Bill C-6 (Historical)

Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act

An Act to provide for the resumption and continuation of postal services

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.

Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague for her wonderful comments this morning. It has been so amazing to hear the very passionate speeches taking place about the principles that are at stake here and how people tackle these different principles. I notice that she spoke about the two tiers of salaries that were tabled by the employer and she also spoke about the next generation.

I wonder if the member could comment more about what a living wage or a decent wage is for a family. It seems unfair that the employer could tell employees because they are new and younger, they would therefore get less money. As someone who represents the younger generation, how does she feel about the fact that because a person is a new employee or is younger, he or she would get a lower wage?

[Rosane Doré Lefebvre, NDP, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her very relevant question.

It is easy for me to imagine what it would be like for someone who went to work at Canada Post after the labour dispute and was subject to this two tier system. There are two people who do the exact same job, but do not have the same salary or benefits. Someone who was hired one month before me could retire five years earlier and would have more money in his pockets to support his family. That is completely unacceptable. We are doing exactly the same job. Equal pay for equal working conditions. That is all I have to say.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would like to remind my colleagues in the House that it was a certain member who said, in Montreal in 1997, “In terms of the unemployed of which we have over 1.5 million, don't feel particularly bad for these people”. Who said that? It was our present Prime Minister who quit his job as a member of this House because he felt he would better serve at the National Citizens Coalition where he ran the campaign to deunionize Canadian workforces.

We see the Conservatives today pretending they have the interests of the workers in hand. We have the old crocodile who has dressed himself as Little Bo Peep, and he has his bonnet pulled down over his snout to try to hide his true intention. However, if we pull the bonnet back, we will see the same dismissive attitude and the same arrogance against common working people on these benches today that we heard in 1997.

I would like to ask my hon. colleague what she thinks about the Prime Minister's dismissive attitude towards working people.

[The Deputy Speaker, Denise Savoie]

The hon. member for Alfred-Pellan has roughly 40 seconds to answer that question.

[Rosane Doré Lefebvre, NDP, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Madam Speaker, there is currently a real lack of respect for the workers, first with the lockout and now with this back-to-work legislation. It is absolutely unacceptable. There are other ways to handle this.

We truly advocate teamwork. We are prepared to negotiate with the government in order to come up with a better way to settle the current dispute at Canada Post.

[Jonathan Tremblay, NDP, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

Mr. Speaker, like many of the MPs in the government, I too have been inundated, not with complaints, but with words of encouragement to continue our opposition to this interventionist bill.

Do the members opposite realize that their party is interventionist? The party that advocates individual and economic free enterprise at the expense of everything else is being interventionist, but not just anywhere. It is being interventionist for the sake of personal and political interests. The government is controlling workers, not companies. We are not naive. There have been other special bills like this before, but not when the Internet was in every home. Today, we can make payments by phone or by Internet. If anyone is left out, they can call their MP and people who can help them out. As others mentioned earlier, the most important cheques were being delivered. As I was saying, we are not naive. An agreement was reached between senior government officials and Canada Post to impose a lockout in order to introduce a special bill to reduce working conditions and force Canada Post employees back to work under lesser conditions.

I was listening to the radio this morning. Economists and sociologists were unanimous on this. I hope that certain people realize that their position is increasingly being challenged. The government can admit its mistake. We are prepared to work with the government to come up with a special bill that will suit all Canadians. The government would come under less criticism than if it continues on its current course. Once again, I am reaching out. I hope the government will listen to us and take our considerations and public opinion into account.

People back home fear that the current government's attitude will become more widespread and that the government will take away the fundamental rights of workers in Canada who contribute to the economy, which would not be viable if 75% of the population did not contribute to the tax base. I would like the minister to explain how she plans to deal with the potential loss of many high-quality jobs in our regions.

What do I tell the people in the various towns in my riding? They are fighting to keep their post office. The post offices are in part the heart of these villages. What do I tell people at Château Mont Ste-Anne who are currently locked out? Do I tell them to go back to minimum wage? What do I tell the AbitibiBowater retirees and workers who are worried about their pension funds? Do I tell them to go back to work until they are 70? They have paid into their pension all their life.

What do I tell the young workers in my riding and young Canadian workers? I myself am a young man. Do I tell them that they will have to work until the end of their days without security? Canadians have rights.

Is the government prepared to change its mind to suggest negotiation opportunities without flouting the workers' rights? Could this interventionist government work with us and listen to us to help Canadian workers? Could this interventionist government step back, reflect and admit its mistake?

I am reaching out. The entire NDP is reaching out. We can make other proposals for the good of the workers.

[Colin Carrie, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health]

Madam Speaker, my colleague said they are not naive on his side. After listening to his speech, I would put forward they are very naive. I would ask any member of the NDP who has run a business, met a payroll, and had to work with the postal service to run their business to stand up and let us know.

I am sitting next to my colleague, the newly elected member for Brampton. He runs a manufacturing business and needs cheques to come in before he can put cheques out to pay his employees. This is the type of small Canadian business that is being affected by this.

These two parties cannot make an agreement. They have to get this resolved. We are trying to get it resolved in the best way for both parties.

How long is the NDP going to allow these two parties to hold Canadians hostage? How long are they going to let that happen?

[Jonathan Tremblay, NDP, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

Madam Speaker, with all due respect to my colleague, I do not think that he understood my message.

I have another proposal to make: remove the locks. That way, our colleague will have his cheque, and all the entrepreneurs will have their cheques and their papers.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, the member indicated the New Democrats are reaching out to the government. He is not the first one to make reference to the fact that they apparently have a series of amendments they would like to bring forward. I know the member is concerned about the postal workers and wants to see what it is they are referring to.

Can you explain to me why there is a need to hold back on sharing that information with members of the chamber? What is it the NDP are in fact looking at that could possibly assist us in trying to draw this thing to a conclusion in which we would find more people being able to have a discussion?

[The Deputy Speaker, Denise Savoie]

On a point of order, the hon. member for Timmins—James Bay.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am sure my hon. colleague is well meaning in his question. What concerns me is if we are going to have fair bargaining, and we are attempting to bargain with the government, then we would be undermining our ability to build trust with the government by asking our members to reveal what those negotiations are.

[The Deputy Speaker, Denise Savoie]

I believe this is a question of debate.

I will ask the hon. member for Winnipeg North to complete his question very quickly.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, based on that point of order, I can assure the member that stood on the point of order that I likely have more confidence in the new member than I do in the member who has the experience.

Why not share with Canadians what it is the New Democrats are talking about so that we could actually have an engagement on that discussion? We might be able then to—

[The Deputy Speaker, Denise Savoie]

Order, please.

I would like to give the hon. member time to respond.

[Jonathan Tremblay, NDP, Montmorency—Charlevoix—Haute-Côte-Nord, QC]

Mr. Speaker, what I can say is that there are a great many possibilities. For example, we can keep the current collective agreement.

With the unanimous consent of the House, we can do what we want. If we decided together to amend the special bill with the unanimous consent of the House, we could leave in two hours, and it would be done.