House of Commons Hansard #93 of the 37th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was workers.
Rob Merrifield Canadian Alliance Yellowhead, AB
Mr. Speaker, a dozen patients in Hong Kong who had recovered from SARS have now shown a relapse of the illness. A relapse may mean the patients can still transmit SARS after recovery, again suggesting the need for greater caution in surveillance.
Are Canadian officials involved in investigating the situation there in order to prepare for the same here?
Jeannot Castonguay LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health
Mr. Speaker, certainly this is a serious disease. We need to acknowledge that we must continue to monitor the situation.
Dr. David Heymann, executive director, communicable diseases at the World Health Organization had this to say today:
SARS is the global emergency. We need to get this disease under control and contain it. We made our recommendation based on three criteria. The criteria no longer apply to Canada and they have been taken off the list. We did not make our decision based on something that Canada was doing wrong. Canada was doing everything right, including screening passengers as they left.
Rob Merrifield Canadian Alliance Yellowhead, AB
Mr. Speaker, back on March 27 the WHO recommended surveillance and it was not taking place here. The government at that time had two options: passive voluntary half-measures; or erring on the side of caution with action. If we have learned anything over the past month, it is the terrible cost of a passive, weak approach.
What specific measures is Health Canada taking should a SARS relapse occur in Canada?
Jeannot Castonguay LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health
Mr. Speaker, this disappoints me. With this type of attitude, it is difficult to be very positive. We on this side of the House are very positive.
Canada is one of the first countries in the world to follow the WHO recommendations regarding passenger screening. We are doing more and more every day. We are making the necessary adjustments based on new information we receive. That is how we will solve the problem, not by criticizing. We must learn from what has happened. That is how we will move forward.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, the anti-scab legislation in place in Quebec since 1977 has made it possible to greatly reduce the duration of labour disputes and thus limit the impact on workers' families. Unfortunately, Quebec and Canadian workers under federal jurisdiction do not have the same protection.
Since the Liberals were in favour of anti-scab legislation when in opposition, will the minister admit that after 10 years it is high time her government legislated and solved this problem?
Claudette Bradshaw LiberalMinister of Labour
Mr. Speaker, as I said this morning, and say again now, the Canada Labour Code is in place because we negotiated with employees and employers.
It has only been in effect since 1999. In the discussions, we were forced to reach a compromise on replacement workers, and that is what we did.
Gilles Duceppe Bloc Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC
Mr. Speaker, what the minister is telling us is a total aberration.
A labour code is not a collective agreement. It is legislation. It is something decided on here. Workers and all unions are against this part of the Canada Labour Code. They have made this clear, but she does not get it.
That said, with his preoccupation with leaving a legacy, the Prime Minister took inspiration from Quebec to make political party funding more democratic. Could he not emulate Quebec one more time as far as anti-scab legislation is concerned, which would leave a legacy of benefit to workers, rather than the nonsense we are getting from the minister?
Claudette Bradshaw LiberalMinister of Labour
Mr. Speaker, it is clearly understood that the Canada Labour Code is a tool for both employees and employers.
It took six years to get it in place. I agree that there was no agreement in the discussions on replacement workers, but we did reach a compromise.
The Canada Labour Code is, however, a tool for them and one that belongs to them.
Monique Guay Bloc Laurentides, QC
Mr. Speaker, when they were in opposition, the Liberals voted for an anti-scab bill, a bill introduced and defended by the Bloc Quebecois.
Now that they have the opportunity to do something because they are the governing party, why do they refuse to adopt anti-strikebreaking legislation that would make labour relations more civilized, as they have been in Quebec since similar legislation was passed in 1977?
Claudette Bradshaw LiberalMinister of Labour
Mr. Speaker, it is often said that decisions cannot be made alone. Decisions must be made in cooperation with people all over our country.
It took six years to implement the Canada Labour Code. Why? Because the minister and the department listened to employees and employers.
Because we did it that way, the code belongs to them.
Monique Guay Bloc Laurentides, QC
Mr. Speaker, a number of labour disputes under the Canada Labour Code are dragging on and poisoning the atmosphere for employers and employees, because there are no anti-strikebreaking provisions in Canada.
Are disputes such as the one at Cargill, which lasted three years, Vidéotron, which lasted a year and Radio Nord, going on for six months now, not enough for the Liberal government to act on what it supported when in opposition—an anti-scab law—without delay?
That is what the workers are asking for.
Claudette Bradshaw LiberalMinister of Labour
Mr. Speaker, what the Bloc is not saying is that the Canada Labour Code is such a significant instrument that last year 90% of labour disputes were settled without a strike or lockout. That was because the code belongs to them.
I would also like to tell the Bloc that, as Minister of Labour, I listen to employees and employers. If they come to see me with a better solution than what we have now, I will certainly listen to them, because we, on this side of the House, work in partnership.
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has said that the law did not allow him to provide assistance to Toronto. Well, he was dead wrong on that one. Then he found another excuse. He said there is no dedicated tax. Well, nobody asked for a dedicated tax. They are asking for help. The only thing preventing small businesses in Toronto from getting the federal help they need is the Liberals themselves.
Will the Prime Minister give a straightforward answer and will he provide the assistance to Toronto's small businesses that they so desperately need?
David Anderson LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should pay close attention. We committed a large amount of money toward marketing Toronto as a safe place to visit. Canadian consulates and embassies worldwide are getting the word out that Toronto is a great place to visit.
We are helping people who are ill or quarantined by waiving the waiting period for EI. We are introducing special coverage for part time, self-employed health workers unable to work because of SARS. Canada Mortgage and Housing will help people who face difficulties in meeting mortgage payments because of SARS related work absences. The Canada Customs and Revenue Agency will help individuals and businesses that experience difficulties because of SARS.
Much is being done. The hon. member should pay attention.
Libby Davies NDP Vancouver East, BC
Mr. Speaker, I have to say it is the federal government, the federal Liberals, who need to pay close attention. It is not only small businesses that need help, it is workers too. Hotel workers in Toronto are being laid off by the thousands. They often have low wages. They cannot pay their rent. Thanks to Liberal EI cuts, now they do not even qualify anymore.
So again I ask the Prime Minister, will the government make it clear today that his government will help these hotel workers and make the changes to EI that are necessary to help them to qualify so they do not go under?
David Anderson LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, I mentioned just a moment ago that we are making changes to the waiting period for EI to help exactly the group of people that the hon. member is talking about.
The difference between people on this side of the House and those in the NDP is that we are trying to get Toronto back to being a centre for tourism, a centre for people to visit, so that these people can continue to work. The NDP simply wants to continue the problem, bad mouth the area and do nothing to deal with the fundamental problem, which is the perception overseas.
Joe Clark Progressive Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Mr. Speaker, after the 1998 ice storm the Prime Minister authorized $717 million in relief. In the SARS outbreak he has authorized only $10 million for Toronto. He has the same legal authority now that he had in the ice storm. The difference is that he wanted to help in the ice storm. He could end this double standard very quickly.
When the government spent $100 million on two executive Challenger jets, it took only one day to submit the requisition, sign it and sign the contract. Why does the Prime Minister act more swiftly on his personal comfort than he does to help a city devastated by the SARS outbreak?
David Anderson LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, the expert in the House on double standards has just spoken.
He talked about what we are doing with respect to the SARS outbreak in Toronto. Yes, there are difficulties and yes, we are certainly trying to help. We are working to help to make sure that people get back to work, that Toronto gets back to being a centre for tourism and the major contributor that it is to the Canadian economy.
Joe Clark Progressive Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Mr. Speaker, the heritage minister broke clear cabinet guidelines this week when she criticized the inept and beleaguered health minister on the SARS outbreak, but the Prime Minister did not enforce his own guidelines. He said the rules of resignation do not apply to his friend the heritage minister.
Government policy now is to refuse federal help to Toronto dealing with the economic impact of SARS. Do the guidelines of cabinet solidarity apply to ministers who disagree with that cold shoulder to Toronto? Are they also free to disagree with the government and keep their seats in cabinet?
David Anderson LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, it ill behooves a gentleman who is stepping down as leader of the fifth party because of his failure to do very much in his time in leadership to criticize the Minister of Health who has been working consistently to make sure this problem is dealt with and dealt with effectively to the benefit of Toronto and others in Canada.
The Minister of Health has perhaps only one failing, which is that she has not elbowed her way forward in the press, in the media, to take credit for the good work she has done.
Grant Hill Canadian Alliance Macleod, AB
Mr. Speaker, the health minister was profoundly slow in implementing the screening provisions, which the World Health Organization asked her to do over a month ago. We have another new infectious disease and my question to the government is, has it learned anything from the SARS epidemic? Has it learned anything so that we can avert another SARS blunder with the West Nile virus?
David Anderson LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, I wish to correct the hon. member. He says on the World Health Organization that the approach taken a month ago was inadequate. A month ago the World Health Organization said:
...what has been going on in Canada, including the system of notifying airline passengers and of screening airline passengers, has been shared with other countries as an example of best practices.
That is what we did.
Grant Hill Canadian Alliance Macleod, AB
Mr. Speaker, I guess the travel advisory would be a good indication of whether those measures were adequate or not.
SARS had a devastating effect on the tourist industry in Toronto. Now we have summer camps and wilderness resorts having exactly the same issue in relation to the West Nile virus: cancellations.
My question is, this time will the government follow every single directive from health experts rather than carrying on with its own mindless play?
David Anderson LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is a gentleman who has had an education in science. He is a medical doctor. He should know of the difficulties--