Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act

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

This bill was last introduced in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session, which ended in September 2013.

Sponsor

Lisa Raitt  Conservative

Status

This bill has received Royal Assent and is now law.

Summary

This is from the published bill. The Library of Parliament often publishes better independent summaries.

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.

Elsewhere

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.

Votes

June 23, 2011 Passed That the Bill be now read a third time and do pass.
June 23, 2011 Passed That Bill C-6, An Act to provide for the resumption and continuation of postal services, be concurred in at report stage.
June 23, 2011 Passed That the Bill be now read a second time and referred to a Committee of the Whole.
June 23, 2011 Passed That this question be now put.

Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

June 25th, 2011 / 5:25 a.m.
See context

NDP

Robert Aubin NDP Trois-Rivières, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my honourable colleague for his friendship. It was short-lived. First it was friend, then colleague, but perhaps we may develop it over the years.

Quite simply, perhaps I was not understood. Maybe it is the language barrier. Not only have the parties not agreed so far, but I can also predict that they will never agree, as long as the fight is unbalanced, two against one. If you really want to resolve the economic problems of your small- and medium-sized businesses very quickly, end the lock out.

Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

June 25th, 2011 / 5:25 a.m.
See context

NDP

Ève Péclet NDP La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague for his speech. What I am seeing here is a government that, since its budget was adopted, is cutting, cutting and cutting public services. It is cutting pensions. It is making cuts everywhere.

I would like my colleague to comment on that. It is as if the government has seized this opportunity. Actually, we have known for a very long time that it wishes to make cuts to the public postal services. For a long time, post offices in the regions have been lacking funding. It is as if the government is taking advantage of the strike just to try to get around the rules and make cuts to postal services using special legislation.

I would like my colleague to comment on the true intentions of the government, which is accusing us of wanting to hide things from Canadians. Instead, I think that it is the government that is trying to hide things from Canadians.

Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

June 25th, 2011 / 5:25 a.m.
See context

NDP

Robert Aubin NDP Trois-Rivières, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his very relevant question; to me, the answer is quite simple. In this House are two ideologies that are far apart. The party in power, the government, believes in the economy and in money as it believes in God. I quite like money too, not for what it is but for what it allows us to do. That is the difference on this side. We want to create wealth so that we can then better distribute it for the benefit of each and every Canadian.

Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

June 25th, 2011 / 5:25 a.m.
See context

Conservative

John Weston Conservative West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC

Mr. Speaker, I have to commend my colleague. At 5:30 in the morning, I think he is still doing a pretty good job. However, I have a question.

In the world of labour relations, if somebody is given impossible conditions by an employer, he or she may leave. It is called “constructive dismissal”. If someone is on rotating strikes and precipitates a lockout, similarly it is the responsibility of the union, not the employer, that brings about the ultimate division between the two. Could the member comment on that?

Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

June 25th, 2011 / 5:25 a.m.
See context

NDP

Robert Aubin NDP Trois-Rivières, QC

Mr. Speaker, I will be brief.

There is only one way for everyone to win; that is when two parties can negotiate with no interference from a third party, in the context of a strong, fair and equitable balance of power.

Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

June 25th, 2011 / 5:25 a.m.
See context

NDP

Peter Julian NDP Burnaby—New Westminster, BC

Mr. Speaker, when the hon. member began his remarks, I noticed that it was 5:15 a.m. It is now 5:29 a.m. So it seems to me that his question period has been cut a little short. The hon. member actually has a minute left to answer questions.

I would just like to ask you that you always keep your eye on the clock so that we can make our points and, of course, answer questions. At some stage, we would really like the Conservatives to rise to defend their position. We fondly hope that they will be able to do so, and, as we do so ourselves, that we will always have the full 15 minutes to which we are entitled.

Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

June 25th, 2011 / 5:30 a.m.
See context

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

I am not sure which of the clocks the hon. member was regarding, but certainly on the digital clock that the chair occupants have the opportunity to view, we indeed went about 30 seconds beyond the time that was allocated. We try to do our best to be judicious and fair in all respects.

Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

June 25th, 2011 / 5:30 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Denis Coderre Liberal Bourassa, QC

Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member for Burnaby—New Westminster takes too much time, he is the one using up all the time. With his long points of order, he is preventing his own colleague from being able to answer questions. I had questions I wanted to ask and I am very disappointed.

Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

June 25th, 2011 / 5:30 a.m.
See context

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Bruce Stanton

I think the matter is resolved sufficiently. We will continue with debate. We will resume debate with the hon. member for Abitibi—Témiscamingue.

Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

June 25th, 2011 / 5:30 a.m.
See context

NDP

Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

Mr. Speaker, I have decided to speak once again as part of the debate on the back to work legislation for Canada Post employees because what is going on here is very important. We are about to take a step that should never be taken by any rightful government.

At no time should a government decide to so shamefully violate the rights of workers, when there is the simple solution of removing the locks and putting an end to the lockout. If this government had done what it should have done from the beginning of the dispute, which is put an end to the lockout and allow Canada Post workers to continue to work, we never would have needed this bill, and mail service would not have been suspended for Canadians and Canadian businesses.

But no, the government would rather introduce legislation that mocks the workers of this country, that violates workers' rights, that imposes working conditions that are worse than what was offered by the employer. The government would rather set our country back, even though we have always been proactive about the rights of our citizens.

For three and a half years, I wore the Canadian flag on one of my shoulders, in both red and white and in green camouflage. What is important is that I was always proud of this flag and what it represents.

Every time I travelled abroad, in Europe or in Africa, when I was asked to talk about my country, I was proud to do so because this country has always respected and promoted the fundamental rights of its citizens. I talked about all the battles Canadians had to fight to improve our standard of living.

I honestly believe that there is nowhere better than here, this land where I grew up. And I would want nothing else for my future children.

That is why I urge my colleagues from all parties in this House to look past their partisan quarrels, because what is going on here is much bigger than that. Not only the workers of Canada Post, but all workers in Canada will suffer the consequences, and the dignity of our country will be undermined.

When this government so shamefully shows that it can side with the employer in a dispute, it does not just hurt the postal workers, but the entire political institution all of us here represent.

We are not talking about overpaid employees with obscene benefits, as some would have us believe; we are talking about men and women who work hard, who have average salaries, who work irregular schedules at the start of their career which quite often does not allow them to enjoy their family life, and whose working conditions sometime cause their health to suffer. We are talking about most Canadian families who work every day for this country.

Let us talk a little bit about the working conditions of Canada Post workers. Some of you may recall the election campaign that started in 2005 and ended in January 2006, in the middle of winter and during the holidays. Most of you who campaigned at the time probably went door to door. Was it not terrible to walk knee-deep in snow, go up icy steps and deal with the freezing cold conditions?

We do not often have to campaign in the middle of winter, but Canada Post employees have to face the winter every year and not just for the duration of an election campaign. They cannot take a coffee break to warm up when it is too cold outside. People do not invite postal workers into their homes to let them warm up and to encourage them to carry on.

The French version of our national anthem, of which we are so proud, says “protégerons nos foyers et nos droits”, which means “we stand on guard for our homes and our rights”. It seems to me those are the two things we are talking about here.

What does it mean to stand on guard for our homes? I think it means to protect the health and safety of our workers. I think standing on guard for our homes means to ensure that workers have a decent pension plan.

What does it mean to stand on guard for our rights? I think it absolutely means to preserve the right of workers in this country to negotiate.

In my work as a nurse, I learned that if I did something for my patients instead of letting them do it, or I did their thinking for them, I would never get anywhere with them. To successfully get lasting change, it is essential to give them the tools they need, but also to allow them to solve their own problems themselves.

With this bill, the government is interfering in a dispute where that was not needed. At the outset, the government should have ordered that the lockout be ended and the parties return to the bargaining table and find a way to agree, and that they find a middle way between the demands of the two sides, to achieve a fairer solution.

Let us talk about that: a fair solution. In this bill that we have been discussing for some time now, there is one thing in particular that is revolting: the wage cut. It is not a wage cut imposed by Canada Post; no, it is being imposed on the workers by our government, a government that deserves credit for being clear about the interests it is prepared to defend.

I would like to say one thing to all Canadians who are watching us or will be watching us later in the day: it is not your interests that our government is prepared to defend, it is not the government that is prepared to spend hours on end in this House to try to persuade the party opposite to bring forward reasonable and respectful legislation.

Our government seems to have respect for only certain people, the ones who are at the top of big corporations, the ones who make profits. The government should not forget, however, that the profits made by Canada Post do not fall from the sky. Those profits are the fruit of the hard work done by the postal employees, and I am sure that all those employees will be grateful to the government for the gratitude it might show them, gratitude that could be expressed, for example, in a bill that did not provide for lower wages than they had been offered. I hear them saying thank you from here.

We do not agree on numerous points, on either side of this aisle, but we agree that the workers should go back to work so that everyone who relies on the postal services can breathe easier. There are two ways of achieving that result. The first is to pass an unfair bill that jeopardizes the social benefits that all workers in this country enjoy. The second is to end the lockout and allow the postal employees to go back to work with dignity. I am on the side of human dignity.

Once again, I call on the government today to reverse its position. Not for the NDP. We are not here to win or lose a vote; we are here because something brings us together: the profound conviction that each of our fellow Canadians deserves respect. Our fellow Canadians deserve better than that. The government has the power to prove that it respects Canadians and Canadian workers.

So I suggest that it end the lockout, and most importantly, I call on all my parliamentary colleagues of all political stripes, on behalf of everyone we represent here, to vote against this bill as long as it remains unchanged.

Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

June 25th, 2011 / 5:35 a.m.
See context

Conservative

Ryan Leef Conservative Yukon, YT

Mr. Speaker, I want to address one point made earlier by a member of the NDP that the government side had not mentioned anything about people who might take a different perspective in our ridings. I certainly have received emails in support of the back to work legislation. I have also received emails in support of the opposition's position.

One thing I heard earlier was that we were fixating on the suspension of time, June 23. The clock is still ticking and with every minute that passes, while our colleagues are making money, my constituents are losing money. I heard that there were two solutions, but there are actually three.

When will opposition members quit thumping their chests, produce solutions, get into committee of the whole to deal with the issues and put forward their solutions instead of their complaints, end this debate and get this resolved?

Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

June 25th, 2011 / 5:40 a.m.
See context

NDP

Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am going to answer here with another question, one that I think provides the answer. I wonder why my Conservative colleague, who has the chance to be in the lobby of the people who control the situation, is not talking to the ones who are responsible for it and asking them why they are not doing something, why they are doing nothing to take the padlocks off and end this lockout. All Canadians who are affected by the absence of postal services would benefit from that solution.

Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

June 25th, 2011 / 5:40 a.m.
See context

Liberal

Hedy Fry Liberal Vancouver Centre, BC

Mr. Speaker, I listened to very passionate speeches by the members of the New Democratic Party. I know they believe what they are saying. Liberals agree that the government bill is a bullying bill. It is absolutely unfair and would be decided on what the arbitration outcomes would be, et cetera.

Members know the government is fixated on what the bill says and has decided it will not change its mind. The NDP is fixated on this filibuster and does not seem to want to change its mind. Meanwhile, nothing is getting resolved.

I am really frustrated. Every hour we talk in the House nothing is happening. The mail is not flowing, people are not going back to work, we are not deciding on a solution to put the government in its place by saying that if it is not a bully, then it should listen to the amendments. Why could we not go into committee of the whole and get some amendments on the table?

We were asked to come here and find solutions, not simply be intransigent, as both sides here are.

Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

June 25th, 2011 / 5:40 a.m.
See context

NDP

Christine Moore NDP Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC

Mr. Speaker, we would not need to introduce amendments and propose changes if the government did what it has the power to do: demand that the lockout end and take the padlocks off the doors.

Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians ActGovernment Orders

June 25th, 2011 / 5:40 a.m.
See context

NDP

Carol Hughes NDP Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON

Mr. Speaker, I want to ask my colleague a question.

She talked about standing up for our families and our rights. I think it is very important.

But some have said people are complaining. Others said they wanted to fix a few problems. Personally, I would like to know whether my colleague thinks what we are doing today is a waste of time.