Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak on Bill C-53, Motions Nos. 2 and 3.
We have gone through this before. The government is nibbling around the edges. The bill unfortunately will not address the problems affecting the private sector by any meaningful way. I will continue with the speech I was making earlier on constructive solutions that can be applied to the bill if the government would listen. It would find there would be widespread agreement among the electorate.
There are various things the government can do with respect to labour policy. It can work with the provinces. I challenge the ministers across the way to call their provincial counterparts together to deal with the issue of labour policies which are having a restricting effect on the ability of the private sector to function as well as it can.
Unionization techniques are being done to quite significantly restrict productivity. Certain things can be implemented. For example, there is the aspect of members taking a strike vote. The strike vote or a vote on whether to unionize should be a silent or anonymous vote rather than public. Often strong arm tactics are used on members to vote for unionization or a strike. That should be done by a secret ballot system.
The aspect of sexual bargaining should be banned, as this also restricts the private sector.
It is really horrible that we have not been able to address these significant problems that have been beleaguering the private sector for so long.
The government has an enormous role to play regarding industrial policy in reduction of interprovincial trade barriers. We had an opportunity to do that in this House and rather than taking meaningful measures to reduce interprovincial trade barriers the government once again nibbled around the edges.
The private sector says we have more boundaries east-west in Canada than we have north-south. In part that can explain the reason why, although we have implemented free trade agreements, they have not been as good as they can become because the Government of Canada has actually impeded and impaired the ability of the Canadian private sector to be competitive with its counterpart south of the border because it has not done much with removing the interprovincial trade barriers that hamstring them so badly. I would encourage it to do that.
By eliminating direct subsidies to businesses we can save taxpayers a lot of money. They really are not necessary because the private sector does not want the money. It wants the environment that will enable it to be productive.
We have a fetish for introducing regulations but have little desire to remove them. British Columbia has enacted 3,000 new regulations since the government was elected.