Thank you very much.
Thank you to the witnesses for coming.
First of all, to CUPE and CAW, I think it was very interesting to hear about what happened at Vidéotron when replacement workers weren't there and what happened when they were there. I think it's a really graphic example of what takes place during a dispute. I appreciate the fact that you've brought this important information forward.
Similarly, to the CAW, in terms of what happened in that situation, I'll certainly look at your CD.
I think it is important for us to understand what really takes place on the picket lines, with the violence that can unfortunately happen, and what it does to the labour relations environment afterwards. I think it is very much a part of this bill.
In terms of the presentation from the CFIB, I think you're proposing that the interests of small business are mutually exclusive to this bill and they're in direct contravention and opposition to each other. I guess I don't see it that way.
You posed a question to us on what would happen to this fellow and his northern airline and whether or not this bill would help. I guess my response is, yes, I think it would.
First of all, it may never have an impact on him at all. You said he's unionized. It sounds like he has a good relationship with his union and his workers. It's terrific, and no one's knocking that. In fact, on the contrary, it should be applauded. Hopefully, there would never be a situation where this bill would be used. But if there were a dispute or a strike and he tried to bring in replacement workers, then this bill would be used. There could be an impact on him through some other sector where this bill was being used.
But I happen to believe that in the broader environment of this bill, when there is a level playing field and replacement workers can't come in, allowing management to still do its job and allowing for essential services, it actually creates a better labour relations environment.
From that point of view, I don't think it would hurt the member you used as an example. In fact, if anything, I would think it would be conducive to a better and more positive environment. I really don't see the two as mutually exclusive. Otherwise, I wouldn't be supporting this bill.
I think it is important that we look at this bill in the context of where it would be applied and where it wouldn't be applied. It's not a blanket thing. It only kicks in for a very specific situation.
I think we have to be careful not to overreact to this bill. I realize you have some concerns about it, and that's fair enough.
I would ask all of the witnesses if they have any suggestions on where they would like to see any changes in the bill, because I think that's what we're also here to do. We're here to hear your overall points of view.
But if you actually have specific recommendations for any improvements or changes that you'd like to see in the bill, because we will be dealing with amendments, then I'd certainly appreciate your thoughts on that, if you have any suggestions in that regard.