Madam Speaker, looking at the situation before us we can say that the delay is unfortunate for all Canadians to a great extent. The responsibility today certainly lies with the Bloc Quebecois as its members come here and go through a lot of political gymnastics in an attempt to prove something to Canada. That is absolutely wrong.
The amendment before us asks for what is called a mediation commission. If there was sincerity behind that amendment I would buy it. However, when I listen to the Bloc present its case to this House, the case is one of political expediency. It is not to change the law of the country nor to bring about a common sense solution to the problem. Therefore I do not buy it, nor do my Reform Party colleagues.
It is unforgiving for a political party to play with our economy. Ministers of this government have outlined situations that are costing Canadians billions of dollars. My colleagues have given examples where industries are hurt, where factories and a variety of businesses which are very dependent upon shipping in this country are hurt to a significant degree. And politics are being played in this House to delay the inevitable, that the workers must go back to work and that we must get the transportation system back on track.
That is where we are today. As a common sense political party, we believe it is time to act. The Minister of Labour has brought legislation before the House. We are prepared to support it and move it as quickly as possible through the final stages.
I know we have been critical of the Minister of Labour. However, we have also generalized it to government saying that the government should have acted sooner and not only brought in back to work legislation but also put in place a long term solution to the problem.
The Minister of Labour, as I listen to her in her new assignment, is committed. We are going to hold her accountable for this on behalf of the Reform Party. We will also hold her accountable as the representative of the Liberal Government of Canada. From what I understand, the commission which is going to be established will bring about a long term solution to the problem. We want that to happen.
I have heard other comments in the House today that would only support that general direction of government, the somewhat commitment of government. I hope it is a real commitment. I hope it is not just political statements for expedient reasons at this point and then six months to a year from now we have no action by government toward a long term solution.
As I listened to the Minister for International Trade today he said: "Rail services should be available so that our goods can reach our ports and move across the U.S.-Canadian border". We agree with that. That is the way it should be. The minister also went on to say that we need a more satisfactory way to resolve disputes in our rail system, which is absolutely true. We support that. That is a statement of commitment by the minister as I read it. I hope that minister will follow through and with the Minister of Labour will bring about a long term solution.
The minister for trade also went on to say in his remarks to this assembly: "Early resolution of the rail strike which is causing such problems to our rail system is certainly necessary". We agree with that as well. That is why we are here today.
That is the position of the Reform Party. We want action. We want action immediately to deal with this matter.
It is my hope that the Bloc Quebecois will reconsider delaying this debate until tomorrow so we can forgo further expense. The government whip has indicated there are enormous costs in continuing the operation of this assembly, not only for Saturday but on Sunday as well. These unnecessary costs are being placed upon Canadians because of one political party that wants to play a political game, which is completely unsatisfactory.
Where are we then as the Reform Party? What is our position? What do we think should be done at this point?
First, we are prepared to support the current legislation, Bill C-77, that will put the workers back to work and our transportation in operation as of this coming Monday.
Second, we are concerned that the government did not put the legislation in place at an earlier date. There were many signals. My colleague, the critic for labour, indicated in his remarks that the signals were there and that the government should have put in place legislation upon which we could have acted more quickly.
Third, we think there is a long term solution to this problem. Bill C-262 was voted on in this House earlier this week. A principle in that bill is supported by a number of groups across Canada. We said clearly in Bill C-262 that there should be binding arbitration in place to bring about a conclusion to a dispute. The two parties in that process would each place their final offer on the table, the arbitrator would choose, and our rail system would continue to work.
Some people say that is the wrong way to handle the problem, that we violate some basic principles of the collective bargaining process. I do not believe that is true. In this circumstance there is a difference.
In collective bargaining circumstances we have management and employees. They bargain back and forth through the process and reach a point where there can either be a lockout or a strike. Under most circumstances that is acceptable.
However, when we are looking at the transportation system of the country there is a third party that loses its rights, that does not have any say in the process but pays the bill. The most obvious example is the agricultural community, the agricultural producer or the processor of agricultural products. We are required as farmers or agricultural producers to ship our goods via the railway. When there are no other options we must place the goods on the railway, get them to port, into the hold of the boat and into the international market.
If we cannot have a reliable transportation system there will be a huge economic impact on the agricultural sectors. We have seen that some 15 times in the last 25 years. Billions of dollars have been lost in that industry. The third party, the producer, was the victim. He had no say but paid the bills. That is unacceptable.
With Bill C-77 we will have binding arbitration in place that will be the solution to the problem. It has been the solution to the problem some 14 or 15 times in the last 25 years. It has been the only way to settle the problem. It has been satisfactory to management and employees. Government has had no other alternative but to knee-jerk and bring in special legislation to put people back to work.
Our recommendation as the Reform Party is that we should have that mechanism in place on a permanent basis so that when the two parties get to a point where they have to settle a dispute arbitration kicks in and the solution is there for the problem.