No.
Evidence of meeting #70 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was unionized.
A video is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #70 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was unionized.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:10 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
You can't see a scenario where municipalities are better off by banning 80% or 90% of the competitors and directing all of the work to the remaining minority?
4:15 p.m.
President, Canadian LabourWatch Association
We've got more and more competition in various parts of our economy in this country, and telecommunications would be a great example. I have to say, as a person in their fifties, that life is a lot better today with the telephone than it was when it was Ma Bell, Ma Bell, Ma Bell.
I think anything that can be done to have private-sector companies competing with one another and being held to account for performance standards and results is the best thing.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
In that sense, we have a Competition Bureau that exists to ensure that the consumer benefits from competing enterprises for the provision of a given service. Do you believe that the same principle of competition would serve commuters and passengers who are looking for improved infrastructure?
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
At the best price, obviously.
Has your organization ever advocated inserting provisions into public tendering processes that would ban unionized enterprises from being competitors?
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
4:15 p.m.
President, Canadian LabourWatch Association
Nor could I ever envision us thinking like that.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
Okay.
For example, what does a country like Sweden do? What is its policies on tendering? Does it ban—
4:15 p.m.
President, Canadian LabourWatch Association
No, I'm not familiar with other countries' tendering. I know how their unionization schemes work in terms of union membership and union dues—
4:15 p.m.
President, Canadian LabourWatch Association
—and they're unlike ours. They've reformed them. How that impacts tendering, I don't know. That's an area to study.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
Well, then, to rephrase my question, in a country like Sweden, for example, which is known for its social safety net, is it illegal for non-unionized construction workers to participate in construction jobs?
4:15 p.m.
President, Canadian LabourWatch Association
Well, what I know about Sweden, because there is a very, very important European human rights case from 2007, where a group of construction workers were paying their union dues to things that had nothing to do with their workplace. They ultimately won a victory against that, in that their money couldn't be taken to be used for non-bargaining purposes.
But how that relates to the world of tendering over in Sweden, I don't know. We'd have to make inquiries.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Your time is up, Mr. Poilievre.
Mr. Holder, you have seven minutes.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Holder Conservative London West, ON
Thank you, Chair.
I would like to thank your guests for being here today.
May I remind our guests and all around the table that we're studying how competition can make infrastructure dollars go further? That's the focus.
I think that probably the most critical point I heard you say, Mr. Mortimer, was that from your standpoint, the solution you thought was pretty straightforward, and the way you see it, is that you'd require that federal tax dollars that would fund work being done, construction work and the like, be open to any employer, regardless of their union status. Did I understand that to be correct?
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Holder Conservative London West, ON
Well, we've talked somewhat about the federal level, because we're obviously federal so that's where our interest is today, but what focus have you put on the provincial and municipal governments? Have you had this same kind of discussion with provincial governments across the country?
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Holder Conservative London West, ON
Is that an intent? Or is your organization set to stay at the federal level?
4:15 p.m.
President, Canadian LabourWatch Association
LabourWatch's mandate is to provide information, so we don't actually go out and formally make submissions. We will respond to any request of any government to come before them and to answer questions, but you will not find, since the year 2000, any submission that we have voluntarily made in order to advocate for change in legislation. It's simply not in our mandate.
4:15 p.m.
Conservative
Ed Holder Conservative London West, ON
I don't think I'm going out on a limb here, but is it safe to say, though, that you would take the view that the position that you hold with federal tax dollars would be the same with either provincial or municipal tax dollars?