Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
First I'm going to speak to Mr. Finn, but also to all those around the table and who are watching via videoconference. I'm going to say again, for the nth time, that proposed subsection (2.2) is very clear in French. I know that Mr. Finn speaks very good French. You need only look at the French version, which states:
(2.2) Malgré le paragraphe (2.1), l’employeur peut utiliser les services des personnes suivantes pendant la durée d’une grève ou d’un lock-out :
It then states:
a) toute personne employée à titre de gérant, surintendant, contremaître ou représentant de l’employeur dans ses relations avec les employés;
He can also read paragraph (b). Subsections (2.3) and (2.4) must be read together. It's much clearer in French than in English. As for subsection (2.4), it states: “The measures”; with regard to conservation measures, for example, we know that that refers to subsection (2.3). Those measures are referred to nowhere else.
It's clear in French, but it should be clarified further, whereas, in English, it should be rewritten. I think the confusion is even greater in the latter case. I know that, like Mr. Finn, you are really very intelligent. So you will no doubt understand these things.
I'm a bit surprised, even disappointed, to see that the group of witnesses today consists solely of employer representatives. Until now, we were used to having the union and management parties equally represented. That kind of arrangement enables employer representatives to hear the opinions of the unions and persons representing people in favour of the bill, to see that there is indeed a problem and that it is human. When you meet people, you can see how genuine the problems are. I'll talk to you about that if I have the time. I hope that will be the case.
Mr. Zoe, I would like to know whether you are unionized.