Mr. Chairman, I would like to talk about what I think was lacking in the whole debate.
We really only heard how the labour legislation works in two provinces. We didn't hear from provinces that never adopted this legislation. It was on the table in my province, which has an NDP government, and they absolutely refused this kind of legislation. Just because these two provinces have the statistics and data that makes us believe we should make this legislation, as federal regulators...I find that very difficult.
I think it's very important for us to understand what was said today. It is federally regulated because it is essential; it is essential to be federally regulated because it's critical. The word “essential” is very important, but he also said it's “critical” to our country.
In the prairie provinces, we would be devastated with legislation such as this that creates an imbalance.
I don't like where this debate went--almost that we're against labour. We are not. In fact, I believe there should be peaceful and good relationships with peers and bosses in corporations.
We are federal regulators. They're looking to us to make sure this economy doesn't stop. I know our prairie provinces would have a very difficult time. These provinces that are represented by unions have ports. We rely on those ports, and the labour, which put a lot of our goods through to other countries. We rely on good labour relations. We expect that between labour and their bosses.
Nobody has asked the consumers. Nobody has asked us, who rely on these services, what we call essential. I would be afraid that we would never have any input on what would be essential. Our livelihoods on the Prairies are very essential--very essential.
We heard from the mining industry. I think we haven't heard enough, even from the employees. What do the employees think of some of this? We've heard mainly from the union bosses. Perhaps some who were represented here on the last day of witnesses said that they felt they did represent the employees and that the legislation did not represent those people.
I think we're not looking at the bill in the right context. If we're going to actually think about this bill, we should ask other provinces why they didn't adopt this legislation.
We are going through strikes right now in our province. They have replacement workers. They've used another jurisdiction to have replacement workers.
I think this motion in fact says what should be said. All our witnesses have given different scenarios about how this country will have some difficulties if this legislation is adopted. It tilts the balance of power. I think there should be no more discussion about it.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.