Finance Committee on Oct. 25th, 2012

[Michael Mazzuca]

The problem from the constitutional point of view is that it requires such extensive reporting of payor/payee reasons for the transaction with respect to political activities, lobbying activities, and organizing activities, as well as collective bargaining activities, that this could hamper the ability of a trade organization to conduct its business. That in itself would potentially violate the freedom of association to belong to an effective trade union, as well as freedom of expression regarding political speech.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Marston.

Mr. Adler, it's your round.

[Mark Adler, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair. Thank you all for being here today.

This is very informative. As Ms. Glover said, this is a private member's bill. It's not a government bill. We are trying to find out some information and get some perspective so that if this bill does end up becoming law, it's fair to everybody concerned, fair to all interests.

Mr. Logan, the U.S. legislation was passed in 1959 on a bipartisan basis. It was introduced by Republican and Democratic senators. Since then, have there been any amendments?

[Dr. John Logan]

What normally happens, and what happened during the Bush administration to bring in new regulations that the Canadian bill is largely based on—

[Mark Adler, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

No. Excuse me, Mr. Logan; I need to know if there were any changes to the 1959 legislation.

[Dr. John Logan]

There have not been significant changes to the legislation that affect union reporting, but the process can be changed—

[Mark Adler, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

Thank you. No, thank you, that's what I needed to know.

[Dr. John Logan]

—significantly through changes to the regulations.

[Mark Adler, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

Mr. Logan, thank you. That's what I needed to know.

[Dr. John Logan]

It doesn't require legislation; it requires action by the Department of Labor.

[Mark Adler, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

Thank you. You're eating up my time here.

[Dr. John Logan]

It is misleading to say there are no changes to the legislation.

[Mark Adler, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

Okay.

Mr. Georgetti, I'm glad you're here. You said all the information is available to members of the union if they want to see the financials or want to get a breakdown of how the money is being spent. Is that correct?

[Kenneth V. Georgetti]

It's the financials.

[Mark Adler, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

This proposed private member's bill would simply codify what already exists, according to you, so what's the problem?

[Kenneth V. Georgetti]

This legislation would sweep in every labour organization in Canada—not just unions, but every labour organization, including all of my labour councils. I have 136 labour councils, all run by volunteers. Most of their budgets are less than $1,000 to $1,500 a year. This will sweep all of them into this legislation.

It's not the same as the regulations in the labour board, which say that union members, with their unions, can get this information. This legislation sweeps everybody in. As well, it doesn't just ask for financials; it asks for exclusive, very highly detailed reporting that we think will cost us tens of millions of dollars as organizations across the country, and more.

[Mark Adler, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

If we were to strip away the other provisions in the private member's bill and codify what exists right now, is that something you'd be happy with?

[Kenneth V. Georgetti]

Sir, you already have it in the federal labour code. Under federal jurisdiction, that law already exists.

[Mark Adler, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

It does.

[Kenneth V. Georgetti]

Yes.

[Mark Adler, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

Okay.

France, which is hardly a far right-wing country, has had its fair share of social democratic governments. They have legislation that is very similar to this.

If it's okay for France, which is a social democratic country and is governed by social democrats, and if the U.S. has such legislation that makes it transparent, why can't we here in Canada just be entitled to the same amount of transparency?

Is there something to hide? Please enlighten me.

[Kenneth V. Georgetti]

Sir, this bill is not about transparency. We don't have a problem with transparency. Our members, who own these organizations, have access to that information—monthly, as was stated by another member. They have it every month, if they want to come to meetings. They can come to their annual conventions. They have access to the financials of their unions now.

What this private member's bill is talking about is far more detailed reporting that, as was said by John Logan and others, will give our adversaries—people who are out to destroy us—information to use against us.

It's not for our members. Our members get it now.

[Mark Adler, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

Well, what about—

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

You have time for a brief question.

[Mark Adler, Conservative, York Centre, ON]

—as Ms. Glover mentioned, the $350,000 given to the NDP in violation of Elections Canada law? That would have been highlighted in detailed financial statements that would have been provided for in this legislation.

This $350,000 wasn't.... The NDP was caught not because you volunteered the information—