Mr. Speaker, since I am a former FTQ trade unionist, I must rise to tell you that compulsory back-to-work legislation does not solve the problems. I was active in the FTQ for 19 years. Despite the many laws passed at both the provincial and federal levels, the problems continue to exist and sometimes even get worse, because this is not the way to resolve labour relations problems, especially since this goes against the principles adopted by the government and supported by both union and management.
The right to negotiate, which has been recognized by the International Labour Organization, the Government of Canada, the provincial governments, the employers and the unions, must be fully exercised. I think that until now, the unions did not have the opportunity to negotiate with the employers. I think that the companies have acted in bad faith toward the employees in these negotiations. The companies have tried to dictate the issues to be negotiated, to impose their strength and arrogance on the unions. The unions are not responsible for the negotiations dragging on, because it is the companies that want to go against the basic principle of job security.
No union or employee in the world can say yes to employers who want to cut thousands and thousands of jobs in an attempt to make mobility one of their labour relations goals. Workers want a certain level of job security and some protection with regard to their job descriptions. Of course, all strikes present disadvantages, but the right to strike is a universal right which is exercised in every country, including the U.S.
Disadvantages are part of the rules of the game which, again, have been recognized by international organizations, the employers, the government and the unions. I was surprised that the minister would make a speech on her bill but not say a word about the workers' legitimate demands or to condemn companies for trying to impose their views knowing that the government will protect them, this Liberal government is behind them.
We want these 7,000 workers on strike or lockout to also be afforded representation, to have someone speak on their behalf in Parliament. That is what we, the Bloc Quebecois, are doing and we do not want to debate this back-to-work legislation today. Even Commissioner Hope said, in his report, that the companies did not bargain in good faith. He did not use these very words but when he said that the companies are trying to impose their own agenda and ignore union demands, that is what he meant.
I am surprised that the hon. minister did not say a word about labour relations in the rail transportation industry, not mentioning that problems exist and that the government has neglected to deal with them because the collective agreements expired on December 31, 1993. That is why I fully support the remarks made by our critic in this area, the hon. member for Mercier.