Madam Speaker, I am very proud to take the floor today to speak to Bill C-77, an Act to provide for the maintenance of railway operations and subsidiary services.
I am proud because the action the government and the Minister of Labour have taken is basically a responsible move. When I look at the opposition members, I have to admit, much to my regret, that they are consistent. Members of the official opposition party are consistent because they always had as their philosophy that politics never work. Consequently, they apply that philosophy to everthing they do.
People are told that is their philosophy, and people will make up their own mind. But now, I would like to examine the two opposite positions we have before us today. On one side, we have the stance of the official opposition that wants to amend the bill.
Where does that amendment leave us? The opposition proposes a 60-day mediation process, that is 50 days for mediation and 10 days to let the Minister read the report and table it in the House. But, after these 60 days, if there is no agreement, we are in a dead end, and it is back to square one with the lockout, strike and never-ending disputes. That is not the way things should work with responsible people and a responsible government.
On the other side, there is the position of the government, which is reasonable and responsible, which I support and which gives a mediation-arbitration commission composed of three persons a 70-day mandate to let the parties try to reach an agreement by mediation. During this 70-day period, the committee will hear both parties, and then, if the parties still do not reach an agreement, there is no denying that the members of the commission will have in hand all the necessary elements to make a proper decision. They will be able to weigh both sides and, after the 70 days, if no agreement is reached-because we, as the government, want to go ahead, and all parties, no doubt, want to go ahead-this commission will make a decision in full knowledge of the facts.
There is no need to go any further and explain in greater detail the positions of both parties. There is no need to further elaborate to see that the government's solution is realistic and reasonable. However, I will repeat what I said at the beginning. It is sad to see that members from the Official Opposition are unable to rise above their own political interest and partisanship. How can they confuse their own interest with that of the population, the public interest? How can they confuse partisanship with such serious problems requiring a quick conclusion and solution.
On the other side of the House, they disregard the interest of employers and employees and they also disregard the numerous economic problems this dispute is creating in Quebec. The previous speakers talked about that, therefore I will not give you the long list of businesses having a hard time these days, and the long list of employees being laid off. It is sad to see these people claim they represent the workers when, in fact, they are acting in their own best interest. Once again, they are just trying to fool the people. The Parti Quebecois simply does not want the system to work.
Since the Parti Quebecois was elected in Quebec City, they have showed us repeatedly, and they are demonstrating once again that they do not want federalism to work. Unfortunately, they apply this ideology to real problems affecting the public. They have left the Canada-wide negotiation table on environment, where Quebec was one of the main and most important participants. But since they do not want the system to work, they left the table. What annoys them right now is that you have here, on this side of the House, a responsible government, a government that is holding the course, that is also responding to the expectations of the provinces. We only have to look at the finance minister's budget.