Debates of June 9th, 2006

Questions on the Order Paper

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Royal Galipeau]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Royal Galipeau]

It being 1:30 p.m., the House will now proceed to the consideration of private members' business as listed on today's order paper.

Rural Mail Delivery

[Lui Temelkovski, Liberal, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

moved:

That, in the opinion of the House, the Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities should use his power to direct Canada Post to maintain traditional rural mail delivery and protect public safety when rural constituents are required to collect mail at designated group mailbox locations, long distances from their homes.

Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to have the occasion to bring this motion on rural route delivery before the House of Commons this afternoon on behalf of the people of Oak Ridges--Markham. The timing could not be better as rural mail delivery is quickly becoming more and more of an issue right across Canada.

On a regular basis we are receiving word of more health and safety complaints and of more routes being affected. As late as 11 o'clock this very morning, I was informed that another rural route in my riding, specifically Gormley, will not be receiving mail today the way it did yesterday. Recent news reports cite affected routes in rural parts of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia and other parts of Canada.

In total there are more than 6,600 rural mail carriers across Canada delivering at some 840,000 points of mailbox delivery. The latest figures I have seen show that approximately 300 rural mail carriers have made health and safety complaints.

Before I discuss the motion and the circumstances in my riding, I want to outline just how fundamental this matter is. Aside from speech, mail delivery is the most fundamental means of communication between human beings. In an age where we have a whole host of choices for communicating, mail is still the most official and the most enduring. Indeed, we are all familiar with the classic slogan for postal delivery, “Neither rain nor snow nor sleet nor gloom of night shall stay these couriers from the swift completion of their appointed rounds”.

Mail delivery is much too important. Seniors depend on timely mail delivery for their pension cheques. Consumers who order products online depend on mail delivery for their packages. In this day of instantaneous communication and quick sound bites, who does not cherish the handwritten letter? Who could imagine receiving a wedding invitation by electronic mail?

Mail delivery is fundamental to our national identity and is as important now as it ever was.

Constituents in my riding of Oak Ridges--Markham experienced a cessation in their rural mail delivery at the end of January, right in the dead of winter. The three routes in my riding were among the first to be affected in the whole country. Residents ceased receiving their mail because of a road safety complaint lodged by a Canada Post rural mail carrier and a subsequent ruling by Human Resources and Skills Development. The affected rural routes include Kettleby, Whitchurch-Stouffville and other areas out of the Newmarket postal station. I commend Canada Post for immediately taking action. Temporary mailboxes were installed and residents received all of their outstanding mail.

As this is a federal issue, residents immediately contacted my riding office in Markham to let us know what was happening and to voice their displeasure at the interruption in their mail delivery. It is important for me to state that no notice was given to my constituents. They woke up one morning and there was suddenly no mail delivery. It was just that quick. I understand that other affected areas in Canada have not received proper notice either.

The situation now is that residents who were accustomed to home delivery for decades are now inconvenienced by having to drive to get their mail. Some residents in Oak Ridges--Markham have to drive long distances while others do not have vehicles.

This is not good enough for rural residents in Oak Ridges--Markham and it is not good enough for all rural Canadians. This situation presents safety concerns for rural constituents. On top of that, instead of just a few rural route carriers on the roadways, there are now thousands more people and vehicles on the roads.

This stoppage in mail delivery has been particularly troublesome for a visually impaired customer who can no longer walk to the end of his driveway to get his mail. Another customer is physically disabled and it was not easy for him to retrieve his mail because his temporary mailbox was too high for him to reach. As well, as if it is not bad enough for the elderly, some of their temporary boxes are at ankle level. This presents a safety hazard in itself as they bend to get their mail.

I took action on this file immediately. I wrote to the minister responsible for Canada Post on two occasions. I wrote to the Prime Minister. I organized a public meeting in my riding so that Canada Post officials could hear from the residents and vice versa.

I appreciate that Canada Post officials attended the meeting and communicated with affected residents. This was the first town hall meeting that Canada Post held to explain what occurred. Canada Post now routinely holds these meetings in affected areas.

Still the situation is unresolved and will be so until traditional rural route delivery is restored and the safety of customers and employees is protected.

I recognize that unsafe work conditions exist for rural mail carriers. Some rural routes are unsafe and carriers are forced to endanger themselves on speedy roadways. As well there are ergonomic concerns in that some carriers may experience physical strain or repetitive stress injuries from continuously leaning over to put mail in the mailboxes.

These conditions existed before, but this is a fairly new issue as rural mail carriers only became employees of Canada Post in 2004. This means that they are unionized workers and in a position to refuse unsafe working conditions. It is crucial that Canada Post deal with these concerns. No one should be in danger in his or her place of work. This is not an ideal situation for anyone. It is inconvenient and unsafe for residents and no one dismisses the dangers that exist for employees.

Beyond that, employees who make a grievance can often face contempt from their customers or may fear making a complaint in the first place due to public vilification.

The minister has to address all of these issues in his capacity as minister responsible for Canada Post. Indeed, in a letter to me dated March 28, the minister wrote that his “role as the minister responsible for Canada Post Corporation is to determine the broad policy direction of the corporation”. Rural route delivery certainly involves a matter of policy for the corporation.

Last Wednesday the minister told the House that he and the Prime Minister would be meeting with the head of Canada Post. He did not tell us when this meeting would occur, but we learned from media reports and committee transcripts that the meeting was held the very next day, on Thursday. Why was the government not more transparent? Why did the minister not tell us when the meeting would occur? What was the result of the meeting? What was discussed? We have not seen an official statement on this meeting.

This is not good enough for affected Canada Post customers. Why is the government so secretive about such a public issue? The minister knows that this concerns members on both sides of the House. Perhaps I missed something, and if I did, I hope I will be corrected, but why has the minister not reported back on this matter?

My motion urges the minister to use his power to direct Canada Post to restore traditional rural route delivery and protect public safety.

The minister has several options. He should propose that Canada Post, one, have a vehicle equipped with a steering wheel on the right, the opposite side; two, move problematic mail boxes to better locations; three, have two employees so one can get out of the vehicle. I understand this has already been undertaken, but perhaps this arrangement should be made permanent. He should proposed that Canada Post, four, have vehicles pull into the driveways; five, have employees get out of their vehicles to drop off the mail; six, ensure all vehicles have reflective strips and lights on them; seven, work with the provinces and municipalities to address particular road safety hazards; eight, ensure adequate training for the drivers in manoeuvring rural roadways.

These are just some ideas. Some might work better than others in certain areas. Canada Post must work carefully with affected communities and with residents to find an appropriate solution that is tailored to each mail route.

Residents expect action. It seems that every year the price of stamps increases. The net income for Canada Post in 2005 was $199 million. This represents a $52 million increase over the 2004 figure of $147 million. Indeed, 2005 represents the 11th year of consecutive profits for Canada Post.

There is no question that cutting rural route deliveries helps Canada Post cut costs. Having community mail boxes means that the corporation does not need to pay as many staff members and does not need to worry about mileage costs or about health and safety issues associated with rural route deliveries. Cutting rural route delivery is in Canada Post's best interests from a financial perspective. I sincerely hope that we will not see an attempt by Canada Post to use workers' safety complaints as an excuse to cut rural route deliveries and save money.

The corporation has the means and the money. It must safeguard the safety, convenience and rights of all customers and employees. Rural Canadians pay their postage costs and they pay their taxes. They deserve better than having to get their mail at community mail boxes.

Now is the time for the government to stand up for rural customers in Oak Ridges--Markham and right across Canada. I urge the minister and the government to support the motion.

[Alex Atamanenko, NDP, British Columbia Southern Interior, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's talk on the postal situation in rural Canada is timely. I just received a call in my riding office and I would like his opinion.

The person said there are not enough post office boxes in the rural areas because the population is growing faster than Canada Post is creating new boxes. Because of this, some constituents have to go to larger centres. Folks in the community of Beaverdale, which is over an hour away from Kelowna, have to rent post office boxes in Kelowna while they are on a waiting list for a post office box in their own community.

Does the hon. member feel that this is an acceptable procedure on the part of Canada Post?

[Lui Temelkovski, Liberal, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

Mr. Speaker, that is a great question. That question has been debated by the constituents in my riding and Canada Post officials. When we received the temporary boxes initially, they came banged up and with a lot of dust on top. The tops of them were cleaned up, but when the mail boxes were opened, there was all kinds of dust and perhaps hazardous stuff insides.

In my opinion, in speaking with Canada Post officials, I do not think that they will have enough mail boxes to place temporary boxes while the court hearings or the appeals are being dealt with.

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Minister of Human Resources and Social Development]

Mr. Speaker, as someone who until very recently relied on rural mailbox delivery for my mail, I have a very great interest in this issue as well as being representative of a very rural riding. I am concerned and have been fighting to preserve our rural mail delivery system. It goes right to the roots of our Canadian tradition. It also goes to the issue of service to rural Canadians, something that has been cut back far too often in other areas.

As the minister responsible for ensuring that people have safe work practices, I also am concerned about the workers of Canada Post. I noted, with some interest, the member's comments and suggestions on things that could be done. I hope, in the spirit of cooperation, he could elaborate on some of these. From my personal perspective, I am having a tough time understanding how some of these might work, but if they did, I would certainly like to have his input.

Specifically, the two issues I am interest in are these. How would right-hand drive vehicles help, especially with making the vehicles themselves more visible? The way I see it, is in certain locations it could actually make things worse. The second issue is the relocation of mailboxes to a more convenient location. Where does the member suggest they be located so it would help the situation?

[Lui Temelkovski, Liberal, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

Mr. Speaker, this was discussed extensively at our meetings with the residents and Canada Post.

In terms of the right-hand drive, we heard, in our discussions with the residents, that mail delivery people were driving the wrong way on the shoulder so they could deliver the mail out of their window as opposed to the passenger side window. When we travel across the world or in some parts of Europe or the United States, we notice immediately that they have rural delivery trucks that are somewhat narrower with right-hand drive. This allows the drivers to put the mail into somebody's box.

In terms of relocation of the boxes and safety, that responsibility falls squarely on Canada Post to ensure that it enters into discussions with municipalities. Municipalities must work with Canada Post to suggest locations that would be safe enough. This means they must be far enough from the road or the curb, or in areas where there may be a dead-end road or on a side road as opposed to a major road. Officials of Canada Post have indicated they are modernizing their community boxes or super mailboxes. Now there is a gazebo style that would fit in with the local beauty, which may be different across the country. I like their thinking on that and I support them on that issue.

On the safety and relocation of mailboxes, when the temporary boxes in my riding were first installed, Canada Post employees put them wherever they could. We started receiving faxes from constituents. We alerted Canada Post, which removed them and placed them somewhere else. They then obstructed the view of a church by placing 12 mailboxes in front of it. They were the green temporary boxes, which are not very attractive in front of anyone's home or any church.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to tell my colleague that this has snowballed. In Quebec, dozens of routes have been closed in the past few days. The president of Canada Post met with the minister and the Prime Minister when she appeared before the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities

Has my colleague heard rumours, as I have, that Canada Post's profitability is being boosted so that the corporation can be privatized in the not-so-distant future?

[Lui Temelkovski, Liberal, Oak Ridges—Markham, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it has been discussed by Canada Post officials that this would be a larger expense for Canada Post. It also admittedly said that it would be a larger increased expense initially and maybe subsequently the carrying charges would decrease for it.

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport]

Mr. Speaker, first, my comment is for my friend, the member for British Columbia Southern Interior. I would like to find out more information about the community of Beaverdell. My brother lived in that community and I visited it many times. My father helped build the mountain road back in the fifties and sixties. I would be happy to help in any way I can. It is an absolutely gorgeous community, and I congratulate him for having it in his riding.

On behalf of the government, I would like to give some good news to the member opposite, who put forward the motion. I take the opportunity now to tell Parliament that the government will be supporting the spirit and intention of the motion. Congratulations.

I can assure the member that, as the member of Parliament for Fort McMurray—Athabasca, a rural area in northeastern Alberta, I am very aware of the concerns of rural Canada. I also am very aware of the importance of a reliable postal service, as are all members on this side of the House. I am very proud to be a member of a government that will support rural Canadians.

I want all members of the House to understand that the government recognizes the important role that the post office plays in communities across Canada. Thus, in addition to supporting a quality rural mail service, we are also fully committed to maintaining the moratorium on rural post office closures. It is great news again from the government.

Of course there are unavoidable situations such as fires or deaths, where something happens that cannot be avoided and where the operation of a rural post office in a small community can be affected. In such cases, Canada Post always consults locally with these communities to explore any option that is possible and available to meet the obligations and needs for ongoing postal needs for that community.

It is important to note that many of the concerns regarding disruption of rural mail delivery services are reported to be of a safety and ergonomic nature, as my friend across the floor brought forward.

However, today's motion focuses directly on rural mail delivery. I think it would be helpful for members to know why the motion was presented and why the Conservative government supports the spirit and intention of the motion.

Some members may be aware that there have been recent health and safety concerns expressed by postal employees delivering mail to roadside mail boxes in rural areas. Canada Post has in fact briefed members who want information on their areas. It has been very cooperative in providing briefings to members regarding those ridings that have been affected.

The member for Oak Ridges—Markham as well as the member for York—Simcoe, a member from this side of the House, are very aware of the situation because they have safety concerns relating to the Newmarket area ridings. For those members who have not yet been briefed on the issues that impact rural mail carriers, I am here today to provide some background information, which I hope will be helpful for them.

First, Canada Post delivers some 40 million pieces of mail per day to more than 12 million addresses, and it does so in a number of different ways. We are all familiar with the resident's door and delivery of mail that way. We are also familiar with the community mailboxes that have become commonplace in Canada. Finally, there is the mail delivery at local post offices.

Rural mail carriers deliver to approximately 843,000 addresses through roadside rural mailboxes, usually located at the end of people's driveways. Canada Post employees have not always performed this work. Prior to 2004, this work was done by private contractors.

[An hon. member]

What happened to them?

[Brian Jean, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB]

What happened was a private member's bill came forward and the government acted. The bill sought for the independent contractors to become postal employees. Indeed, Canada Post and the Canadian Union of Postal Workers, signed an agreement, resulting in more than 6,000 contractors becoming employees of Canada Post in January 2004.

The law rightfully places obligations as well on all employers across Canada to ensure that they have safe working conditions for employees. Under the Canada Labour Code, which the House passed, there are certain obligations on employers. Employers now even have further legal responsibilities to ensure that the health and safety of employees is protected.

Indeed, the House recently amended the Criminal Code, following the Westray Mine disaster, to impose a new duty on employers to take reasonable steps to prevent employees from suffering harm at work.

What could be more important than keeping Canadians safe in the job or at home?

In the past six months, more than a few hundred rural mail carriers have raised health and safety concerns. Some have even exercised their legal right to refuse to work under the Canada Labour Code. These employees have raised two areas of concerns.

The first, as has been mentioned, is ergonomic health, a complaint arising from the repetitive motion of stretching to deliver rural mail across a left-hand drive vehicle into a post box.

The second is related to road safety. This concern is especially prevalent in rural communities or on rural roads. These include, for example, high volumes of traffic and the increase in volume of traffic on rural roads. Sometimes these roads are not wide enough to allow a vehicle to pull off to the side to deliver the mail without having to worry about what's coming behind them. In some cases there are insufficient sight distances. For instance, roadways and hills cause a visual disturbance to somebody coming along behind them. Thus, they are unable to react quickly enough or to stop to avoid some form of accident.

We are talking about the safety of employees and the safety of residents in rural Canada.

Human Resources and Social Development health and safety officers have been called in to investigate a number of the work refusals. They have determined, in some cases, that the workplace conditions do constitute a situation that must be immediately corrected: safety concerns. The government is committed to the safety of Canadians.

Canada Post is committed to protecting the safety of all its employees. The corporation immediately upon receiving these decisions implemented a series of measures to mitigate these concerns.

There are a limited number of safe alternatives to roadside mailboxes, and Canada Post understands this. This may include delivery to a central point, such as a local post office or a community mailbox. Millions of Canadians, including rural Canadians, already receive their mail this way and have for some period of time.

Where Canada Post has received a Human Resources and Social Development decision or direction relating to road safety or where delivery is clearly unsafe, quick action has been required and quick action has been taken. In these cases, customers have immediately been moved to alternative forms of delivery.

In each case Canada Post is working closely with the community because the community is what drives Canada Post, and it understands that. It is working closely with the community to ensure that convenient delivery is maintained through locations where both employees and public safety is protected, the very thing to which the member's motion speaks.

At the same time, Canada Post has engaged various experts, including traffic safety experts at the National Research Council, to evaluate and advise Canada Post on the working conditions of rural mail carriers. The findings of these experts will provide guidance moving forward as to how Canada Post can comply with the legal requirements and its obligations to its employees.

Some of the more practical solutions Canada Post has already moved on are flashing yellow lights to ensure these vehicles are visible from behind and reflective signs. They have already been passed out and delivered to all 6,000 rural route drivers.

Just as the government takes seriously the safety and the ergonomic concerns raised by Canada Post employees, we are insisting that Canada Post maintain a rural mail service. The government recognizes that issues have arisen with respect to rural mail delivery and are in part due to labour issues, but also are in part due to safety issues.

The Prime Minister and the minister responsible for Canada Post have recently met with senior officials of Canada Post. As a consequence, Canada Post has reiterated its commitment to taking steps to ensure quality rural mail delivery.

The government is supporting the spirit and intention of the motion.

[Mario Laframboise, Bloc, Argenteuil—Papineau—Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise on behalf of the Bloc Québécois to discuss the motion introduced by our colleague from Oak Ridges—Markham.

At the outset, I would like to say that we support the principle underlying my colleague's private member's bill.

If I may, I would like to quote the Bloc's most recent election platform, which was straightforward:

—adapting government services and crown corporations, such as Canada Post, to the aging population is an important issue.

The rural population is aging, and Canada Post must do everything in its power to adapt its services to this reality and avoid forcing people, particularly those with disabilities and reduced mobility, to travel long distances just to get their mail.

This is important. There is indeed a problem at Canada Post, as my colleague mentioned, but there is also the reality of the situation. When I say we agree in principle, we have to be careful because this situation is changing very quickly.

Earlier we heard the parliamentary secretary say he was in favour from the outset, just like the government, to the motion introduced by the hon. member, but let us not forget it has two parts. The first part says:

—to maintain traditional rural mail delivery—

and the second part adds:

—and protect public safety when rural constituents are required to collect mail at designated group mailbox locations, long distances from their homes.

That is where we must be careful. The parliamentary secretary is explaining the message from Canada Post, as its president did at the last meeting of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities.

The president came to deliver her message that for safety reasons we have to put an end to these irregularities in the interest of her employees. Nonetheless, her speech and what is really going on are two entirely different things.

I want to warn all my colleagues from rural areas. In a question to my colleague, I said earlier that Quebec had not been affected. However, for the past two weeks it has been directly affected. In other words, the syndrome that hit certain communities in New Brunswick and British Columbia is snowballing.

At first, as the parliamentary secretary was saying, it was a matter of a refusal to work. It is true that under the collective agreement the employees can file a refusal to work. In such cases, Canada will see what the problem is.

This time, however, Canada Post is taking it much further. There are two options: employees can use refusal to work or they can file a safety complaint. Canada Post, apparently, is at the second stage.

It happened in my riding—as those citizens listening are aware—with regard to a complaint about roads in Thurso, Lochaber-Canton and Lochaber Ouest. Two days ago they saw a notice that they will be receiving. Canada Post met with the communities to tell them that a complaint had been filed. An employee who wished to avoid a refusal to work decided to notify Canada Post that certain locations on the roads were unsafe. At that point, Canada Post initiated the process as though there had been a refusal to work. It decided to notify the public. It quickly carried out a safety evaluation and told the citizens that 178 of 660 mailboxes had safety issues.

It invited the public to a meeting. I will read you the notice that will be sent to them, because other Quebec communities have received it. It is a notice advising that Canada Post wishes to meet with the members of the community and discuss ways to solve this problem. Canada Post makes two, not three, suggestions: citizens will have to pick up their mail at the local post office or use community mailboxes.

When the community asked Canada Post if it was prepared to sit down with citizens to resolve the problem of the 178 mailboxes, Canada Post said that it did not have the time, that it was too expensive to do so, that it was not what it wanted, and added that it wished to speak to them about remedial solutions. There are only two: send citizens to the post office or set up community mailboxes. There is no other solution.

It does not matter what the parliamentary secretary tells us. If he does not rein in the president of Canada Post, who does not want to spend money once the safety evaluation is completed, she will not deal with each of these problems.

The parliamentary secretary told us that the Canada Post Corporation is ready to sit down with Canadians. That is not true. That is not what the Canada Post Corporation does. It will gather citizens together in one place to tell them that there are safety issues, that it analyzed the situation, and that the only solution is to create community mailboxes. It will ask them where they want these community mailboxes set up, or whether they would prefer to have their mail sent directly to the post office. That is what it will really do.

The elderly and people with disabilities who live in rural locations and are used to getting their mail delivered at home in their own mailboxes will have to leave home to get their mail. That is why I am cautioning my colleague who introduced the motion. He must ensure their safety. When they go to public places, citizens must feel comfortable and safe.

I agree with that, but first, I would like the Canada Post Corporation to sit down with people who have safety issues to see whether they might be able to move their mailboxes or whether there might be some other solution.

I am sorry for my hon. colleague, but having spoken directly with Canada Post Corporation, having listened to the president in committee, I know that Canada Post is willing to analyze safety issues, and if it is deemed unsafe, it will find another means. This other means will not involve changing the location of the mailbox. It will not involve looking at solutions one by one with citizens; it will be a comprehensive solution. If there are safety concerns on any given route, it will create group mail boxes.

The problem is that Canada Post cannot create these group mail boxes immediately because, apparently, manufacturers cannot deliver them fast enough. Thus, that idea must be forgotten. There seems to be quite an operation in the works. That is what I was saying earlier. One can sense that Canada Post is preparing for future privatization.

An analysis of the safety and security concerns across Canada will likely be conducted. We already know that 25% of mail boxes can pose safety problems. A massive project is underway to remove those mail boxes and tell people that they must use group mail boxes or simply go to their local post office.

That is not the answer. That is not what people want. What is more, Canada Post's profits will not let the corporation do that. It could sit down with the people whose mailboxes may pose safety problems to see if it can solve those problems. If it cannot, it may send them to the post office. But Canada Post is not prepared to do that. And my colleague's motion, which we support, does not suggest that.

My colleague has not seen how events have progressed. Changes are being made very quickly and will eventually apply to everyone. Quebec has been covered for two weeks, and this is going to snowball. Quebec has more mailboxes on poles than anywhere else in Canada. We will see a series of decisions by Canada Post that will put an end to deliveries to mailboxes for safety reasons.

It started with complaints. Canada Post will conduct safety operations everywhere to make sure its employees do not refuse to work. It will try to use its employees to justify its actions.

You should have seen the president in committee. Her eyes were twinkling with dollar signs at the thought of how much money the corporation could save. Among other things, she will save money in the long term with community mail boxes. It was quite something to see this woman in action. She was the consummate CEO taking decisions.

As I told my colleague, before the president appeared before the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, she attended a meeting at the Prime Minister's Office with the Minister of Transport. He told us about it. My fear is that a decision has been made to privatize Canada Post in the medium term. They will look for ways to save as much money as possible in order to make it profitable and be able to privatize it.

This goes against the interests of all members of the public, especially those living in rural areas who will be at a disadvantage because the rural service costs too much and poses safety problems. Under the guise of safety, they are going to save money on the backs of the public. All the hon. members from ridings where mail is delivered to rural areas will be affected. They should not be surprised. Before the president appeared before the committee there was no problem in my riding. In just two weeks, two routes with mail boxes in rural areas are at risk. Hon. members will have to deal with this in their ridings and they will have to be vigilant.

We will of course support the motion of the hon. member, but I think that the government should rein in Canada Post and table a bill in this House to protect rural routes.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague, the member for Oak Ridges—Markham, for his timely private member's motion. As a rookie MP in the House of Commons, I see that he has taken the opportunity to bring forward an issue that really does resonate right across the whole country. He focused it on his riding, but it fits the whole country and that is a very good thing to do.

I trust that we can move forward with this motion, with the support of the New Democratic Party and with the concurrence of the government. Of course, concurrence of the government does not mean that we are going to get the final results we are looking for and that was well pointed out by my colleague who spoke earlier.

There are many a slip twixt cup and lip when it comes to dealing with Canada Post, and getting some of kind of ruling and result in the end without considerable backsliding along the way. This motion is appropriate, but it is going to require follow up and attention from across the country to ensure that it works for people.

Last weekend I had the opportunity to attend a meeting of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities. As deputy critic for rural and northern communities for the NDP, I attended the rural communities forum. Rural municipalities across the country have realized over the last number of years that they need to get organized at a national level in order to get their voices out and issues on the table.

The FCM has organized, at the national level, the rural communities and it would be a very good place to extend this discussion, using its capacity to reach out to rural communities across the country, to understand if these problems are occurring all over the country and also to ensure that when the government instructs Canada Post to deal with the problems, we have a way of seeing that they are dealt with.

I would say that might be another avenue to take this issue at a date in the future. It has an executive committee as well that meets on a quarterly basis and could put forward this kind of information to the rest of its members. That is one way we might continue this to ensure that Canada Post not only deals with the issue but continues to deal with the issue and works satisfactorily on this issue across the whole country.

I represent northern communities and there are very few that have any kind of postal delivery. We all rely on postal boxes in central post offices in the smaller communities. Many of the communities are small in size and people routinely travel 20 to 30 kilometres a day or whenever they choose to do so to collect their mail.

There is no consistent standard of delivery across the country for all rural people that we could point to and say that is the way it is done for everyone. That is not the case and in many of these communities, of course, the burden is put on people to get their own mail at a central point. That is part of living in the north. People put up with these sorts of things.

In other ways other services have been given to us. The food mail system in the north is very important to people. They can get food delivered to them at a reasonable postal rate, but what they have found in a lot of the communities in the north is that the stores are taking advantage of the food mail delivery costs and not passing it on to the customer. That is a concern that northerners have with Canada Post, that it enforce the spirit of the food mail delivery system as well as the letter of the law.

Canada Post must have the spirit to show that it wants to be that public service that we want it to be. Any time I hear that Canada Post should be even more privatized than it is already I shudder for our northern communities. It leaves me completely cold to think that would be the direction in which we would take that service, which has so many important attributes for isolated and rural communities across the country. We certainly do not want to see that.

I appreciate that the member has brought this matter forward in the form of his motion, which he was fortunate enough to have had drawn under private members' bills. All members wish we were in the top 10 of the lottery on private members' business but that does not always happen. I think I am at 208. I am unlikely to get into the top 10 unless the government turns out to be more conciliatory. We will all work on that over the summer. We will not be betting any money on the length of time the government stays in power. At the same time, the government should think about other members who have numbers in the triple digits and consider that we may want to bring forward motions such as this one in the future.

The New Democratic Party will support the motion but we want to ensure it works, that it does not get caught up in bureaucracy, that it does not get caught up in where the separation between Canada Post and the minister means that it could get watered down and the solution that does not work for everyone is implemented.

[Andy Scott, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I also commend the member for Oak Ridges--Markham for the timely use of his very fortunate draw in private members' business. What I would like to do today is put a practical and human face on the issues that this private member's bill is designed to deal with.

Last Monday, 1,150 homes in greater Fredericton were advised that there would be no mail the next day. As a result of that, by noon on Tuesday my office had received 60 calls and 100 by the end of the day. We called Canada Post when this happened to find out what was going on and were advised that mail delivery had stopped as a result of work refusal on the part of its employees in terms of rural home delivery. While safety issues could be applied in some instances in greater Fredericton, the same arguments could not apply to the vast majority.

In any case, for two or three days it was very difficult. Unlike my Bloc colleague, I would say that the president of Canada Post, under very difficult circumstances, did respond to our interventions and began the process of public meetings. Four meetings have been held so far. However, this is not a particularly pleasant exercise because constituents are very angry as this came as a complete shock to them. They received no notice. Many of the people we are talking about are seniors and many have disabilities. All of this happened right out of the blue. We are talking about cheques and other important communications that were not being received. These constituents were simply caught completely unaware.

Over the course of the next three or four days there was significant movement on the part of Canada Post and it started bringing in mailboxes. When we originally called we were advised that Canada Post would not be able to make any temporary arrangements for at least six weeks. As it happened, temporary mailboxes were put in place that weekend after the rather vociferous response within the community.

I welcome what the parliamentary secretary had to say about the government's support for this motion. I understand there are 840,000 similar rural mailboxes in Canada. There are now ongoing discussions within Canada Post as to what lessons might have been learned from this. If significant change is going to be made, and this is a significant change, it is hard enough to change things in an unemotional, calm atmosphere but if we add the dimension of injustice these people felt by virtue of the fact there was no notice, then it is more difficult to have that community forum exercise.

Good suggestions were made and my colleague alluded to many. The Minister of Human Resources and Social Development wondered about having the car reconfigured so the driver would sit on the other side. The reason this suggestion was made was because of the recurring movement problems involved with reaching over. These kinds of vehicles are used in other jurisdictions in the world for the same purpose.

Many people recognize that they live on streets where it is not just dangerous for the person doing the delivery, but it is dangerous for the people who receive the delivery in that fashion. Many of them recognize the need to have collective mailboxes but they are not the majority. That is not even close to a majority. It is very difficult to defend on a safety issue or a safety argument when, in the case of many of the residents, they are caught on a route that had some unsafe boxes, but certainly it does not apply to all, or even the majority of them.

I would also suggest that this should not be posed as a choice between rural home delivery and the safety of employees. It is the responsibility of Canada Post to figure out how to do this in a way that is safe for its employees. I take it from what the parliamentary secretary said that the government accepts that and would give that as a general policy direction to the Crown corporation.

I also want to pay tribute to the residents who, notwithstanding their anxiety, concern and outright anger in some cases, have in fact participated in these public meetings. In fact, residents have chaired the meetings. They have made a large number of very reasonable and positive suggestions. I will not go through the list because that has been done, but I want to pay particular recognition to Sue Johnstone with Canada Post locally in Fredericton who has been very helpful in facilitating these meetings. I think that they will continue.

Again, I want to make sure that no one, and there will be those that may try, should somehow ask the carriers to operate in unsafe conditions, nor should they ask the residents to somehow be responsible for the fact that they cannot be served in any way that is not safe. The reality is that those two competing objectives can be reconciled.

Further, as we go forward with 840,000 of these boxes across the country, the most important lesson that should be learned from this unacceptable execution has to do with notice. It has to do with public consultation before the fact so that the communities can engage in offering their own understanding of the roads, understanding of locations, understanding of what is convenient and possible within their communities. As I say, change is not something that is embraced easily. We do not need the complication of anger, emotion and so on.

I also want to recognize a few individuals who have gone out of their way in an obviously volunteer capacity. John Moreau of Rusagonis outside of Fredericton has been going door to door since last Monday circulating petitions. There will be a large number coming forward. I do not think we can let up in this. As an hon. colleague from the Northwest Territories said earlier, it is one thing for the government to support the private member's motion, but it is quite another to make sure that it is executed better in the future.

Jackie Philips of Rusagonis chaired a meeting in that community. Again, these are volunteers in their local communities and some of these meetings were charged. We should be appreciative of them for doing this.Don Stewart is going door to door in MacLeod Hill and Royal Road. That would include the part of Fredericton where I live. Earl Holland in the local service district of Noonan chaired a meeting and has been making calls around the community.

There is a resolution here as we go forward. Again with 840,000 boxes this can be done in a way that is acceptable to the communities. People are not unreasonable. People would not want the employees of Canada Post to put their health and safety at risk, but in the spirit of this private member's motion, and as has been accepted by the parliamentary secretary, this is about a commitment by the government to rural home delivery and not something other than that, unless there are a minor number of instances where it has to be done differently. All other things should be done basically as a responsibility of Canada Post.

We cannot blame these citizens for fearing that this would be seen as an opportunity by the government, because I know that some have said that this is an opportunity, to move to a different place. I was glad to hear the parliamentary secretary tell the House that not only does he reject that notion, but that he intends to support this private member's motion.

[Gary Schellenberger, Conservative, Perth—Wellington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have known and know many rural mail carriers who have delivered mail day by day, rain, snow, sleet, hail or whether the sun is shining. Many have been working into their seventies and eighties, never complaining, sometimes without holidays, thinking only of getting the mail through, people like Freeman Apple, Bill Ney and Richard McNamara.

Many Canadians, especially those in rural areas of the country, have become concerned in recent weeks about the disruption in delivery service to their homes. The government has heard this message. That is why the minister, as well as the Prime Minister, has directed Canada Post to maintain good quality service to all rural residents.

As members are aware, the disruptions to rural mail delivery in Newmarket and elsewhere were caused after Human Resources and Social Development Canada ruled that Canada Post had not protected some employees against the possibility of being struck by traffic on busy routes. Given the changes to workplace health and safety standards, it is perhaps not a surprise that complaints have been made today, even after rural delivery procedures have remained the same for many years.

Since January 26 when the ruling was made, Canada Post has tried to place group mailboxes along delivery routes in safe stopping areas. Canada Post has also met with local officials and the public to discuss the issue.

Certainly, the safety of all Canada Post employees must be our top priority, but I am hopeful that this can be done while at the same time ensuring that people in smaller, rural communities receive their mail as quickly and conveniently as possible. That is why I hope that Canada Post will consider alternatives for those areas where legitimate safety concerns exist or where visibility requirements are not met.

I am pleased that Canada Post has recognized the impact of its changes on some rural communities and has agreed to work with them to find solutions. It is important to meet the needs of both employees and customers. As a rural member of Parliament, I know how important this is to so many of my constituents.

[The Acting Speaker, Conservative, Royal Galipeau]

The time provided for the consideration of private members' business has now expired and the order is dropped to the bottom of the order of precedence on the order paper.

At this moment, before I call the time, I would like to pay tribute to 18 of our pages. The people who work with us and who serve with us on a daily basis are also community-minded. Last weekend they assisted four members of this House at the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario annual telethon.

The four members of the House were: the hon. President of the Treasury Board, the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board, the hon. member for Hull--Aylmer, and your humble servant.

However the credit really belongs to these 18 pages and they are: Ellen Burch, Laura Morrison, Stephen Middleton, Dominique Angelo, Emily Bates, Nathalie Freynet, Joseph Morin, Renée Tousignant-Keays, Sarah Burke, Andrée Carpentier, Sarah Gillis, James Mancini, Mark Ruban, Anna Hopkins, Jennifer Laing, Marisa Monnin, Jeremy Stuart and Leslie Ning.

I thank them all, on behalf of the Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario telethon.

It being 2:30 p.m, this House stands adjourned until Monday next at 11 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 2:32 p.m.)