Madam Speaker, the motion before us is a motion to speed up the process around the approval for the most undemocratic legislation we have ever seen. We are talking about closure.
Every incident I have referred to has do with the way in which the government wields the heavy hand, cuts off debate, makes decisions outside parliament and denies the fundamental tenets of a democratic society. I am right on topic.
Let me move toward the actual anti-democratic nature of the legislation around which the motion is trying to speed up the process with regard to Bill C-76, the back to work legislation. Why in the world did the government feel compelled to go the route of fundamentally bypassing the democratic collective bargaining process and bringing in this heavy handed back to work legislation?
It is absolutely shameful the government had to resort to such tactics when there were many other options which the government with a bit of courage, leadership and conviction could have used to ensure that the concerns of workers, farmers and the public service were all addressed. Canadians could then feel there was some framework of harmony and consensus at play and the tools in place by which they would have the ability to take on the future with all the rapid technological change and global forces at work in this country and around the world.
We are talking today about the most anti-democratic process to bring in and to force the most anti-democratic legislation imaginable.
I do not think many Canadians will take solace in the government's suggestion that this heavy handed legislation was the only solution to the problem. Canadians know full well that the process of collective bargaining involving members of the Public Service Alliance of Canada was not respected. They know full well that legitimate issues and demands were being raised by alliance workers that were not taken into account.
I would like to take a couple of minutes to read a few letters I received today in my office in Winnipeg and some letters I received over the course of the last couple of months while public service alliance workers have been trying to convince the government of the need to deal with their grievances and, in particular, to deal with the whole question of inequity and discrimination in the regional rates of pay.
I quote from a letter by Alice, sent to me today at my office. She wrote:
I thought that being a federal employee would entitle me to equal treatment like everyone else that works for the government, but I guess (the President of the Treasury Board) doesn't see it that way. This is discrimination with a capital D . Our prime minister does nothing to help us. I feel we have no rights as Canadian citizens.
Alice does not feel she has any rights as a Canadian citizen. We do not feel we have any rights as members of parliament. Is there any sign of people feeling like they are able to use their full rights as citizens of the country?
Let me go on and read from Leona who wrote:
Dear Judy:
I am writing in protest to being legislated back to work by the federal government. I can't believe that our Prime Minister condones (the President of the Treasury Board's) behaviour towards the blue collar workers of Canada. (The Prime Minister) openly shows his discrimination, by not stepping in to stop (the President of the Treasury Board) and the treasury board from once again sending us back to work without a proper raise.
Let me quote from Mike who wrote to me today:
I am an employee of the Federal Government of Canada and a member of the Public Service Alliance of Canada. As an employee represented by Public Service Alliance of Canada-Table 2 I urge you to intercede on our behalf—
We are doing that today. We are trying to intercede on behalf of workers who are members of the public service alliance and part of the table two negotiations seeking to have their concerns heard and taken seriously.
It is absolutely unnecessary and unexplainable. It takes the words right out of my mouth to try to figure out why the government felt it had to resort to back to work legislation when there were options before it, when it was a matter of respecting the rights of workers and respecting the role that the labour movement plays in the country.
I urge members today to consider their actions and to remember people like Stanley Knowles who would have been appalled by the kind of anti-democratic motion put before the House today. I ask members to remember the contribution of the labour movement throughout the history of the country in seeking a more just and equitable society. I ask members to remember the words that when one among us suffers we all suffer. When we work to ensure the collective good and find co-operative solutions, therein lies our hope for a secure, healthy and peaceful future.