Evidence of meeting #124 for Finance in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was cbc.
A video is available from Parliament.
11:30 a.m.
Conservative
Mark Adler Conservative York Centre, ON
Ms. Dezell, some of the below-grade infrastructure in urban centres is very old and needs to be replaced. This funding, I suspect, will go a long way in helping to replace that much-needed infrastructure below grade, wouldn't you say?
11:30 a.m.
Manager, Gas Tax Implementation, Association of Municipalities of Ontario
Absolutely. There's a demand for infrastructure investments across the broad range of the spectrum, as I mentioned, in the core critical infrastructure, as well as in those day-to-day things that Canadians enjoy, such as skating on ice rinks and swimming in swimming pools. There's a need in every sector of the infrastructure category that municipalities administer.
11:30 a.m.
Conservative
Mark Adler Conservative York Centre, ON
So it's really not just what we see in cities. It's also what we don't see that needs attention.
11:30 a.m.
Manager, Gas Tax Implementation, Association of Municipalities of Ontario
Absolutely. I would agree with that.
11:30 a.m.
Conservative
11:30 a.m.
Conservative
Mark Adler Conservative York Centre, ON
I'd ask both of you what you would say to those members of the House who would not vote in favour of this budget.
11:30 a.m.
Vice-President, Strategic Development, Canadian Urban Transit Association
I'll leave that to you.
11:30 a.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
11:30 a.m.
Manager, Gas Tax Implementation, Association of Municipalities of Ontario
Thanks a lot.
11:30 a.m.
Conservative
11:30 a.m.
Manager, Gas Tax Implementation, Association of Municipalities of Ontario
I implore them to recognize that in order for the Canadian economy to be competitive, we need municipalities that work from sea to sea, and that includes having infrastructure that is new, safe, and reliable.
11:30 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Okay. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Adler.
Mr. Rankin, please go ahead for your round.
11:30 a.m.
NDP
Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, witnesses, for being here.
I guess I will focus my comments on Professor Smith and Mr. Bolduc, if I may, initially.
I think this is quite extraordinary. We have a very seasoned management representative and a very seasoned trade union representative united—which happens very rarely in my world—in saying that this particular move is regressive. You both expressed great concerns with Bill C-60.
I mean, we're talking about 48 crown corporations employing 88,000 Canadian workers, and you're both saying that there are problems. In fact, Professor Smith, you started by talking about the possibility of this initiative being contrary to the Canada Labour Code.
Two other legal issues also arose. Mr. Bolduc reminded us of the fact that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees free association and has been held to include collective bargaining. So we have a legal challenge, potentially, under the labour code. We have a constitutional challenge, potentially. The Friends of Canadian Broadcasting, who were here earlier with a very respected media lawyer, Brian MacLeod Rogers, indicated that there was an inherent conflict, as he called it, between the Broadcasting Act and Bill C-60, which will likely lead to legal challenges.
So I'd ask the two of you if you have any thoughts on how these legal challenges may play out or any predictions as to how this might proceed.
11:30 a.m.
General Secretary, Canadian Union of Public Employees, Québec, Canadian Union of Public Employees
The Canadian charter establishes this country's fundamental values and freedoms. Freedom of expression and freedom of religion are on par with one another. The second section lists freedom of association, and by extension the freedom to negotiate. Those are the values that the Canadian state and Canadians chose to adopt. I think the government should, first and foremost, promote values such as justice, fairness, freedom and equality. It should make those values easier to apply, not harder.
The bill states that the Treasury Board has the authority to reject any agreement negotiated by management and labour representatives. It also says that the Treasury Board is not the employer. If only for those reasons, we believe this legislation will lead to complex court challenges that will eat up time and money.
Also, there will be a loss of money.
Thank you.
11:35 a.m.
Fellow and Adjunct Professor, Queen's University, As an Individual
I'm concerned that these changes are being looked at as a binary decision. Either we accept the changes that are proposed in this act or we can't have efficient crown corporations that negotiate responsibly. I'm pointing out that the Canada Labour Code is potentially in violation because I believe that under the Canada Labour Code, without these changes, you can have efficient collective bargaining that addresses the kinds of concerns that have been put on the table, which Ms. McLeod identified, because those changes have been made.
CN and CP Rail both had employment security for all their employees, not just those within a 40-mile radius. In 1995 we negotiated those changes to the collective agreements. CN went on to be privatized, and CP, as you know, is going through a revitalization now. It was done through collective bargaining, and it was done under the Canada Labour Code. My intent is not to suggest launching legal challenges, but to move that conversation back to the forum of the Canada Labour Code and to recognize that historically the Canada Labour Code has provided a framework within which the kinds of changes that are being proposed here can be undertaken.
11:35 a.m.
NDP
Murray Rankin NDP Victoria, BC
Thank you very much.
This is a question for Mr. Sauvageau. You termed the changes that would be implemented by Bill C-60 as unacceptable, and then you spoke in another answer to a question about how this would undermine the perception of independence of Radio-Canada and CBC in the eyes of the public.
I would like you to speak a bit more about that, specifically to provide a little clarity about what these changes would do. With regard to the fact that the Treasury Board could now change the bargaining mandate of Radio-Canada, how do you think that would undermine the perception of independence we've enjoyed to date?
11:35 a.m.
Emeritus Professor, Information and Communications Department, Université Laval, As an Individual
It will no longer feel like public television. As I explained at the beginning of my statement, independence is a fundamental principle of any public broadcaster. You can't have a public broadcaster without independence.
Yesterday, I quickly reread the questions that had been asked about the BBC. Our public broadcasting model was based on the BBC's in the very beginning. There as well, the director-general is in charge of managing the resources. The BBC Trust serves as a buffer between the government and the director-general.
11:35 a.m.
Conservative
11:35 a.m.
Emeritus Professor, Information and Communications Department, Université Laval, As an Individual
For instance, guidelines for collective bargaining should come from the CBC's board of directors. The state must keep as much distance as possible between it and the public broadcaster.
11:35 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative James Rajotte
Okay. Merci.
Thank you, Mr. Rankin.
We'll go to Mr. Jean, please.
11:35 a.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Carrying on with where Mr. Rankin left off, Mr. Sauvageau, are you familiar with CTV and Sun Media?
11:35 a.m.
Emeritus Professor, Information and Communications Department, Université Laval, As an Individual
Yes, of course.
