispute such as this bill proposes to do.
Instead, the minister's role should be to provide the kind of support that will move the parties toward a negotiated solution, such as the Minister of Labour provided in a recent case in west coast ports.
In the case of the Waterfront Foremen Employers Association of British Columbia and the International Longshore and Warehouse Union, Local 514, for example, a mediator appointed by the Minister of Labour was able to help the two sides come to a settlement in a long-standing dispute late last year.
Earlier in 2003, the B.C. Maritime Employers Association and the International Longshore and Warehouse Union resolved the renewal of their collective agreement in direct negotiations.
Complex negotiations like these call for flexibility in arriving at solutions that meet the needs of both employers and employees.
The final offer selection approach proposed in Bill C-312 would remove that flexibility and instead impose an arbitrary solution that would favour one side over the other. We do not believe the final offer selection approach is the right one for complex labour negotiations such as those involving the west coast ports.
Now let us examine more closely the final offer selection process. Typically, final offer selection requires one party to prepare a final offer for resolution of all outstanding issues in a dispute. The two sides then submit their final offer to an arbitrator or selector. The selector is then required to choose the complete package from one side or the other, either the union's final offer or the employer's.
There could be variations in the process, but the model is based on the selector being obliged to choose the final proposed solution of one party or another. This approach might have some merit in cases where there is only a single economic issue, such as wages, for example.
However, most labour negotiations involve more than a single issue. The issues involved usually go well beyond wages and can include a broad range of matters such as work rules, vacation entitlements, pensions and so on. Negotiating a settlement in situations like this can be tricky. There is usually a lot of back and forth negotiation involved. Flexibility remains a very important aspect of the process.
In the recent cases involving west coast ports, for example, agreements were achieved because a federal employment mediator was able to go in and work with the parties to find common ground and then build from there to find an eventual solution. In cases like this wages may be only one of the issues that come up, but wages are not the most important in some cases.
Final offer selection by definition must pick one side over the other, and it does not allow for negotiations and compromise between parties. In other words, it sets up a process that prevents the trade-off between parties that can be key to achieving overall agreement. In addition, by setting up a process whereby one side in a dispute puts forth its final bargaining position and an arbitrator picks one over the other, the final offer selection approach creates a scenario where there is a clear winner and a clear loser. That is not usually a good recipe for harmonious workplace relations in a post-settlement period.
I understand the frustration that comes when workplace disputes threaten the economic lives of others, but I do not believe that final offer selection is the way to resolve these situations. In recent workplace experience, Canada's west coast ports achieved a mediation by working together, by one party working with the other to resolve their disputes. Adopting the final offer selection approach would divert us from this tried and true method to dispute labour resolution. This is at the very heart of the Canada Labour Code.
Does it mean that we would deny employers and employees the right to choose final offer selection if they believe it is right for them? No. In fact that option is available to them now. However, as a matter of practical experience, it is rarely used. The fact that parties themselves choose to settle the terms and conditions of work through some process other than final offer selection, when it is an option available to them to choose freely, suggests to us that there is something wrong about the final offer selection that does not meet the needs in terms of an acceptable bargaining process.
The House has considered the issue of mandatory final offer selection before. It seems that these ideas are often brought forward with regard to a particular workplace dispute, but these ideas do not usually develop any momentum in the long run, especially if a negotiated settlement is achieved through using our existing bargaining system.
On the issue of final offer selection, the government's position has been consistent. We do not deny any employer or employee group the right to choose final offer selection if it feels it meets its needs, but I do not see an approach that should be mandated under the Canada Labour Code as desirable. Therefore, I do not support the bill.
Literacy October 23rd, 2003
Mr. Speaker, literacy skills are linked to work skills, health and self-esteem and play a key role in ensuring that Canada continues to be productive, competitive and economically secure. Today is Literacy Action Day and we know that far too many Canadians still do not have the literacy skills they need.
Could the Minister of Human Resources Development tell the House how the government is addressing this critical issue?
Breast Cancer Research October 6th, 2003
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to inform the House and all Canadians that October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month.
Yesterday, across Canada, over 160,000 Canadians took part in the CIBC Run for the Cure, raising an unprecedented $17 million for breast cancer research.
Breast cancer is a major health problem for women in Canada. It is estimated that over 21,000 new breast cancer cases will be diagnosed this year and 5,300 women will die from this disease.
The federal government is concerned about the physical and emotional impact this disease has on Canadians and has a longstanding commitment to the Canadian breast cancer initiative which focuses on: prevention; early detection; surveillance and monitoring; enhanced quality approaches to breast cancer diagnosis, treatment and care; community capacity building; and research.
We are continuing to reduce the number of new cases of breast cancer, to improve the quality of life for those affected by the disease and to decrease the number of deaths it causes.
I encourage my fellow members of Parliament and all Canadians to support breast cancer awareness.
Monument to Canadian Fallen September 29th, 2003
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, in a moving and dignified ceremony, an echo copy, a replica of the Monument to Canadian Fallen that stands in the United Nations Memorial Cemetery in Busan, Korea was unveiled here in Ottawa. This monument pays tribute to the over 30,000 Canadians who fought in Korea to protect justice, democracy and peace.
This monument is one of peace. The Canadian volunteer soldier depicted holds no weapon. He carries a small Korean girl in one arm and guides a Korean boy with his other hand. At the base of this bronze monument are the names of the 516 Canadians who lost their lives in Korean service.
This monument serves as a tribute to those who fought and those who gave their lives so that others would be free.
On behalf of the House and all Canadians, I am honoured to thank all the Canadian soldiers and their families for their immeasurable sacrifice.
Housing September 23rd, 2003
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Canada has signed $680 million worth of agreements with the provinces to provide Canadians with affordable housing.
Would the secretary of state responsible for Canada Mortgage and House Corporation advise the House if the provinces have made any headway. Is any progress being made on the delivery of this much needed housing?
Committees of the House June 12th, 2003
Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the third report of the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, entitled “Raising Adult Literacy Skills: The Need for a Pan-Canadian Response”.
The committee is extremely concerned that 40% of working age Canadians lack the necessary literacy skills required for successful participation in our rapidly changing workforce. We have tabled a report with 21 recommendations that we hope will address this.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank the clerk, Danielle Bélisle, and our outstanding researchers, Chantal Collin and Kevin Kerr.
I also would like to table the fourth report of the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, entitled “Building a Brighter Future for Urban Aboriginal Children”. The chair of the subcommittee, the hon. member for Don Valley West, has worked extremely hard. He and his committee have eight recommendations that hope to address the concerns of urban aboriginal children.
Finally, I have the honour to table the fifth report of the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, entitled “Listening to Canadians: A First View of the Future of the Canada Pension Plan Disability Program”. The member for St. Paul's and her committee have done an outstanding job with their e-consultation and I know the House would like to congratulate all the people involved.
Health June 10th, 2003
Mr. Speaker, the troubling news that SARS may have spread east of Toronto to the dialysis unit at Lakeridge Health in Whitby is of considerable concern to all public health officials and to the residents of Whitby and Durham in particular.
Could the Minister of Health tell the House what measures she and her department are taking to assist Ontario health officials in determining the origin of this potential new SARS cluster?
Are there any additional federal resources available to the Greater Toronto Area, including the region of Durham, to battle and contain this outbreak?