House of Commons Hansard #152 of the 35th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was code.
John Williams Reform St. Albert, AB
We heard the member. This government in three and a half years has exceeded the cumulative total since 1917 when it was first introduced.
This is no longer a House of debate. This is no longer a House of the people. The government has abused the trust and privileges of the House. The government does not want to hear what the representatives of Canadians have to say. It does not want to listen.
Paul Szabo Liberal Mississauga South, ON
Mr. Speaker, I will again ask the member whether it is his intention to support the bill. If it is, I will assume it is on the basis that he has already made a full assessment of all the relevant factors to-
Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders
The Deputy Speaker
The hon. member for St. Albert.
John Williams Reform St. Albert, AB
Mr. Speaker, I hate to create suspense, but I know that we are going to vote on this later today.
Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders
The Deputy Speaker
It is my duty, pursuant to Standing Order 38, to inform the House that the question to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Bourassa, Immigration.
Paul Szabo Liberal Mississauga South, ON
Mr. Speaker, I want to be on the record with respect to Bill C-66, which is proposed by the Minister of Labour. This is the third reading of an act to amend the Canada Labour Code, Part I, and the Corporations and Labour Unions Returns Act, and to make consequential amendments to other acts.
Being a member of the government and having followed the debate this afternoon I thought it important to address one of the issues raised by the previous speaker. The issue has to do with the process used by the government to pass this legislation.
Earlier this day, during Routine Proceedings, the government was forced into the position of putting forward a motion to ensure that this bill came to the floor of the House for debate. This is one of the subtleties of the operation of the House which the Canadian public does not recognize. It is very likely that we would not be debating this bill today if the government had not put forward the motion to move from Routine Proceedings to Government Orders.
The daily routine of business includes matters such as the tabling of documents, statements by ministers, presenting reports from inter-parliamentary delegations and reports from committees. I recall that on a number of occasions members of the Reform Party rose in their places during Routine Proceedings to move frivolous motions which were debatable by the rules of this place, which meant that the House would continue to debate frivolous motions and frustrate debate on government bills and private members' bills.
It is important that Canadians know about the committee work which has been done, as well as the work which has been done by the Minister of Labour. The preparatory notes contained excellent background material. In fact, Canadians will see when the vote is taken later this day that the House will support this very important legislation.
Therefore I want to congratulate the Minister of Labour who has earned the respect and admiration of the different parties who played a role in this process.
It is encouraging to see management and unions agreeing on this matter. That is a very significant point that should be noted. We have to underline that management and labour are now in agreement on the principles brought forward in the bill.
A tremendous amount of work has been invested in producing this agreement. Bill C-66, first and foremost, is fair and balanced legislation, as members have now discovered from the debate in this place and through the work in the committee. It is the product of consultation on the whole process.
Members from every party fully appreciate the importance of that consultation process. These consultations included a task force of labour relations experts, a working group of management and labour organizations and a series of meetings involving the
Minister of Labour and representatives of labour and management as well as other interested parties which is a very important aspect of any legislation before this place.
The task force was chaired by Mr. Andrew Sims, an Edmonton labour lawyer specializing in arbitration and dispute resolution. He was admirably supported by two experienced colleagues: Toronto based labour arbiter, mediator and fact finder, Paula Knopf, and Quebec labour arbiter and professor at Laval University, Rodrigue Blouin.
The task force received numerous written submissions and met with labour and management delegations and with members of the academic and legal communities in the various locations across the country over this overall consultative process. It also invited labour and management organizations whose members are subject to the Canada Labour Code to set up a working group to discuss and endeavour to reach consensus on many important issues.
When the task force submitted its report entitled "Seeking a Balance," it reflected the consensus reached by that labour-management working group in a number of important areas.
In addition to its findings and those of the working group, the Sims task force also took into account the recommendations made by the west coast ports industrial inquiry commission which had issued its own report in December 1995.
It is quite an accomplishment that both labour and management have expressed support for the overall balance of the task force's recommendations. The consensus reached is an illustration of what can be accomplished by working together in the spirit of good faith and mutual respect. Members, even of the Reform Party, acknowledged that with regard to Bill C-66.
On several key issues, Bill C-66 reflects the consensus reached by labour and management. With these amendments, the government has acted as a pro-active catalyst for change. We are proposing strategies that will modernize the code and we are encouraging parties to suffer their differences in a less adversarial fashion.
The amendments proposed include, first, the establishment of a new representational Canada industrial relations board composed of a neutral chairperson and vice-chairpersons and equal numbers of members representing employers and employees. This board will replace the current non-representational Canada Labour Relations Board.
Second, the new board will be given greater flexibility to deal quickly with routine or urgent matters.
Third, the board's powers will be clarified or extended to ensure that complex industrial relations issues such as those arising from the review of bargaining units or sales of business can be fully addressed and to provide appropriate remedies in the case of unfair labour practices such as failure to bargain in good faith.
The next point is that the bill will bring in the federal mediation and conciliation service, which will continue to be part of the labour program of Human Resources Development Canada. It will have its third party neutrality enhanced by defining its role by statute. Defining the role of the FMCS underlines that the dispute resolution and prevention programs are a vital component of Canada's collective bargaining policies.
A further point is that there will be a replacement of the current two-stage conciliation process by a single stage with a choice of procedures to take no more than 60 days. The right to strike or lockout will be subject to the holding of a secret ballot vote within the previous 60 days and giving a 72-hour advanced notice.
Parties involved in work stoppage will be required to maintain services necessary to protect public health and safety. All members of the House certainly recognize the importance of that issue.
Services affecting grain shipments will be continued in the event of legal work stoppages by any third parties in the ports.
There will be no general prohibition on the use of replacement workers. However, if they are used for the purposes of undermining the union's representative capacity, the board may declare their use as an unfair labour practice and order the employer to stop using them for the duration of the dispute.
Finally, the employees will be entitled to insurance and benefit programs during work stoppages.
As members can appreciate and see from this variety of points, some very important issues have been addressed and dealt with by Bill C-66 as a result of the excellent work that has been done by the Minister of Labour and his department officials.
The amendments will also confirm the rights of employees in the bargaining unit who were on strike or locked out to resume employment following the end of a work stoppage instead of any persons hired to replace them. The list I have just recited is quite long yet it only begins to outline what Bill C-66 will accomplish.
It is fitting that the government is moving forward with these amendments at this time. After all, the Canada Labour Code has not been subject to this kind of comprehensive review since the early 1970s. As members know very well, the world has changed since then. Trade liberalization, globalization, privatization, deregulation, and corporate and economic restructuring have placed significant pressures on employers and employees and hence the industrial relations system as well.
The new global economy in an increasingly competitive marketplace dictates change in the existing industrial relations environment.
Jim Gouk Reform Kootenay West—Revelstoke, BC
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. As the hon. member who is now speaking was very diligent in asking questions earlier, I wonder if he would agree to yield the floor so that questions may be put to him before time runs out.
Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders
The Deputy Speaker
The hon. member for Mississauga South has the floor.
Paul Szabo Liberal Mississauga South, ON
As I was saying, the new global economy in an increasingly competitive marketplace dictates change in the existing industrial relations environment. Measures that help resolve labour disputes in a more positive environment are good for employers and workers. Hence, co-operation will lead to improved productivity, better job security and increased worker participation in the workplace decisions.
The proposals we are debating today represent a fair and balanced approach that will reduce conflict and lead to quick resolutions of differences. At the same time, the legislation responds to the changing needs of many workers and workplaces, including the increasing number of people working in the home.
In closing, I would like the House to remember that the Sims task group report was entitled "Seeking a Balance". In my opinion, Bill C-66 strikes the appropriate balance between the rights and responsibilities of employers and unions and underlines the important role that government plays as a facilitator and catalyst for positive change.
I know I have taken some time to deal with a very important bill but Canadians will realize, even from touching very briefly on some of the many issues that I have raised and listed in this speech, that there are many points that have been dealt with comprehensively throughout the process. I am very pleased to have had the chance to rise in my place and speak on behalf of the Minister of Labour and Bill C-66.
Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders
The Deputy Speaker
There are 20 seconds left. The hon. member for Kootenay West-Revelstoke.
Jim Gouk Reform Kootenay West—Revelstoke, BC
That is a real challenge, Mr. Speaker, a 20 second question.
I wonder if the hon. member would make a comment simply on the question of final offer selection arbitration as an alternate dispute settlement mechanism.
Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders
The Deputy Speaker
The time has expired, unfortunately. It being 5.15 p.m., pursuant to order made Monday, March 17, it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the third reading stage of the bill now before the House.
The question is on the amendment. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the amendment?
Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders
The Deputy Speaker
All those in favour of the amendment will please say yea.
Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders
The Deputy Speaker
All those opposed will please say nay.
Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders
The Deputy Speaker
In my opinion the nays have it.
And more than five members having risen:
Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders
The Deputy Speaker
Call in the members.
(The House divided on the amendment, which was negatived on the following division:)
Canada Labour CodeGovernment Orders
The Speaker
I declare the amendment defeated. The next question is on the main motion.
Bob Kilger Liberal Stormont—Dundas, ON
Mr. Speaker, if you were to seek it, I believe you would find unanimous consent that members who voted on the previous motion be recorded as having voted on the motion now before the House, with the Liberals voting yea.
Chuck Strahl Reform Fraser Valley East, BC
Mr. Speaker, Reform Party members present will vote no on this motion.
(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)
Jim Gouk Reform Kootenay West—Revelstoke, BC
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. After the Liberals asked for applied votes you went to the Bloc and to the Reform Party but you did not go to the NDP. I wonder if you would clarify its vote.
