I'll ask a question, and then Ms. Dhalla has something else.
The frustration here is that we're not getting any definition of essential services. In the last few weeks since I've been on this committee, we've been asked to wait until we get the technical witnesses and then we'll understand this better. We're not getting a definition, and it's of concern to me.
I want to put a bill in place banning replacement workers, but I'm concerned about it. I'm concerned this bill has loopholes that have the potential to have a severe impact. I don't think any labour union in the country wants to shut down an essential service.
What an essential service is depends on who you are. We've heard from the trucking industry that food in some northern communities is dependent upon trucking, and it is therefore an essential service. 911 is an essential service.
In the absence of having someone able to define for us what an essential service is and not being able to get that definition, I want to go back to the history of the CIRB. Assuming it's correct, section 87.4 of the Canada Labour Code does not empower the CIRB, the Minster of Labour, or the government to order the suspension of a strike or a lockout pending the determination of an issue on the maintenance of activities that arise during a strike or lockout. In fact, the Canada Labour Code specifically states in subsection 87.5(3) that the strike is not suspended. If the strike is not suspended, there is the question of what an essential service is.
Can you tell me again, based on history, how long it takes to get a determination from the CIRB?