Thank you very much.
That last comment, that if this bill is adopted we'll end up paralyzing the economy, I think is a very irresponsible statement to make. I don't think there's any evidence that will happen if this bill is adopted. We do have anti-strike-breaker legislation in British Columbia. I've not seen any evidence that legislation has been harmful in any way. In fact, it's been the contrary. It's helped create an environment of stability, understanding, and labour peace. The only difficulty we've had is in the case of disputes under federal jurisdiction. Because we haven't had this kind of legislation, we have had difficulties. I just want to make that comment.
We should also remember that the bill we voted on was in principle, so we are talking about the principles of this bill. We're now at committee to look at the bill in detail and to consider what changes or amendments need to be made. So I would like to ask you that. It seems to me that as minister you have a responsibility to look at this bill and to consider what improvements, from your point of view, can be made.
The fact is that now, under the Canada Labour Code, under section 87.4, there is a provision whereby either an employer or a union can go to the CIRB if they haven't come to an agreement on what is considered to be an essential service. So there is a provision now that does exist. I'd be interested to know whether you consider that to be adequate or whether you think there need to be additional provisions.
I think it would be much more constructive if, as the minister, you would provide some helpful information to this committee as to what you'd like to see, in terms of this bill, to improve it, from your perspective. We may or may not agree with you, but at least we'll have the benefit of what your constructive analysis is, rather than making outlandish statements that this bill will paralyze the economy. I find it astounding to say that.