Evidence of meeting #71 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 work.
A video is available from Parliament.
4:20 p.m.
Director, Federal and Ontario, Progressive Contractors Association of Canada
What is clear is that history tells us those labour unions, the labour movement, fought for more than anything the right to associate with whomever they wish. If they wish to associate with a building trade union, a CLAC union, or no union at all, they should have that right. That shouldn't preclude them from the work they do.
I believe that's what the labour movements fought for all those years.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Lise St-Denis Liberal Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC
I would like some clarification on the question of P3s.
You said that P3s posed a problem because of foreign industries. I would like to hear further explanations of this.
4:20 p.m.
President, Canadian Construction Association
Because of the long-term financing involved in these projects, the financiers for performance security require liquid instruments like letters of credit. However, contractors in North America have been using the bonding industry for that performance security. They don't necessarily have the balance sheets to support letters of credit and have been using the bonding facility to leverage their balance sheets.
EDC, Export Development Canada, through its temporary domestic powers has been able to help some of those Canadian firms obtain letters of credit or this liquid security that's required on these projects. However, there is a proposal to further restrict the ability of Canadian companies to use EDC's domestic financing powers on these projects. Our fear is when international or foreign companies come, they have in tow their EDC-type agency, their export credit agencies, and they have the ability to achieve that security.
Our concern would be if the measures are as restrictive as those being proposed for EDC, that might impair the ability of Canadian firms to compete on P3 projects here in Canada.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Larry Miller
Thank you very much.
I'll now move to Mr. Poilievre for seven minutes.
May 9th, 2013 / 4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
Madame St-Denis suggested you and the CLAC were trying to direct business away from unionized workers. You represent unionized workers. You are a union at the CLAC. Is that correct?
4:20 p.m.
Regional Director, Eastern Ontario, Christian Labour Association of Canada
Absolutely.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
So you obviously don't want to take business away from unions. You are a union.
4:20 p.m.
Regional Director, Eastern Ontario, Christian Labour Association of Canada
Yes. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, this is certainly not an anti-union issue. We are a union.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
4:20 p.m.
Regional Director, Eastern Ontario, Christian Labour Association of Canada
We represent workers.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
So you probably wouldn't want to put yourself out of business by banning yourself from competing.
4:20 p.m.
Regional Director, Eastern Ontario, Christian Labour Association of Canada
I don't think that would be too smart.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
Mr. Atkinson, you're not in favour of banning unions from competing either.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
In open competitions some of your unionized members win—
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
And we are in favour of that happening when they are the most meritorious bidder. I think all of us should be. You were just saying that level playing field, open competition, best team wins.
Are any of you familiar with the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights?
4:20 p.m.
Director, Federal and Ontario, Progressive Contractors Association of Canada
I couldn't recite it for you, but I'm vaguely familiar.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
I can, with the help of my iPad.
Article 20(2) says, “No one may be compelled to belong to an association”. Do you believe the forced union monopoly on construction in Hamilton and other similar jurisdictions is a form of compelled association?
4:20 p.m.
Regional Director, Eastern Ontario, Christian Labour Association of Canada
In my opinion, workers certainly lose an element of choice in those circumstances. If you're a carpenter today living in the city of Hamilton, certainly you lose the ability to work on a good chunk of work, public infrastructure work, in your own city.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Nepean—Carleton, ON
Article 20(1) of the declaration allows for freedom of association, so there's a positive freedom and also a negative freedom. I just mentioned the negative. The positive one is that you have the freedom to associate with an organization. If you ban workers in Hamilton in the construction field from working with the CLAC or another non-qualifying union, are you not violating their freedom of association rights?