Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act  Madam Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's intervention today and, more specifically, his support of this piece of legislation because I agree with him that it is the right thing to do. One of the really disconcerting parts of the previous legislation, Bill C-59 that was introduced by the previous Conservative government, was the fact that it stripped away the ability for federal employees to retain their sick days.

Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act  Madam Speaker, in the interest of the member helping his constituents get a pension, will he then support legislation that makes it easier for his constituents, those employees who do not have a pension, to unionize, so they have the ability to bargain collectively with their employer?

Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act  Madam Speaker, I listened to my colleague's intervention, and there was little substance that had to do with the issue at hand. In fact, this morning, all we have been hearing about from the other side of the House is Phoenix. We know the reality of the situation is that the previous Conservative government fired 700 compensation advisers whose direct jobs were responsible for what Phoenix was overtaking.

Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act  No, Madam Speaker, that is not the case, although that is the picture the Conservatives obviously would like to paint. In reality, what happened is that these 300 employees had already been assigned to new tasks and 400 people had been hired and moved into Miramichi where a new call centre was going to take this over.

Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act  Mr. Speaker, I am glad to hear that my colleague is in support of this piece of legislation. One of the things that Bill C-62 does, or attempts to undo, is with respect to a provision in Bill C-59 of the former government that actually went ahead and removed the ability to bank sick days from federal employees.

Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act  Mr. Speaker, my colleague touched on a whole host of issues. However, I would like to quickly address his comments with respect to Phoenix. The member talked about the fact that we were advised to dial back in January of 2016. However, the reality is that the previous Conservative government fired 700 compensation advisers throughout the public service.

National Defence  Mr. Speaker, last year I had the privilege to travel with the Standing Committee on National Defence to Latvia to witness the important work our women and men in uniform accomplish overseas as part of Operation Reassurance. I understand that new Canadian personnel have recently left for Latvia.

Salaries Act  Mr. Speaker, my colleague across the way is absolutely correct, and that is what this is all about. I had an interesting conversation with a family member over the weekend who was a provincial cabinet minister. I mentioned this debate to him and he seemed surprised to hear that all ministers at the federal level are not paid the same, because in Ontario provincial ministers are.

Salaries Act  Mr. Speaker, at the end of the day, and I touched on this in my speech, this is about making ministers equal. We are attempting, in this legislation, to address one of those technical details that was preventing that from happening before. If there is opportunity in the future to further fine-tune this and to make sure of any other technical requirements that need to be addressed, then I am sure the government will take the opportunity to do that.

Salaries Act  Mr. Speaker, I would love to hear your personal perspective on this at some point. To answer my colleague, that is what we do in this House. We review and amend legislation. That is what we are doing here today. That is what we do on an ongoing basis. Are we doing that now? Are we looking at the Salaries Act to properly reflect progressive changes that we are seeing with the government and with Parliament more generally?

Salaries Act  Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that question, because it goes to the heart of this. What this is all about is making sure that all ministries are treated equally. There are a variety of different issues that the government faces on a day-to-day basis, and there are different issues that are important to different people throughout the country at all times.

Salaries Act  Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise in the House today to speak in support of Bill C-24. This is my second opportunity to speak to this bill, and I take great pride in it, as it is one I wholeheartedly endorse. Assembling a cabinet is one of the first responsibilities of an incoming prime minister.

Salaries Act  Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for St. Catharines for his excellent speech. Perhaps the most disappointing part of it was when he said “in conclusion” towards the end, because I could have listened to that all day. The member touched on the efficiencies of this government and this cabinet.

Salaries Act  Mr. Speaker, for my colleague on the other side, I wish him the same merry Christmas and happy new year. I just want to touch on one part of his speech, particularly toward the end where he was talking about the openness and transparency of government and how he did not feel as though that was the case.

Salaries Act  Mr. Speaker, I have heard the member ask this question a number of times today. What I will say is that the minister of status of women has a full seat at the cabinet table, has the full ability to participate in the discussions, and her or his value, whoever it might be of the day, at least in this government, and is fully part of the decision-making process.