Mr. Speaker, it is an honour for me to take part in this debate on Bill C-419, An Act to amend the Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act. I will speak primarily to the provision in the bill that covers the coming into force of parts II and III of the legislation.
This provision, clause 4, changes the provision of the act concerning the coming into force. The Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act was passed by Parliament and received royal assent on June 27, 1986. Nevertheless, parts II and III of that act, the ones dealing with employment standards and health and safety standards, have never come into force.
Part II, establishing the obligations related to normal working hours, salaries and holidays, incorporated part III of the Canada Labour Code.
Part III of the act, setting health and safety standards, incorporated part II of the Canada Labour Code.
Both parts of the legislation were intended to apply to staff in the House of Commons, the Senate and the Library of Parliament as well as the staff of senators and members of parliament.
It may seem odd that they have never come into effect, since the bill has been law for 17 years. The government acknowledged that the unions, as well as a number of employees and members, have called for these provisions to be applied.
The government has acted upon their requests by addressing this matter and consulting parliamentarians and other stakeholders. It did not move on the matter after that consultation because of a lack of consensus. As well, the government feels that the requirements of the law are properly respected, albeit informally.
The standards imposed by part II are already in collective agreements. As well, parliamentary employers respect the spirit of the law as far as health and safety is concerned. In many cases, they go beyond what the law requires.
For instance, the House of Commons has struck a joint health and safety committee made up of representatives of management and labour.
The hiring of MPs' staff is governed by the regulations of the Board of Internal Economy, and employee benefits are set out in the directives of the Manual of Allowances and Services , which apply to parliamentarians in their capacity as employers.
Two main concerns were raised by members of Parliament concerning the coming into effect of parts II and III.
First, part II requirements might have financial and operational implications for MPs and senators.
Each parliamentarian is aware that we must carry out our activities within the framework of the limited funds made available for staff.
Second, the coming into effect of part III might impact upon the independence of members of Parliament and breach their privileges.
For example, employees might refuse to work if they deemed their working conditions to be dangerous, and this might be considered a matter of privilege it if prevented the House or its members from sitting.
Part III would give government inspectors access to the parliamentary precinct, in particular the MPs' and senators' offices, without the authorization of the person concerned or of the Speaker of the House.
As parliamentarians, we need to act with caution when laws are proposed which might conflict with parliamentary privileges.
As I have already noted, parts II and III apply the provisions of the Canada Labour Code to parliamentary staff. Yet that code was never designed to apply to the legislative branch.
It does not in any way take into consideration the distinct nature of the House of Commons or the Senate, rights and parliamentary immunity of MPs, or the constitutional independence of the House from the executive branch.
I would point out that the Parliamentary Employment and Staff Relations Act has not undergone a comprehensive parliamentary review since 1986.
It is now proposed in Bill C-419 that parts II and III come into force without our first ascertaining that they remain as relevant as they were 17 years ago.
As I just said, perhaps we should consider further amendments to the act before enacting parts II and III, to ensure that they do not conflict with parliamentary privileges.
We should make sure that all the amendments made to the Canada Labour Code since 1986 actually do apply to parliamentary staff.
That having been said, this bill only changes the coming into force of the act and does not make any substantive changes to parts II and III.
To conclude, it was in response to concerns expressed by parliamentarians that the government held off enacting parts II and III.
The working conditions of our staff matter greatly to us, but I believe that the House was able to settle the matter informally, without breaching our privileges in the process.