House of Commons Hansard #104 of the 36th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was workers.

Topics

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:25 a.m.

NDP

Pat Martin NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB

That will not be necessary.

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:25 a.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

Thank you. The hon. member for Waterloo—Wellington.

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:25 a.m.

Liberal

Lynn Myers Liberal Waterloo—Wellington, ON

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak regarding Bill C-19. I know that this is a complex bill, but having listened to the comments made by members of the opposition on the motions in Group No. 3 I can only conclude that the members do not understand the successive contractor provisions in Bill C-19. Either they do not understand or they are intentionally spreading misinformation.

They say they agree with part of proposed section 47.3 which would protect the pay levels of employees providing pre-board security screening services in the event of a change of contractor. Then they put forward Motion No. 28 which would remove the right of these employees to seek a remedy before the board if a successive contractor were in fact to reduce their wages.

In other words, the official opposition wants compliance with section 47.3 to be completely voluntary. If a successive contractor does not respect the provision, too bad for the employees. They would have no recourse and that is unacceptable.

Members of the official opposition have also talked at length about how the provision, if extended, could impact on railway short lines and the transfer of government services to the private sector.

This provision has nothing to do with either sales of business or the privatization of government services. It would not even apply to such situations and to suggest otherwise is completely false.

Proposed section 47.3 would not grant successor rights where the federal government or an employer subject to the Canada Labour Code contracts out services. Proposed section 47.3 would not even grant successor rights when there is a change of contractor. The successive contractor would not be bound by that collective agreement. The bargaining agent would not retain bargaining rights.

All the provision does is require a successive contractor to maintain wage levels, that is to compete on the basis of sufficiencies other than wage reductions.

This provision will protect low wage employees who might otherwise lose their employment or be forced to accept pay reductions when there is a change of contractor.

Pre-board security screening services are important to the safety of the Canadian public. Employees providing such services deserve this minimal protection as would other groups of vulnerable employees providing such key services. These are the kinds of employees who would benefit from protection under proposed section 47.3.

I thought it was important to set the record straight on these issues. I think it is important that we do so as a government.

I would also like to comment that I was at the committee when the Reform Party was filibustering. Talk about wasting time and resources. Talk about the abuse of parliament. Talk about being childish. All of this is from the party that claims there is a fresh start to be had in parliament and a new way of doing business. That is rubbish. I saw it firsthand and I was disgusted by it.

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:30 a.m.

Reform

Rob Anders Reform Calgary West, AB

Mr. Speaker, I could not help but respond to some of the criticisms that were levelled from across the way.

The reason the Reform Party was filibustering in committee—

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:30 a.m.

An hon. member

You admit it.

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:30 a.m.

Reform

Rob Anders Reform Calgary West, AB

Oh, indeed I do because filibustering is something that has been used by opposition parties since the beginning of parliament. It is one of the few tools that we actually have to be able to change government legislation.

As a result of the Reform filibuster, Bill C-19 was changed so that people who were offsite workers, contract workers would not be forced to have their names given over to union organizers. That way their home addresses would not be violated by union organizers along the lines of ding-dong, knock knock, the unions calling at their home addresses.

The opposition was able to get some amendments to Bill C-19 as a result of our filibuster in committee. However there are things that have not changed. Successor rights is indeed one of the things the government has not changed.

There are reasons we were enacting a filibuster and I am going to speak to this today. I would not have done so otherwise but I think it is important that people know why the opposition was doing that type of thing.

This is the way it works in this setting for the information of the folks at home. The opposition puts forward amendments, much like we are doing today, substantive, real amendments like successor rights, but the government most often turns them down and does not give them fair and due consideration. If the amendments are put forward in cabinet or if they are put forward by members of the government, whether they be in committee or privately to cabinet members or however that process may work, they are more likely to be considered and implemented.

We were given good information that there were people on the government side who had problems with successor rights as they stand in Bill C-19 and there were people who had problems with privacy concerns and there were people who had problems with the violation of the secret ballot as proposed in Bill C-19, along with a few other things. We were giving those members time to bring those concerns forward in committee and they failed to do so. Those members who said they had a backbone in the government caucus and said they had a backbone in the cabinet failed to have one and failed to bring forward those changes to Bill C-19.

To the Minister of Labour who said that he did not have the resources in his own office to fight his own departmental officials on those aspects of Bill C-19 that he thought were over the top, shame on him. To the Minister of National Revenue who had concerns yet did not bring forward these things in committee and did not actually get a change when push came to shove, shame on him. Shame on them. To the Liberal caucus members who sat in HRD committee and argued along with the Reform Party on some of these substantive changes that we wanted early on when we were questioning witnesses in testimony, shame on them for not having put forward those amendments.

We wanted to see those things brought forward. We will be speaking about them today at report stage and we will be speaking about them at third reading. Shame on the government for not having brought those things forward. We know that is the only way those things would have been given proper and due consideration. The fact that the government put the 40th time allocation since it has been in office shows that government members have had little will or little backbone to stand up to the department.

Bill C-19 basically amounts to a departmental official being shuffled off for many years into a sideline of the labour department. Mike McDermott finally had his glowing chance and I talked with him many times in committee. To him I say, I guess you finally have your chance to leave your glowing mark on Canadian labour legislation by going ahead and embedding successor rights, going ahead and violating the secret ballots in workplace democracy, going ahead and not allowing final offer selection arbitration, but shoving through instead more cabinet power.

Rather than trying to achieve peace in the workplace, they are going ahead and giving the power more thumbs down control over the worksites which does not promote labour peace.

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:35 a.m.

Reform

Reed Elley Reform Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC

Undemocratic.

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:35 a.m.

Reform

Rob Anders Reform Calgary West, AB

Very undemocratic.

With that, I subside. Those are the reasons why the opposition enacted filibuster. I am proud to say I was probably one of the biggest pains in the government's side in filibuster and am proud to have been so.

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:35 a.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

Is the House ready for the question?

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:35 a.m.

Some hon. members

Question.

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:35 a.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

The question is on Motion No. 9 in Group No. 3. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:35 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:35 a.m.

Some hon. members

No.

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:35 a.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

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

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:35 a.m.

Some hon. members

Yea.

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:35 a.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

All those opposed will please say nay.

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:35 a.m.

Some hon. members

Nay.

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:35 a.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

In my opinion the yeas have it.

And more than five members having risen:

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:35 a.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

The recorded division on Motion No. 9 stands deferred.

The next question is on Motion No. 28. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:35 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:35 a.m.

Some hon. members

No.

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:35 a.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

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

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:35 a.m.

Some hon. members

Yea.

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:35 a.m.

The Acting Speaker (Mr. McClelland)

All those opposed will please say nay.

Division No. 137Government Orders

11:35 a.m.

Some hon. members

Nay.