Evidence of meeting #83 for Finance in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was unions.
A video is available from Parliament.
5:30 p.m.
Federal and Ontario Director, Canadian Taxpayers Federation
—but I think that if you're talking about whether something is going to pass a constitutional test or whether....
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
I'll go to Mr. Logan. I'm sorry. I have a whole bunch.
Mr. Logan?
5:30 p.m.
Professor, Labour and Employment Relations, San Francisco State University
I'm more focused on the costs and benefits of the bill, so I would say no, but I think it's not the most important issue.
5:30 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Federation of Independent Business
Sorry—can you repeat the question?
5:30 p.m.
Voices
Oh, oh!
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
In your opinion, on the amendment proposed by Mr. Hiebert that would ensure home addresses are not published, would that improve the bill?
5:30 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Federation of Independent Business
Sure. Yes.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
Okay. Thank you.
The next thing he committed to doing was dealing with that issue around confidentiality of solicitor-client privilege. If his wording in his amendment is proper, is that going to improve the bill?
Can we just do yes or no?
5:30 p.m.
Chief Operating Officer, Canadian Office, Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO
Without seeing the amendment I—
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
5:30 p.m.
Chief Operating Officer, Canadian Office, Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO
If the amendment makes it so that solicitor-client privilege is in fact protected, I would say that's great. Without reading the amendment, I can't tell you if it does or not.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
5:30 p.m.
Chair, National Pensions and Benefits Law Section, Canadian Bar Association
It currently requires disclosure of legal activity. I think that should be excluded.
October 25th, 2012 / 5:30 p.m.
President, Canadian Labour Congress
I agree.
It doesn't just cover solicitor-client privilege. It covers the bills that they send us, even how much lawyers are charging us.
5:30 p.m.
Chief Operating Officer, Canadian Office, Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO
That's privileged.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
You don't want to get into the weeds, so I'll leave you out.
Mr. Logan, would that improve it?
5:30 p.m.
Professor, Labour and Employment Relations, San Francisco State University
I think it would require substantial revision and not just—
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
5:30 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Federation of Independent Business
I'm sorry, I don't know.
5:30 p.m.
Conservative
Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC
One of the other things that he has committed to is having very specific language around the pension, the health-care funds, and the definition of a labour trust. If the amendment is created in a way that addresses the concerns that we've heard commonly, is that going to improve the bill, yes or no?
5:30 p.m.
Chief Operating Officer, Canadian Office, Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO
If it excludes trust funds and excludes reference to the payments that are made to people under trust funds and basically carves trust funds out, yes. Short of that, no.
5:30 p.m.
Chair, National Pensions and Benefits Law Section, Canadian Bar Association
Again, I think labour trusts should be exempted from the bill.