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.