Some days it's very difficult to listen to some of the questions the Conservatives ask, both here at the committee and in the House, when they pretend to support unionized workers.

One thing I'm aware of is history. Representing my constituents in the province of Ontario, I think back to the days of Mike Harris and the common sense revolution, when tens of thousands of unionized employees took to the streets of Ontario because he undermined the collective bargaining rights of those workers.

History also reminds me of, most recently, of Premier Ford's 1% wage cap on government employees. That, again, is legislation by a Conservative government that completely undermines the rights of unionized employees.

Of course, we don't have to look too far back in history to the Leader of the Opposition, who was in my community not too long ago as part of his “make Canada great again” tour, courting unionized employees and officials. There was no mention, of course, of two bills, Bill C-377 and Bill C-525, which are probably some of the most anti-union legislation that we've seen to date.

There's a common theme here with one party both at the provincial and federal levels. It's hard on days like today to listen to some of these questions when they pretend to stick up for unionized rights and employees.

Can I get your take on that?

11:40 a.m.

Liberal

Steven MacKinnon Liberal Gatineau, QC

The people of Ontario shudder when they hear those two words that Mr. Harris used to so often evoke, and now we're hearing them again.

What union members whom I know understand is that this is a party that proposes to emasculate the Canada Labour Code and workers' rights, and one can only rely on their own words.

In the Conservative Party's declaration—not the Progressive Conservative Party's, obviously—you have section 17(iv), that “supports right to work legislation to allow optional union membership including student unions”. That's very specific language. That says to me that the Conservatives under Mr. Poilievre, who was a boorish and vocal advocate for union-busting legislation in the past—the ones you talked about—would again return to this playbook of union-busting and of requiring unions to unilaterally disarm in front of employers, to cease advocating for social justice and, indeed, providing options so that workers would not have to join a union in unionized workplaces.

That would be a 100-year pullback on the accomplishments of the Canada Labour Code and other labour codes across this country. Unions are quite right to fear it.

11:40 a.m.

Liberal

Chad Collins Liberal Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON

Thanks, Minister.

Mr. Chair, I'll cede the rest of my time to my friend and colleague Mr. Coteau.

11:40 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

He's not here.

11:40 a.m.

Liberal

Chad Collins Liberal Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON

We'll go to Mr. Fragiskatos.

11:40 a.m.

Liberal

Peter Fragiskatos Liberal London North Centre, ON

There is a lot of generosity on this side of the table, Mr. Chair.

You've touched on it, Minister, but could you go a bit more into the implications of what the Conservatives have in this official—again, clear as day—policy document on page 6, updated as recently as September 23?

What would right-to-work legislation mean for unions and workers in Canada? What would the consequences of that be?

11:40 a.m.

Liberal

Steven MacKinnon Liberal Gatineau, QC

It would mean that, in any given industry under federal regulation, union membership would be optional, that you would have non-unionized workers allowed to work beside unionized workers or have no unionized workers in what were previously unionized workplaces.

Right-to-work legislation is the kind of legislation you see in places like Alabama, Mississippi and places where they want to keep unions away, because they don't like the kinds of things that unions advocate for: good paycheques, leave, sick leave and safety and occupational practices that favour workers, protect them and make sure they're well paid.

Conservatives are against that. They're against it in Mississippi, and they're against it in Canada, apparently. It's written right here, black on white.