Madam Speaker, I was listening very closely to some of the comments from the parliamentary secretary and those made by the labour critic from the New Democratic Party. I think it is necessary to correct some misconceptions they have about this process.
The parliamentary secretary said that in her opinion fair and free collective bargaining has always been the best way to arrive at a settlement, or words to that effect.
Certainly we agree. We are not advocating a heavy-handed approach here at all. It is most important to note that the process applies equally to the employer and to the employee. It is a tool that can be used equally by them.
I have said many times before in the House that final offer selection would take the place of very heavy-handed back to work legislation. I see it as a real step forward.
Back to work legislation has become sort of a crutch whereby management and labour do not feel compelled to earnestly bargain, to get right down to cases and to settle the disputes themselves. Of course any dispute that can be settled between the parties is absolutely the best way to go.
We are offering final offer selection as a final step that would take the place of having to go through the trauma, so to speak, of a strike or a lockout and then having parliament legislate them back to work.
This tool can be used equally by both parties. If it were in legislation both parties would realize it was the final step and would bargain accordingly. They would get right down to the last parts of the case.
My colleague in the NDP actually made the case for final offer selection in Manitoba. He said that knowing the legislation was there 93 of 97 cases resolved themselves because the parties came to an agreement. That is exactly how we want it to happen. For those 4% to 5% that cannot come to an agreement, someone has to make the agreement for them.
My colleague in the Reform Party from British Columbia made an excellent point. When the local grocer has a work disruption, whether it is a strike or lockout, certainly it affects a few families that like to deal at the particular store. It also affects the employees and the owner of the store. However people in the city do not starve because they have alternative places to buy their groceries.
Canadians, particularly in the western part of Canada, do not have an alternate west coast port to use. It is the only game in town and the people who run the west coast port are very much aware of it. It is no coincidence that work disruptions take place at a time of year when western farmers are trying to market their crops through the port.
The parliamentary secretary says that this process will not work. There are many precedents in Canadian history to show that it does work. In the case of legislating parties back to work, all that accomplishes is to reluctantly have the parties go back to the job. It does not resolve any of the outstanding issues. Those outstanding issues are yet to be resolved and in many cases are done through the exact method we are suggesting here.
It is most unfortunate the bill is not a votable motion. I would have been very pleased to have seen how the House would have voted on it.