Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in this House today to speak on Bill C-24, an act to provide for the resumption and continuation of postal services.
At the outset, let me say that the hon. members have to vote on Bill C-24 today because of the incompetence of this government. Let me explain.
When negotiations started, in April, we suspected the government's intentions with regard to Canada Post. The Radwanski report on the future of the Canada Post Corporation, tabled in October 1996, hinted at what the government's priorities were concerning the future management of the corporation.
The report is clear. It reads, on page 4, and I quote: “Canada Post is operating under the constraints of a collective agreement whose provisions, particularly with regard to pay for time not worked, flexibility and job security, are completely out of line with the new realities of today's workplace. The financial consequences of these provisions pose a serious threat to the eventual viability of the corporation and hence to the future of all its employees.”
This is the basis on which the government plotted its course of action in the postal dispute. From then on, everything became a matter of cost-effectiveness. In co-operation with the corporation's senior management, the government set targets in terms of cost-effectiveness and commercial results.
These were easily agreed to since the government had made sure to appoint its friends to the board. Everyone knows that the president today is none other than the hon. André Ouellet, former Minister of Foreign Affairs in the Liberal government.
So there was no problem digging into the Canada Post surplus to reduce the federal deficit.
Of course, such an objective could not be achieved without cutting jobs, without reducing employee benefits, without reorganizing the work done by letter carriers, and I could go on.
That is exactly the result sought and achieved with the introduction of Bill C-24.
Events started to unfold more clearly as soon as the postal workers' collective agreement expired last June. The government's strategy was simple: let things drag on, make sure that negotiations are going nowhere and push the postal workers to strike just as the holidays are approaching. At this time of the year, it is easy for the government to justify the early introduction of special back to work legislation, and that is what it did.
For the minister responsible for the Canada Post Corporation, the agenda has been set since last August. The Canadian public knows today that the minister stated that the strike would be short and that back to work legislation would be quickly introduced. It was at a meeting held last August 6 with the president of the Canadian Direct Marketing Association and other large mail users that the minister revealed his intentions.
I am not inventing anything. The details of that meeting are clearly set out in a memorandum released by the postal union at a press conference in September.
Obviously, the government and especially the minister found themselves in an embarrassing situation when the content of that memorandum was revealed. There is no doubt about that. In fact, on September 8, the national union president sent a copy of this memorandum to Prime Minister Jean Chrétien.
The union had provided proof that there was collusion between the government and the large mail users. That is outrageous.
The large mail users are already benefiting from the lowest postal rates in the world. To preserve these benefits, they supported the government so that it would reduce salaries and benefits for postal workers.
The minister responsible for Canada Post even prepared for a parallel service to deliver government cheques. Again, according to the famous memorandum made public by the union, the minister even declared that “this time, the social benefit cheques will not be delivered by postal workers during the strike, but by another unidentified delivery service that has already concluded an agreement with the government”.
The government backed down on this when this other tactic intended to put pressure on the negotiators was revealed.
To cover up its mistake, the government finally accepted the offer sent by the union of postal workers to the minister responsible for Canada Post on August 7. A few days before the strike, it half-heartedly came around.
It has become obvious that the parties to the dispute are still far apart. But the evidence is there that the government bears a large share of responsibility for the breakdown in negotiations. The minister responsible for Canada Post promised to pass back to work legislation so as to put a wrench in the bargaining process. Well, he kept his promise. We now find ourselves debating Bill C-24, the result of this collusion.
Once again, the government has demonstrated its incompetence and lack of resolve. It has shown a complete disregard for the right to strike provided for under the Canada Labour Code, by forestalling any chance of successfully negotiating a real collective agreement. The government did everything it could to shift the blame for this strike onto the union. The Minister responsible for Canada Post said so himself. This is what it says in the memorandum from the Canadian Direct Marketing Association.
We in the Bloc Quebecois asked the government on numerous occasions not to interfere in the postal dispute. It was up to the two parties to negotiate a new work contract. Through its repeated interference, the government has made a mess of things. The government should not kid itself. The upshot of Bill C-24 will be unhappy people and considerable dissatisfaction on both sides.
At the end of the road, the deterioration in postal service will once again hurt the public. There has even been talk of civil disobedience by postal workers. We have the government to thank for this.
Consideration of Bill C-24 shows clearly that the government has chosen to favour the employer's objectives over those of the union.
Canada Post Corporation is going to become a cash cow for the government. The bill represents much more than the end of a strike. It is also an insurance policy guaranteeing that the corporation will also be a increasing source of revenue for the government's consolidated revenue fund.
There is no getting around it, the government has put itself in a conflict of interest situation in the negotiations. Now, it will make huge profits of $200 million over five years through the corporation, thanks to the savings that will result from implementing of Bill C-24.
The Bloc Quebecois is in favour of resolving labour disputes through negotiation. Imposing working conditions through special legislation does not solve the basic issues.
I agree that the postal strike has a devastating effect on the country's economy. Businesses, particularly small and medium size businesses in Quebec, are deeply hurt by the lack of postal services. Customers are late paying their bills and suppliers do not get the money owed to them. The strike has cost millions of dollars. All this would not have happened had the government acted in good faith and had it not interfered in the negotiations. The government planned the outcome well in advance.
For all these reasons, the Bloc Quebecois is opposed to Bill C-24, which forces postal employees to go back to work, in spite of their legal right to strike.