This bill was last introduced in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session, which ended in September 2013.
Lisa Raitt Conservative
This bill has received Royal Assent and is now law.
This is from the published bill.
This enactment provides for the resumption and continuation of postal services and imposes a final offer selection process to resolve matters remaining in dispute between the parties.
All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from the Library of Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
The Chair NDP Denise Savoie
(Clause 10 agreed to)
[See list under Division No: 27]
(Yays: 158; Nays: 112)
(On Clause 11)
On Clause 11, there are several amendments. We will proceed with the amendment by the Liberals. For the sake of clarity, the reference is 5114336:
That Bill C-6, in Clause 11, be amended by deleting lines 19 to 36 on page 4.
The hon. member for Cape Breton—Canso on the amendment.
Rodger Cuzner Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
Yes, Madam Chair, that is lines 19 to 36 on page 4.
Our amendment addresses what has been talked about in several past amendments, the fact that final offer selection is of great concern. It is not a preferred way to go. Certainly the arbitrator will be handcuffed if the guiding principles in this legislation are held to.
When we see the reference to the arbitrator having to identify benefits that are consistent with those incomparable postal industries, that raises a flag, because there are no other comparable postal industries to Canada Post. It is unique in itself. There are private companies that provide very similar services, but they are not a national service provider. Certainly, if we are to apply that type of business model, then rural and remote areas that are not profitable will see no service. People in those areas will not be able to pay for the cost of those types of services. We are concerned that this compromise the unique nature of Canada Post.
As well, with respect to the short- and long-term viability of Canada Post, Canada Post has been a profitable corporation in recent years and we are not comfortable with that approach. We think it further handcuffs the arbitrator.
Finally, the taking the pension plan into account, as has been mentioned prior, we think what is at play is an obvious attack on defined benefits pensions in this country. This causes us great concern. That is the intent of our amendments and we would hope to seek support for those amendments.
Lisa Raitt ConservativeMinister of Labour
Madam Chair, we looked at the amendments that were presented by the then Liberal government in 1997, the guiding principles that were embedded in its back to work legislation for postal services. We actually improved on the language in order to ensure we had a decision in a short period of time that made sense to the parties. We also adjusted it to reflect the issues specifically in dispute with the parties today in recognizing how far apart they are, the viability and importance of Canada Post, as well as the importance and viability of the pension plan. The fact is it is the Canadian taxpayer who has the responsibility for any unfunded liabilities of the Canada Post pension plan.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
No.
Some hon. members
Agreed.
The Chair NDP Denise Savoie
I declare the amendment defeated.
(Amendment negatived)
The next amendment reads as follows:
That Bill C-6, in Clause 11, be amended by replacing lines 10 to 13 on page 4 with the following: “pute on that date; and”.
Debate, the hon. member for Windsor—Tecumseh.
The Chair NDP Denise Savoie
It is my understanding that the numbering is different in English and French.
Joe Comartin NDP Windsor—Tecumseh, ON
Madam Chair, I will propose that all four of these NDP amendments to clause 11 be dealt with at once.
Some hon. members
Agreed.