Debates of March 26th, 1995

Maintenance Of Railway Operations Act, 1995

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I believe that at that time the hon. members opposite had voted against this measure. I also believe that, when they were elected, they gave not the slightest indication that if this sort of situation arose this is what they would do.

As for the reasons behind the evolution of the Leader of the Opposition, I can tell you that I know, and he has said so himself, that he has evolved in many areas, and that he has no problem defending himself.

And I know that those members who are now laughing promised not to do what they are doing. And they are supposed to be "liberals".

[Some hon. members]

Hear, hear.

[The Speaker]

In keeping with the letter and spirit of the law, the hon. member has approximately 90 seconds. The hon. member for Lethbridge.

[Ray Speaker, Reform, Lethbridge]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to state the case in one question for the hon. member for Mercier.

We are discussing back to work legislation for the purpose of protecting a third party which is being injured, the exporters, the shippers. What has happened in this House is that the Bloc Quebecois has attempted to move the discussion into the future of collective bargaining. No one is talking about that. That is not the purpose of this debate.

We are not saying it should be done away with. All the Reform Party has said and what we are saying in this debate is that a third party is being injured. The Leader of the Official Opposition did not mention and was not even concerned about the economy or the exporters and farmers, the people who are being hurt. He was not one bit concerned.

It is time for the Bloc Quebecois members to admit whether they are concerned in the least about the third party we are talking about here, the people who are being injured, and Canada's broad economy. They are being injured by this delay, this nonsense and politics which are going on by the Bloc Quebecois.

[Francine Lalonde, Bloc, Mercier, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have two things to say. The first is that in life as in labour relations everyone finds himself at one time or another in the role of third party. Let me tell you a story.

One day I picked up a worker who was furious because the subway was not running outside peak hours, because in Quebec we have essential services during a strike. This health worker said to me: "I hope this is over soon. When we go on strike, people want to see us back at work as quickly as possible". We are always the third party in somebody's eyes. It is important that we remember this when it comes to labour relations. That is my first reply.

My second is that there should be an anti-strikebreaking law in Canada because 75 per cent of workers in other Canadian provinces are covered by one.

And thirdly-

If the Canadian economy cannot afford the Canada Labour Code, then there is a problem. The government should say so and do something about it.

[The Speaker]

It being 2.03 p.m., pursuant to the order made Saturday, March 25, 1995, it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put all questions necessary to dispose of the third reading stage of the bill now before the House.

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Speaker]

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

[Some hon. members]

Yea.

[The Speaker]

All those opposed will please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Speaker]

In my opinion the yeas have it.

And more than five members having risen:

[The Speaker]

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

[The Speaker]

I declare the motion carried.

(Bill read the third time and passed.)

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, a point of order. I wonder if you might seek consent that we suspend the sitting of the House now until the royal assent, which we anticipate later this day, on the understanding that the House would reconvene only for the purpose of attending for the royal assent. The House would adjourn immediately thereafter until tomorrow.

[Michel Gauthier, Bloc, Roberval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, before giving consent, I would like to speak to the motion, as we are allowed to do at this stage on motions such as this one.

[The Speaker]

With unanimous consent, we can do anything we please in this House. Is there unanimous consent?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Speaker]

The hon. member for Roberval has the floor.

[Peter Milliken, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member wants to speak, he will have to deal with the motion we will be moving in this House. I suggest therefore that the Orders of the Day be called.

[The Speaker]

I did call Orders of the Day. I was looking for unanimous consent to the motion put forward by the member. I am going to ask once again.

A motion was put forward by the hon. member for Kingston and the Islands asking for unanimous consent. Did I misunderstand? That is the motion that I put to the House. It is very simple. Is there unanimous consent?

[Some hon. members]

No.

[Translation]

[Alfonso Gagliano, Liberal, Saint-Léonard, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we just finished giving third reading to this bill providing for the resumption of work by rail workers.

[The Speaker]

I see I am going to have to put the motion first, if the hon. secretary of state will excuse me.