Bill C-7 (Historical)

An Act to amend the Public Service Labour Relations Act, the Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board Act and other Acts and to provide for certain other measures

This enactment amends the Public Service Labour Relations Act to provide for a labour relations regime for members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and reservists. It provides a process for an employee organization to acquire collective bargaining rights for members and reservists and includes provisions that regulate collective bargaining, arbitration, unfair labour practices and grievances. It also amends the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Act to bar grievances related to the interpretation and application of a collective agreement or arbitral award, which are to be filed in accordance with the Public Service Labour Relations Act.
It changes the title of the Public Service Labour Relations Act and the Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board Act and the name of the Public Service Labour Relations and Employment Board. It also amends that latter Act to increase the maximum number of full-time members of the Board and to require the Chairperson, when making recommendations for appointment, to take into account the need for two members with knowledge of police organizations.

Federal Public Sector Labour Relations Act

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, collective bargaining is at the core of any democracy. Any democracy will be reflective of particular interests and concerns. These are interests and concerns that often divert. Therefore, if we do not respect the collective bargaining process in any labour relations realm, then we are not living up to that recognition, the recognition that diverging interests, when not taken into account, can lead us astray as a society.

We have to get back to a path of respecting the fact that we all have a particular stake in this society, that we need to be on the same page, and that we can move toward that through collective bargaining.

It is an enshrined principle in any democracy, and I am glad that this government is taking its cue from the Supreme Court of Canada in proposing this particular legislation.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Madam Speaker, I certainly appreciate what the member has said about making sure that everyone is onside and supportive.

Before I get to my question, I want to make a comment on something the member said earlier about the previous government not respecting municipalities, not caring for them. When the Liberals were in power for 13 long years, they only provided $1.5 billion to British Columbia in infrastructure funding. In eight of the almost ten years that we were in power, we gave British Columbia $4.5 billion, tripling what the previous government had in done in less time.

The question I ask is, has this member respected municipalities by asking stakeholders, like municipalities, on their opinion of the bill?

[Peter Fragiskatos, Liberal, London North Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, consultation is ongoing. As far as the record of the previous government goes, I have a number: $150 billion in debt. I rest my point on that.

[Sheri Benson, NDP, Saskatoon West, SK]

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time.

As the labour critic for the New Democratic Party, it is my pleasure to rise in support of Bill C-7. However, as the labour critic, it is also my duty to rise to point out important aspects of the bill that I see are missing and need to be addressed.

Like many opportunities I have had to stand and speak to labour bills, I commend the Liberal government for moving forward, but I would ask it to move forward a bit faster, sooner, and to address issues that are missing.

The RCMP members have been prohibited from collective bargaining since 1918, and to this day remain the only police force in Canada without the benefit of a collective agreement to regulate and protect their working conditions. As we have heard in the House, 2016 is a good year for many things, and it is a good day for collective bargaining and the rights of working men and women in this country.

For our police officers working in the RCMP, the wait is finally over. Unfortunately, this group of police officers had to fight all the way to the Supreme Court to get this right, a right that their fellow officers and working men and women have had for a very long time. Like many victories, it is bittersweet, but it is a victory for these working men and women all the same.

In January 2015, a Supreme Court ruling found that the government had failed to establish permission for meaningful collective bargaining for the RCMP members that would not disrupt the stability of the police force or affect the public perceptions of its neutrality. Therefore in its ruling, it declared that the prohibition of collective bargaining for the RCMP members to be in violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and gave the previous government one year to modify the legislation. I feel that the previous government showed its disrespect for these workers and this decision by not moving on this, leaving little time after the election to respond. Now we find that the Liberals are looking to push the bill through before the May 16 deadline.

The Supreme Court said that the limits on collective bargaining should be acceptable, if it could be shown that those limits are reasonable, demonstratably justified, and necessary to achieve the goal of maintaining an independent and objective police force.

This, of course, brings us to today and Bill C-7, and to my point about what is missing in the bill for working men and women in the RCMP. We have heard from others who have risen to speak and support the bill, but also from my colleagues on this side of the House, of our need to point out the important things that we feel are missing from Bill C-7 and need to be addressed.

They include a number of issues that most working men and women include in their collective bargaining, have a right to be involved in, and have as rights within their workplace. We feel that the most important exclusions are issues around staffing, deployment, unfortunately harassment, and discipline. These issues have the largest impact on the health and safety of RCMP members and are central to most of the public complaints that RCMP members have made about their workplace.

It would not come as a surprise that people would know that as the labour critic and a member of the New Democratic Party, we support and have supported the collective bargaining of the RCMP members. We have always recognized workers' rights to meaningful collective bargaining, and that those issues extend beyond the issues of pay and benefits alone. Good collective bargaining and good collective agreements also include a discussion and decisions with the employer and the employees on important issues around workplace safety and health issues. These can sometimes be as important, if not more important, to employees in bargaining.

As we know from the RCMP members, and from what we know about what is going on within the police force, these are some of the most pressing issues for these particular workers. They are very much linked to their working conditions around deployment, harassment, and discipline.

Instituting a collective bargaining system—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Order, please. I think we should suspend as we are getting ready for the budget speech.

The member will have five minutes remaining in her speech when we renew.

The hon. member for Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte has a point of order?

[Alex Nuttall, Conservative, Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as you know, the Conservatives left a very generous surplus, which is going to be turned into a deficit today. Pursuant to Standing Order 32, I would like to set the context and table, in both official languages, the November “Fiscal Monitor” from the Department of Finance, and ask for unanimous consent.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

Does the member have unanimous consent to table the document?

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

It would appear there is no unanimous consent.

Sitting Suspended

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

The House will suspend for a few moments.

(The sitting of the House was suspended at 4 p.m.)

Sitting Resumed

[The Speaker, Liberal, Geoff Regan]

I would remind those in the galleries that they are not permitted to make a noise or applaud in the House.

Order. The House will now proceed to the consideration of Ways and Means Proceedings No. 2 concerning the budget presentation.

(The House resumed at 4:05 p.m.)