Bill C-29 (Historical)

Port of Montreal Operations Act, 2021

An Act to provide for the resumption and continuation of operations at the Port of Montreal

This enactment provides for the resumption and continuation of operations at the Port of Montreal and imposes mediation as the process for resolving matters remaining in dispute between the parties. It empowers the mediator-arbitrator to impose arbitration as the process for resolving matters that cannot be resolved through mediation. Finally, it sets out the elements that are to be included in the new collective agreement between the parties.

Port of Montreal Operations Act, 2021

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague spoke about Canada's reputation.

Does he think that Canada's reputation will grow if we tell workers that the right to strike means nothing, if we ask them to keep working, if we tell them that we do not care about the employer's arbitrary decisions and that they cannot do anything about them? That would give Canada a great reputation.

What message is the government sending to workers about Canada's reputation and their right to protest arbitrary decisions made during negotiations?

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Madam Speaker, collective bargaining and collective bargaining negotiations are obviously a pillar of the country, a pillar of democracy for that matter, and this legislation is only used in exceptional circumstances. However, I would also like to add that the worst thing I would hate to see is for shipping companies to choose the Port of Long Beach or Port Newark to bring their products into North America, and then have them rerouted via rail into Canada if that is the case. I would hate to see jobs lost and our reputation for certainty for businesses. We saw it when the Suez Canal was blocked.

Ships go throughout the world and bring products everywhere, including to Canada. We must provide certainty to those shipping companies, we must provide certainty to the workers and we must provide certainty to our businesses.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Madam Speaker, I have heard a couple of Liberals say this evening that they would like the parties to reach an agreement before the bill is passed. Workers have only one tool they can use when they have to stand up for fair pay or a safe workplace, and that tool is to withdraw their labour. When government takes away that right, it removes any pressure on the employer to bargain in good faith, the government takes the side of the employer.

How can the government justify this draconian action when the strike has barely begun?

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would disagree with much of what the hon. member has said.

This process allows for a neutral mediation arbitrator to be appointed. Actually, if the parties could agree, the individual would be appointed by them on their joint agreement or by the minister if that is not possible. There is an arbitration process involved and many opportunities with respect to labour proceedings have occurred. Strike is not the only process to exercise an individual or worker's right.

There is an aspect of the importance of ports in Canada, which is really an essential service. They are vital for our economy and supply chains. We understand how important supply chains are across this world. The pandemic has re-emphasized that situation, and we must ensure that Canadians and Canadian businesses can continue to operate and not be disrupted in this manner.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, my hon. friend referenced the Suez Canal blockage and, yes, it was an extraordinary thing to see. Who knew there were 400-metre-long ships that could block the Suez Canal? That lasted six days.

I am distressed that the government has moved so quickly. The strike was provoked by the employer. It began just a couple of days ago. Certainly, the damages that are being described to our economy would be significant were the port to be closed for several weeks, but why move so fast and deny the workers their right to strike?

[Francesco Sorbara, Liberal, Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON]

Madam Speaker, the two parties have been in negotiations for, I believe, over two years, or 30 months to be exact. They have been unable to reach an agreement, with very little movement shown in progress. It is imperative that the government take action when it is needed. This is something that measures that bar with respect to the Canadian economy.

We cannot allow a supply chain to be break down. We have already seen shipping companies reroute their containers to other ports. That has a negative impact for the workforce in Montreal, for workers in Canada, and it is also a negative impact for businesses with respect to our supply chain. We need to maintain that certainty. We want to work and encourage the parties to reach a new collective agreement. This will be a step in that process for them to reach a new collective agreement using a mediator/arbitrator to enter the negotiations at that level.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my hon. colleague for his speech.

I rise today to explain why our government introduced Bill C-29 to end the conflict between the Syndicat des débardeurs, or CUPE Local 375, and the Maritime Employers Association, or MEA.

I think that we would all be extremely relieved if this labour dispute were resolved rapidly and without government intervention. Canadians count on their federal government to protect the most vulnerable and help the men and women who need it most. The work stoppage is devastating for our economy, and the government has a responsibility to act on behalf of all Canadians and to make decisions based on the common good and the safety of all.

Throughout the collective bargaining between CUPE Local 375 and the MEA, we have constantly supported and encouraged the parties to reach an agreement that works for both sides. However, despite our efforts, the parties have not been able to resolve their differences.

The Port of Montreal is central to the economic well-being of Canadians from coast to coast, especially in Quebec and Ontario. The port is an essential link in the supply chain of raw materials and various products that are shipped in containers between Canada and the United States.

The Port of Montreal is the second-largest container port in Canada. Every year it handles over 1.6 million 20-foot units and 35 million tonnes of cargo, representing approximately $40 billion in goods. It is a major entry point for essential containerized imported goods for the Quebec and Ontario markets. We are talking about construction materials, pharmaceuticals, food products and other critical goods for the pharmaceutical and food industries.

The port’s competitive advantages include its proximity to central Canadian markets, efficient rail links and timely trucking operations. About 40 million consumers live within a day’s drive by truck, and 70 million more can be reached in two days by train. It is estimated that the port’s activities create more than 19,000 direct and indirect jobs and generate about $2.6 billion annually in economic benefits.

During last year’s strike at the Port of Montreal in August, desperate business owners in my riding called me. Alex is in construction, Marco is in the food industry, Jacques works in maintenance, Luc is in agriculture and Kathy is in metallurgy. Not only did they have to deal with the pandemic’s devastating impacts on their operations, but they are now losing clients and contracts because their containers are stuck at the port as a result of the strike and they cannot fulfill their obligations to their clients.

As one business owner in my riding put it so well:

“Businesses are losing money hourly. We are on track to gaining back what we lost through the pandemic, but now we are losing clients at an uncontrollable rate. The business community is held hostage by the union and it will be devastating to the economy. The strike will wipe out all the work done to overcome COVID-19. Businesses can't absorb anymore. This is a do or die for many small businesses. I respect the union's right to strike, but what about the right of small business owners, who depend on Maritime Cargo to meet the obligations of their business and thus continue to feed their families, pay the employees and sustain our community. Businesses expect action from the government.”

It should be noted in the summer of 2020 four strikes led to costly cargo hijacking and far from the table confrontations that led to arrests. The uncertainty regarding operations at the Port of Montreal could cause long-term damage to the Canadian economy, particularly in Quebec and Ontario.

With another work stoppage, it is again containerized products, including essential goods like pharmaceuticals and other commodities such as food, forestry and metal products, that are affected. Along with this work stoppage comes the diversion of cargos by other ports, including Halifax and Saint John and the ports on the east coast of the United States. Some diversions could become permanent. This could lead to a drop in demand for related rail and truck transport services. It could also lead to continued economic damage when the conflict ends.

This is why the government is taking legislative measures that would force the parties to resume and continue their activities in the Port of Montreal, while continuing the talks at the negotiation table.

This bill, once it receives royal assent, will immediately put an end to the work stoppage and ensure the continuation of all operations at the Port of Montreal.

It will also extend the most recent collective agreement until a new one is negotiated. It also provides for the appointment of an impartial mediator-arbitrator to help both parties resolve outstanding issues. Because the impartiality of the person selected must be ensured, if both parties cannot agree on one individual, the Minister of Labour will appoint a person of her choice.

The mediator-arbitrator will have the double duty of helping the parties resolve outstanding issues through mediation or, if mediation fails and the parties are unable to agree on a new collective agreement, through an arbitration method of his or her choice. Mediation will last for 14 days, after which all outstanding matters will be decided upon by the arbitrator.

The new collective agreement that this process will result in will include the unamended provisions of the former collective agreement, every decision rendered by the arbitrator and every agreement entered into by the parties at any point in the current round of collective bargaining. Nothing in the bill precludes the parties from coming to an agreement on any topic or entering into a new collective agreement before the mediator-arbitrator renders a final decision. The mediator-arbitrator will have 90 days to conclude the arbitration process and establish a new collective agreement.

I sincerely hope that the parties will come to an agreement before we have to vote on this bill, but we cannot afford to wait. We must act now. We are really sorry that we had to table the bill, because we firmly believe that a negotiated settlement is always the best solution. However, we have a responsibility to Canadians and to businesses which drive our economy. When the consequences of a work stoppage are gravely detrimental to our country, we must act in the best interest of all.

After having exhausted all other options, we believe that this back-to-work legislation is the only one left.

Therefore, I urge all members to support this bill, because Canadians and businesses count on us to end this labour dispute.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to my colleague's speech and even to the previous speech. What I gather is that it is all about business. I did not hear the word “workers” very often in those speeches. There is not much consideration for workers. It is unfortunate since they are the ones unloading the cargo. They are the ones working in the port of Montreal.

Let us go back in time a bit and take a look at how things evolved. First, there was a unilateral change in work schedules by the employer in the midst of negotiations. That is such a good start.

Second, workers replied that if the employer was to do that, then they would go on strike because they want to maintain the quality of their work.

Third, the government threatened to pass legislation if there was to be a strike.

Fourth, the government said it would table special legislation and that such a move would help with negotiations. There has not even been a single day of strike yet.

Last night, the employer just walked away after seeing the special legislation being tabled.

Is this not a bit like bad high school theatre, and in the end—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order. The member for Alfred-Pellan has the floor.

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member across the way for his question.

For more than two and a half years, our government has been providing the Syndicat des débardeurs, also known as CUPE Local 375, and the Maritime Employers Association with significant support to help them come to an agreement, including 100 mediated negotiation sessions.

The Port of Montreal is essential to the economic vitality of Quebec. I know that, because many companies from Alfred-Pellan do business with the port. Nevertheless, I want to emphasize that the work stoppage at the port is causing considerable and potentially lasting damage to the economy of Montreal, Quebec and Canada. It is also putting additional pressure on supply chains that are already strained due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Businesses in Laval are worried and increasingly stressed about the situation. They are already having a hard time trying to recover from the consequences of the pandemic, and now they have to deal with the issues at the Port of Montreal.

I want to be clear that we take no pleasure in bringing this bill forward.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague just forgot that the employer, which is represented by five multi-billion-dollar corporations that control a huge share of the global freight industry, violated the collective agreement four times.

This is no mere labour dispute. This is about an employer that, in bad faith, systematically violated and ripped up the collective agreement. The government did absolutely nothing. Now that the workers, the Port of Montreal longshore workers, are trying to protect their rights, the government is taking the employer's side, deciding this has to stop and asking workers to give up their rights.

My question is very simple. When did the government inform the employer, these huge corporations, that it wanted to intervene in their favour?

[Angelo Iacono, Liberal, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague opposite for his question.

I would like to inform him that the government strongly believes that free collective bargaining is a cornerstone of a productive working relationship between the two parties. The federal mediation and conciliation service has been working with the parties, but their inability to reach an agreement resulted in a partial work stoppage at the Port of Montreal from April 13 to 26 and an unlimited general strike since then.

I want to assure the member that the government has been there every step of the way and will continue to be there. However, we believe the government must act when all other avenues are exhausted and a labour dispute is causing significant economic harm to Canadians.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will share my time with the excellent member for Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry.

Like many Canadians, I am deeply troubled by the labour dispute that started at the Port of Montreal. I am especially disappointed in the Liberal government's nonchalance, considering that it had months to help the parties negotiate a solution.

This is not a first for this government, which also took its time alerting Canadians to the imminent arrival of the pandemic, closing the borders when the pandemic hit, supplying rapid tests and negotiating a stable vaccine supply. Even now, it is slow to close the borders. This Prime Minister does not have the leadership skills to manage crises well. He was slow to resolve the rail blockades, and now, a labour dispute at the Port of Montreal is forcing him to react.

I would like to help the Prime Minister understand why longshore workers are essential to our country. The Port of Montreal is vital to the Canadian economy. It has been described as the beating heart not only of Quebec but of all of eastern Canada, Ontario and Quebec.

The Port of Montreal is the second-busiest port in Canada. It handles cargo from 140 countries, serves as a logistical ecosystem for more than 63,000 businesses, and provides essential goods to more than 6,300 Quebec businesses.

These 6,300 Quebec businesses depend directly on the Port of Montreal to continue operating. We are not talking about big multinationals but about small and medium-sized businesses across Quebec that depend on operations continuing at the Port of Montreal.

The port supports the regional and national economies. It generated $2.6 billion in added value for the economy in 2019. Nineteen thousand people are directly or indirectly employed in handling 1.7 million containers annually.

Since 2020, almost 17 million metric tonnes of cargo have entered and left the port, in spite of the COVID-19 pandemic. Before the pandemic, the numbers were even more impressive. More than double that metric tonnage of cargo was handled by the Port of Montreal alone.

Let us go back a bit further. Since 2016, 12,000 ships have stopped at the port, for a total gross tonnage of $245 million. To put that in perspective, that means that the port receives more than 2,000 ships every year, 2,500 transport trucks every day and 60 to 80 freight trains every week. It handles $275 million in goods every day.

It does not take an expert in logistics or shipping to know that these numbers make the Port of Montreal an extremely important player in the transportation of goods and materials around the world, while contributing to the Canadian economy.

The importance of the port does not stop at the circulation of goods and materials. The port also plays a key role in welcoming cruise ships. Some 439,000 cruise ship passengers and crew members have gone through the Port of Montreal since 2016. Seventeen cruise ship companies are currently operating out of the port, and 76 international vessels visited the Port of Montreal as a port of call in 2019 alone.

The Port of Montreal's international reputation is extremely important in terms of both freight and passengers and visitors. It is clear to everyone that the Port of Montreal is an irreplaceable asset for Canada's regional and national economies.

It is not as though the Prime Minister did not foresee what might happen or was unable to prevent it. In August 2020, 1,100 port workers went on strike to protest the fact that they were working without a contract. At that time, the strike prevented the shipment of 90,000 containers and 325,000 tonnes of dry bulk. Industries like mining and forestry were particularly hard-hit by the strike. Many small businesses in my riding of Mégantic—L'Érable were negatively affected.

According to a recent press release from the Montreal Port Authority, the August work stoppage caused approximately $600 million in losses over a two-month period. Fortunately, that strike ended after 19 days, when the Maritime Employers Association and the Canadian Union of Public Employees, which is affiliated with the FTQ, agreed to a seven-month truce to negotiate a resolution.

That was the exact moment when the government had the opportunity to intervene. The federal government could have thrown all of its weight and influence into ensuring that the parties reached a negotiated agreement. That was when ministers should have taken an interest in what was happening at the Port of Montreal. The government should not just have sent mediators. Ministers should have gone to the Port of Montreal and met with the parties to show that they cared about the Port of Montreal's contribution to the economy. However, that did not happen. The government let things go and let the parties drift apart. As a result, we are here tonight to vote on special back-to-work legislation.

Canadians cannot and should not have to suffer the disastrous consequences of the government's inability to take advantage of the seven-month truce signed last summer. This is even more true when we consider the fact that our country has been hit very hard by the COVID-19 pandemic.

A Montreal market research firm said that the Canadian economy could lose $10 million to $25 million for every day that work is disrupted at the Port of Montreal. As a result of the strike last summer, $600 million in sales was lost, 80,000 containers were not able to be processed and 20 ships were diverted to competing ports. This undermines the Port of Montreal's international reputation.

I will give an example. Canada's fertilizer industry is one of the industries at risk of once again being significantly affected by the work stoppage at the Port of Montreal. Hundreds of thousands of tonnes of fertilizer pass through the port during the spring planting season, which is right now. Farms across Quebec and Atlantic Canada need this fertilizer to grow the foods that make their way to grocery stores everywhere, including Thetford Mines.

After a prolonged strike, food insecurity could become a real problem in eastern Canada and across the country. This is not what we want. Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, supply chains around the world have been greatly affected. The last thing Canadians need is even more uncertainty due to a labour dispute at the Port of Montreal. Many small and medium-sized businesses have already warned that they will have to slow down production and lay off workers if the strike at the Port of Montreal continues.

The executive director of the Association du camionnage du Québec is also worried about the inevitable bottlenecks that will occur once the workers' strike is over. The docks could be filled with ships still waiting to be loaded, preventing new container ships from docking. The resulting costs would inevitably be passed on to consumers, who are already paying dearly for the inflation we are all currently experiencing, particularly when it comes to building materials and food.

We have already seen this kind of bottleneck situation in Canada, during the rail blockades that took place last year. It seems like such a long time ago, but it was just last year. Because products could not be moved from the ports of Vancouver and Halifax, ships were eventually diverted to American ports. As a result, the Canadian economy was deprived of the benefits of shipping activity in its own ports.

As I mentioned, Canadians are unfortunately already familiar with the negative impacts of disruptions caused by interruptions in supply chains.

Last year, the Parliamentary Budget Officer indicated that the rail service disruptions cost the economy $275 million and that businesses' profits would be $130 million lower than usual. I am not just referring to multinationals, but also to small businesses in all regions of Canada and Quebec.

Billions of dollars in goods were delayed because of the blockades. Millions of tonnes of grain were trapped in the Prairies, and Canada's forestry sector suffered very heavy losses. It was hell. This evening, we must talk about the 2020 rail blockades to illustrate the impact that disruptions in the supply chain can have on Canada's economy and Canadians' lives.

It is shameful to have another labour dispute affecting our supply chain.

The strike at the Port of Montreal could and should have been prevented. As was the case with the rail blockade, this government does not understand how Canada's economy operates. It is unable to act at the right time, and it reacts when it is too late. It is obvious that a solution—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Order. The member's time is up. As many members have questions and comments for the speakers, I would ask hon. members to keep their remarks short and concise.

The hon. member for Thérèse-De Blainville has the floor.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his speech. I broadly agree with him on the lack of leadership, predictability and action on the part of the government, which could have solved the problem instead of lying low.

Tonight, the opposition parties have an opportunity to show some leadership and to vote for or against the legislation. Does my colleague agree that the members should vote against the legislation and dedicate themselves to resolving the dispute?