Debates of June 23rd, 2011

Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Order. I did not hear any of that point of order because of all the noise.

The hon. member for Timmins—James Bay.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Sorry, Mr. Speaker. I was not allowed to finish because of the interruptions.

I would ask my hon. colleague to do the right thing and retract that rather low-class comment. If he wants to make derogatory comments, he can go out to the washroom or get on the bus. He can use many places to make derogatory comments, but this is the House of Commons. He needs to have a certain decorum in debate.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Order. We are not going to get into a big back and forth on the point of order. I would ask the hon. member for Medicine Hat to think about the types of words he is using. We are trying to elevate the level of decorum here.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I will continue, because I am going to use some of the language that was used by NDP members. They are very socialist and we know that. They talked about dangerous precedents and draconian measures. We understand, of course, that this is exactly what they are doing in terms of hoisting our fragile economic recovery by not supporting this motion to try to stop the postal workers and by not joining us in trying to get postal workers back to work and delivering mail.

I had another call today from one of my small business constituents, who said he is now going to have to lay off employees because he is not getting postal service. He cannot get his invoices out. He has no income coming in and is virtually going broke. New Democrats purport to support small business. I would ask them if they are going to join us in helping to get postal workers back to work and the mail delivered.

[Malcolm Allen, NDP, Welland, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is abundantly clear that the power rests with the CEO and with the government, which actually has oversight over the crown corporation. The government simply has to give the CEO the key, tell him to put in the lock, turn it to the left, and open it.

The government could have done this yesterday before it introduced the legislation. This would be over with, the workers would be back at work, and the small business owner the member is talking about would be mailing his invoices and getting his remittances, and he would not have had to lay off his employees. That could have been done.

In fact, the government could have done it last week. As soon as Canada Post indicated to the minister that it intended to lock out workers, the minister could have said no, not to go there, not to threaten to lock them out. The minister could have said that if they were going to go back to work not to lock them out, to let them get back to work, and they would try to figure this out. That did not happen and there was a lockout.

The bottom line is that the CEO should be given the key to open the locks and unlock the doors. The workers will show up tomorrow morning to get back to work and we will indeed go forward. It is just that simple.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am probably one of those people who worked in labour and was never involved in union leadership; I was one who would say yes or no to an agreement when I worked as a lumber worker and a teacher.

Let me take it back to the school system. When I was working in the school system, the tone and morale of the school always depended on the direction the principal was taking. In my talks with postal workers, I've found that the morale in our postal service has deteriorated and had deteriorated since the last CEO was in charge. Prior to that, after the late 1990s, things were moving along smoothly. There was good consultation with the workers and the company was making money, but suddenly it went down. There are more grievances now than there have ever been.

Would the member agree that perhaps this is the reason we are in this situation now, that it is because of the fact that we have not had a good labour relations climate in Canada Post?

[Malcolm Allen, NDP, Welland, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the member is absolutely correct. My colleague from down Windsor way will understand this, because he and I were both in the same union at one point in time. If there is not a good industrial relationship between the union and management, the shop floor is poison and productivity goes down, and the company suffers and so do workers. That is clearly what has happened at Canada Post.

As has been pointed out in the debate today, 1997 was the last time that we saw workers being forced back to work. There has been a period of time when we've had basic peace. It is important—

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

I'll stop the hon. member there.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Vancouver East.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to say right off that I think this has actually been a very good debate overall. I guess now we are into about our sixteenth hour. I have been looking at this beautiful calendar on the table in front of us that is still showing Thursday, June 23. I f feel like we are in that movie Groundhog Day, where the day just keeps going around. I guess we might be in Thursday for a while.

Overall I think it has been a good debate. So much of what we do in Parliament seems to be pro forma. There is a bill, we debate it, it goes to committee, and we know what each side is going to say. I do feel that on this occasion, with this debate on a matter that is so serious, we actually do not know what the outcome is going to be. We do not know how long the debate is going to go on. I think that is an open question.

We do not know what the outcome will be although there is certainly pressure building. For all of the New Democrats who have spoken, I can say that, contrary to what the Conservatives say, we do want to see the postal service resume, absolutely. We support those small businesses. We support and understand the need for that service to resume.

But the reality is that we are faced with a lockout and with dreadful legislation in this House that we are determined to oppose. I think that is the only honourable and principled thing we can do, while at the same time seeking changes in amendments that will help resolve this situation. I do think it presents a very interesting scenario in the House and it makes the discussion and the debate all the more meaningful.

I have heard some of the pretty amazing speeches that have taken place and the stories that people have told, whether they are about labour history, women's rights, or the impact of the labour movement. Again, the Conservative members really cannot bear to hear that, but it is a side of society that is really coming out and is rarely debated or aired thoroughly in this House.

I am appreciative that we at least are able to have that kind of discussion and get underneath this legislation to examine the principles and issues of why we in this party feel so strongly that we are opposed to this back to work legislation.

Yesterday, in his incredible speech, the member for Toronto—Danforth, the leader of the NDP, talked about the relationship that he and his family have with their letter carrier. I have the same experience. I think we all do.

I know my letter carrier, who usually comes every day at about 9:15 in east Vancouver. A couple of years ago, he noticed that my front door was open. I was not there. I was in Ottawa. He left, thinking that maybe someone was in the garden or in another room. He went on his way. He came back the next day and the door was still open.

Someone who was staying there had inadvertently left the door unlocked, so the letter carrier, my postal worker, took the time to phone the police and report it. The police came down and contacted my office and I was able to then get someone to lock the door. To me, that was a great example of how letter carriers and postal workers are so much a part of our community.

I have been down to the main depot on West Georgia Street year after year to talk to letter carriers, and also in my own community. We see them there at 6 o'clock in the morning sorting the mail, and then out in the community no matter what the weather, be it icy or snowing or raining, or whether one's stairs are broken down. No matter what, they are out there delivering the mail, so we do have a very special relationship with these folks in our community, and that is mirrored right across this country.

To me, it adds insult to injury that we are facing this legislation in the House that is forcing these folks back to work when they have been locked out, when all they want is to get to the bargaining table to negotiate a fair settlement and a fair deal. Come on, this is reasonable, and this is what labour relations are meant to be about in this country.

I am so sick and tired of hearing the Conservatives say over and over that they do not intervene in the marketplace, as that is not the role of government. So what do they do? As soon as they are faced with their buddies at Canada Post who do not like what they are facing at the bargaining table, they rush out and bring in legislation that makes it even worse. What incentive is there for Canada Post to do anything, to bargain anything, when they know that their friends here are producing legislation they could only have dreamed of and that now is a reality?

Yes, we are pretty opposed to all of that, on the grounds of it not just affecting postal workers but also, and I want to stress this, because of its implications for all workers in this country.

We can see the writing on the wall. This is about a race to the bottom. This is about establishing two tiers of wages: If an employee is new, he or she will get a different wage from some who is already there, and maybe a different pension and maybe different work and safety provisions at some point.

We understand that the government is setting a direction with this legislation by siding with the employer in a completely unilateral way that has enormous implications for labour relations in this country for all workers. We just have to look at pensions. Many of us have spoken through the night and through the day of our concerns about the pension system. It does not matter whether one is unionized or not, because everyone wants to have a sense of security for their retirement. Heaven knows, we have been raising this issue year in and year out in this House, before and after the election.

The issue of what happens to people's pensions, whether they are based on defined benefit plans or defined contribution plans, with the latter really having no security, is of critical importance not only for postal workers but for all workers in this country.

Yes, we are onto that. We recognize that the legislation is setting the direction and tone for what is going to take place in this country in terms of labour relations.

I heard one of the Conservative members say earlier that the NDP is opposed to Canada Post because it makes a profit. In fact, we are very happy that Canada Post generates profits; it shows that it is a very viable crown corporation. It is providing an essential Canadian service to all parts of this country. We just want to make sure that those profits are shared in a way that the employees get a fair deal. Again, to us that seems a very reasonable proposition. The fact that Canada Post makes a profit is not a bad thing; we just want to make sure that the workers do not get the short end of the stick.

We have all been quoting the emails we have received. To hear the Conservatives, one would think that they are only hearing from people who support their back to work legislation. However, I want to add to the record that I have heard from a number of people in my community.

I have an email I received from a small business owner, who states that:

Canada Post is running a profit. It is a Crown corporation why not share the profit. Yes I would like the mail to resume but why not focus on Canada Post listening to our postal workers and give them their due rights.

I have another letter from a constituent, who is a postal worker, who wrote to the minister, I guess a couple of days ago. This constituent says:

I know that if we are legislated back with a poor contract that does not address the many issues, especially Health and Safety, this act will do immeasurable damage to the working environment which already is a highly stressful environment. High injury rates, burn-out from extremely long routes and, believe it or not, high mail volumes coupled with extreme levels of under-staffing have made this job unmanageable.

This postal worker went on to say that we should maybe invite representatives of the parties to go on a mail route to actually see what it was like.

I am very proud of the New Democrats in this House and the fact that we understand what this legislation is about and that we are determined to expose the implications and consequences of this legislation, not only for postal workers but for all Canadians. We want to see the postal service resume and we call again, in this House, on the government to take the locks off the door, allow that service to resume and allow collective bargaining to happen. That is the way things should be.

[Michael Chong, Conservative, Wellington—Halton Hills, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal member for Scarborough--Agincourt last night never really got an answer from the New Democrats to a question he posed. It is important that we get an answer because it is important that we walk the walk in this House.

All that we do in this place is to talk, so it is important to match our talk with action. We and the Liberal members are hearing that the NDP's staff in the House have no collective bargaining agreement and that the Office of the Leader of the Opposition is ignoring the seniority of union staff and new hires in that office are being classified as management to avoid union rules.

Is this true, and if so, when will the NDP put a collective bargaining agreement in place? When will they start respecting the seniority of their union staff? When will they stop classifying new hires as management to avoid union rules? In other words, Mr. Speaker, when will the NDP talk the talk and walk the walk?

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would actually be very happy to answer that question. I do find it a bizarre question because the NDP is the only political party on this hill that stands by its principles and actually has a collective agreement negotiated with the people who work for our MPs and our overall operation. Many other parties lay people off in the summer, some of whom have very low wages. We have a very standardized approach and I'm proud to say that we operate in a very honourable way in terms of our collective agreement.

It is the party across the way that has denied for so many decades having health and safety provisions as rights here on the Hill. Those are things we have fought for. We will take no lessons from that member or the Conservative Party about collective bargaining and labour rights.

[Ted Hsu, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I agree with the hon. member that in the last few hours we have heard many wonderful speeches in this chamber, especially on this side of the House. I also agree that what we are doing here reminds us of the movie Groundhog Day. Yet I remember that progress was made in that movie: Bill Murray's character decided he just could not live the same day over and over again and he tried to do something to improve himself.

I am wondering how we can do the same. I am wondering when we can start talking about amendments to this bill to further show Canadians how unreasonable and unjust Bill C-6 is and what a dangerous precedent it is.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, of course we want to see progress. I do not want to be stuck in that movie.

We are here debating this legislation, but we have said all along there is a very efficient and easy way to resolve this situation, and that is to remove the lockout.

Our leader made it very clear last night in his speech that the NDP will offer amendments and, in fact, has already been in the process of trying to offer resolution to this dispute. However, the response from the Conservative government has been rigid and unilateral.

I would ask the members opposite, are they not willing to recognize that this legislation is extremely harmful and that they need to embark on a sensible and responsible course of labour relations?

[Paul Dewar, NDP, Ottawa Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I want to reiterate my colleague's point in response to a Conservative member that we do not even have health and safety provisions here on the hill. That issue has been outstanding for years. If the members opposite want to talk about fairness, how about the people on the Hill who do not have the same health and safety provisions workers across Bank Street have? That is hypocrisy. This government is engaged in that hypocrisy when it brings in closure.

I would like my colleague to talk about closure, because if we go back to when the Conservatives were in opposition and criticizing the then Liberal government on closure, they said they would never invoke it. Here we not only have had closure invoked but it has been brought in before the legislation was even tabled. So we now have new heights of hypocrisy and I wonder if the member could comment on that.

[Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Ottawa Centre is entirely right. Not only are we debating really regressive legislation but the whole process by which this came forward from the government. It really is the first piece of legislation that has come forward after the budget, and it is a very telling story that the government used its majority to invoke closure on a bill that we had not even debated. How is that democratic?

Unfortunately, we have come to expect that of this Conservative government. Even so, we are opposing the legislation and will fight it all the way.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to rise in this House representing the people of Timmins—James Bay who, over the last century, have fought many of the key labour battles that have allowed us the standard of living we enjoy today and who are watching with great concern. I have received emails from people across the region who have been watching a concerted attack against a way of life that has been built in this country thanks to working people standing together.

What we need to do here today is to deconstruct the stage play that has been set up by the PMO and the Conservative Party. This is one of their careful little stage plays were the world is in black and white and there is good versus evil, and Captain Canada over on the Conservative benches is going to rise up and squash the union bosses and the socialists. We hear such language from the back benches of the Conservative Party.

How was this stage play created? There was an ongoing labour dispute with Canada Post and CUPW. Certainly in the Conservative mind, beating up on posties is probably an okay because they think there is a collective memory of a time of great labour conflict. They keeping saying that the sides have never been able to get together. In fact, look at the last time: It was in 1997 when we had to order them back to work. Then my wonderful daughter, Margaret Lola, was not even born and now she is in high school. So this is not an ongoing crisis; it is a breakdown of discussions. Then the government intervened and locked out Canada Post.

We have an unprecedented situation where, in a fragile economy, the government is working with Canada Post to shut down the mail service of the country. That has allowed them to stand up and to say that we have a crisis and that they have been forced to act. It is a manufactured crisis. It is an old tactic of the Conservatives. John Snobelen, the leader of the Mike Harris gang, used to speak about how one has to manufacture a crisis in order to shake things up.

They shut down the postal service across the country. Then the Conservatives have come into this House dressed as Captain Canada, vowing they are going to defend the interests of the senior citizens they have cut off, that they are going to defend the small businesses they have cut off. They create this as an us versus them battle.

It was interesting last night to listen to the Minister of Labour, because she kept trying to confuse the Canadian public that the Conservatives had to intervene because it was a strike. She said the word again and again. It is a misrepresentation, because it is a lockout.

She said the government was not taking sides. Of course, we know what side the government has been on.

When the leader of our party said that we could settle this, that we were speaking with the union and that we were willing to bring forward amendments to make this work, there was laugher and ridicule from the Conservative benches that we would have a phone line to the union workers of this country. Of course, we have a phone line to them because that is how one gets things done in the country. In the New Democratic Party, we believe one should talk and not demonize.

I find it astounding that the Minister of Labour would ridicule the idea of actually talking to the other side. That is what we have been doing. We have offered amendments and offered to work with this government. We have not heard anything back from them except vitriol.

The Minister of Labour defended this. Wearing her Captain Canada logo, the minister said that the Conservatives represented 33 million people. It is an absurd claim that the Conservatives make that they represent all Canadians versus only 40,000 union members. What does that attitude represent, but a narrow mentality that the big get to crush the small.

If we went by that theory, we could undermine all manner of things in this country. That is the Conservative mentality. That is the stage play they are creating, whereas New Democrats do not believe in pitting people against each other or using the politics of division.

Unfortunately, it is not all that surprising, because we need to see the author of this stage play. I would like to quote the voice of someone who is well-known in this House, who said:

In terms of the unemployed, of which we have over a million-and-a-half, don't feel particularly bad for many of these people.

Who was that? That was the Prime Minister of our country.

He said that when he decided he did not like federal politics. He had better things to do. He quit his job as a member of Parliament, which some people might not remember, and he went to work for the National Citizens Coalition. He thought they had a better agenda than could be achieved in the House of Commons.

I was looking at the platform the current Prime Minister ran on in 1997 with the National Citizens Coalition. One point was to start attacking the interest groups such as women's organizations and human rights organizations. We sure saw how the Conservatives put the boots to KAIROS. It goes right back to the original plan. Another one was to launch a media attack against unions. We could hear it from the backbenchers. They would go on about those big bad union bosses. That was there in 1997 when the Prime Minister was running the rabble at the National Citizens Coalition.

There are some other interesting things he ran on. These are the key reasons he left Parliament. One was to set up a lobby campaign to bring in right to work legislation in Alberta. The second was the privatization and elimination of the public service. The third and most crucial one which he ran on with some of his now elected buddies was a campaign to de-unionize the workforce.

When Conservatives say they are not picking sides, we know exactly what they are doing. This has been a manufactured stage play by the extreme right in this country and a Prime Minister who said that he did not care about the fate of the unemployed. He said that in 1997. We know that a leopard never changes its spots.

I would like to indicate how this demonization has occurred under the Conservative government.

I heard the member for Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound yesterday. The Conservatives are creating all these emails and saying that they are talking to the common people, madam and monsieur citizen. The member said his people back home say that if people starting in the workforce get $12 an hour and three days a week, they should be tickled pink.

I have talked to many people in my riding and across the country. I have never had senior citizens come up to me and say they are ticked pink that their adult son or daughter was getting $12 an hour with no pension and three days of work a week. They are lucky to have a job; that is the attitude. I have never heard that.

What I have heard is people asking about what has happened to our country. The pension and workforce that have been built up are being eroded. The workforce is being turned into a temp service. By intervening and creating this lockout, the government is creating a two-tiered workforce. It says that the new workers do not deserve pensions, that they deserve lower wages. My hon. colleague from Bruce—Grey—Owen Sound said they should be lucky to have a job.

I know what it is like to see communities fight to get basic wages. My grandmother told me that when she was a little girl she saw the first form of lockout and back to work legislation. It was called the army. My grandmother was a young girl when Winston Churchill sent in the army against the dockworkers of Dundee. She never forgot that.

Of course, they moved into the velvet over the brass knuckles. When my family came to Canada my grandmother was in the Hollinger mine strike that went on for six months. At that time the average life expectancy of a Timmins miner was 41 years because minders were dying of silicosis. At that time there was no eight-hour workday. They fought for the eight-hour workday. It was not given to anyone. This is something they built up.

I remember the stories of men like “Big” Jim McGuire of the Western Federation of Miners. He said that when a man gets injured in the mines, there should be compensation. The records show that the Conservatives at Queen's Park at the time laughed and ridiculed him. Their grandsons and granddaughters are here today laughing at us because we have said there is a fundamental principle here. If the Conservatives want to make this a stage play, well this is their play.

The New Democrats have said again and again that we want the locks off Canada Post. We want people back to work. We want a fair negotiated agreement. This takes good will. We have offered to work with the government. We have offered to help bring the union to the table if the government is willing to listen. However, it is not going to happen if the government ridicules the notion of actually talking to the union, if it tries to demonize them as union bosses, and if the members of the government believe that people making 12 bucks an hour for three days a week should be happy to have a job. That might be the Conservative ideology, but it is not ours.

The Conservatives say they will not take sides, but look at Nortel. Look at the Nortel workers who lost their jobs and their pensions. Look at the sick workers whose benefits were cut off and the government did nothing. Every other western nation that was involved in Nortel stood up for their workers. The government did nothing, but--

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

Order. The hon. member's time has expired.

Questions and comments, the hon. Minister of State for Transport.

[Steven Fletcher, Conservative, Minister of State (Transport)]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the member's comments. We are here today to talk about resuming mail service for Canadians.

After eight months of negotiations, the negotiations broke down. There were rotating strikes which led to a lockout, which led to a complete mail stoppage, which has had a huge detrimental impact not only on the postal workers and the financial viability of Canada Post, but most important on the people of Canada. That is why we are here as the Government of Canada and members in the House of Commons, to represent the stakeholders, the people of Canada. Would the member acknowledge that?

We recognize that the member and his party have strong ties to organized labour. However, would they put aside those biases and support the Canadian government in bringing workers back to work so that Canadians can get their mail in a timely manner? Will the member's party support the Government of Canada in supporting the people of Canada?

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to the minister's argument and it seemed to get rather convoluted. At one point he said that great stress has been caused to business. Yes, of course. That was caused by his government's decision to lock out the workers.

How much more direct do we have to be? Do we in the New Democratic Party want the workers back at work? We want them back now. This is why we have said let us just sit down and deal with these amendments, but the government does not want to do that.

Then the minister presented a circular Conservative argument saying that they, as in Captain Canada and the Conservative Party, represent Canada. They do not represent Canada. He accused the New Democratic Party of not representing Canada. Why do the Conservatives not do the right thing?

I say to the member that I do represent Canadians. I represent the people of Timmins—James Bay and I will be in this House for as long as it will take to ensure that people get a fair deal.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Mr. Speaker, it is interesting listening to the debate. I very much appreciate the fact that there are many people who are also listening to what is taking place in this chamber. There is a great deal of sympathy in terms of the hassles and the bother that the Canada Post workers have had to endure because of being locked out.

Earlier in his speech the member made reference to the fact that the NDP have provided amendments to the government as to what could be done on this legislation. It would be extremely helpful if the NDP could provide that information to the Liberal Party. It would be great to end the lockout and let the workers get back to work.

Having said that, I understood from his comments that there are some amendments which the NDP has shared with the government. Would the NDP object to sharing them with all Canadians and members of the chamber?

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we have made an offer to the government to settle this. I am not trying to freeze the Liberal Party out of this whatsoever. We are trying to act in good faith with the government. We have offered the amendments. We have offered not to go public with them. We want to see if the government will sit down and negotiate. That is how it is done.

We are serious about getting this situation settled. We know everybody wants their mail service back. This manufactured crisis by the Conservative Party has an impact on Canadians across the country. We think it is completely unacceptable that the government has held senior citizens hostage when the mail servers said that they would ensure that any cheques for seniors would be delivered. They made that offer. Once again, the Conservatives are not talking to the people on the lines. We have been talking to them. We know what their offers are. We know what the issues are. We are offering as the official opposition to make this happen. We just need to see that the government is actually willing to stop holding the Canadian public hostage.

[Jamie Nicholls, NDP, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to thank my constituents for their support. And I also want to wish them a wonderful Saint-Jean-Baptiste Day.

My riding of Vaudreuil-Soulanges is quite awesome. From the top of Rigaud Mountain, we can see farmland, the Ottawa River and Lac des Deux Montagnes on the north side. My constituents know the south shore of the St. Lawrence quite well. Some say that Rigaud Mountain is but a hill, but the landscape tells quite a story. Today's sand plains were once the shores of Champlain Sea, which was created by the melting of ice sheets after the ice age.

Our crucial waterways were shaped by melting ice. Watersheds are an integral part of our lives. The forests, rivers and wetlands in my riding are part of the creation myths of the Mohawks who live on the other side of Lac des Deux-Montagnes.

We also have the Haudenosaunee nation, known as the Iroquois, and Turtle Island, for the turtle coming out of the water. These were among the first communities to be established in the region. There is a long history of fine communities made up of good people looking after each other and rising to every challenge. This is the region where my father decided to settle. It is the region where the father of my party leader also settled with his family. They wanted their children to grow up surrounded by nature, in a healthy environment among warm people who were always willing to lend a helping hand, and in a place where they could attend good schools. They wanted us to grow up in a better world.

They wanted us to grow up in a better world. My father, William Nicholls, was a working man. He worked in a non-union job for a company called Control Data. That was a company that delivered computer paper to all the departments of the federal government in the 1970s and 1980s. That was my introduction to Ottawa, at the age of eight. As we drove into Ottawa in his truck, we would bring boxes through the back doors. He delivered an essential service. He kept the databanks of the government going.

Sometimes he was treated with disdain when he entered through the wrong door. His work was taken for granted. Other times, he was greeted warmly. As a child watching the reactions of these people to my working father, I realized how manual labourers in this country were perceived.

I find it unfortunate that the government is trying to place blame on the working people of this country by confusing for Canadians the difference between a strike and a lockout.

It is not surprising, though. The government is happy to discourage the voting population into thinking that public service and government does not work. It would have them believe that people working in a union have cushy lives and that they are spoiled. I am sure the Conservatives' Minister of Labour will set them straight on that.

Once upon a time there was a young girl of eight years old. Her name was Lisa MacCormack. Her father was a union organizer in Nova Scotia. This girl grew up to be a minister in Canada's government. Through struggle, hard-working values and respect for work, her family was able to prosper. Through her union family's upbringing, she was able to prosper.

My father wanted a better life for me too. That is what I also want for my daughter. I am here for Pera Nicholls, age six. I want her to know that in my short life I struggled to make a better world for her, a world where she will not be worked so hard that her body breaks down before its time like so many workers' bodies in this country do.

My father died at 62 years old of lung cancer. He smoked because it was a psychological crutch for him. All the weight, worries and stresses of the world were channelled into those cigarettes. My father did not like his work. He did it with pride and the knowledge that his sons would have a better life and that they would have benefits, pensions, respect, low stress and an easier life than his was.

Our time on this earth is limited. We have maybe 100 years each, and in a hundred years all of us in this room will be gone. Is it not our calling on earth to alleviate the suffering of all of our fellow citizens?

What I see from the government is a mean-spirited 19th century attitude; that is, survival of the fittest. And I find that echoed in the words of Stockwell Day in his address to the Conservative convention that was held a couple of weeks ago. He said, “The official opposition will bring out the saddest cases, the most hard done by. They will present to Canadians stories of the most hard done by”.

Do members know what his advice was to them? He said, “Don't listen to them. They are the exception. We are here to promote Canada's prosperity”. That sums up the Conservative spirit for me. The Conservatives are for the prosperity of the few.

The Conservatives throw the label “socialist” at us. I would ask Canadians why Conservatives took the word “progressive” out of their party name. Its absence implies that they are the regressive Conservatives. That name would certainly be apt, since they want to take us back to jolly old Victorian times when there were fewer workers' rights, sexuality was repressed and people lived in fear of God. It was easier to control people and easier for monopolies to form. The term “regressive” always implies rolling back rights and measures that were put into place to make workers' lives less stressful.

I cannot say that the Conservatives are deliberately misleading Canadians when they continually refer to the crisis before us as a strike; that would be unparliamentary to imply that. I will let Canadians be the judge of that.

It is a lockout. It is a lockout that has been done with the approval of the government. The Conservatives are the ones who are keeping hardworking Canadians from working. Why? That is in order to demonize them in an attempt to turn Canadians against working people.

I would like to read an email from Jack Coyne from the Yukon:

Thank you for the telephone call this evening in regards to the Canadian postal...[lockout]. It is heart-warming to know there are those in our nation's capital who are working hard to resolve this dispute.

I believe the fabric of our country is being damaged with the halt of Canada Post. Certainly we all know there are other ways of communicating during this lock-out, but what of the elderly who are unable to send each other birthday cards? What of those who depend on mail-order catalogues? I personally know of dozens of artists who are unable to ship their wares worldwide. I have a farmer friend who was lucky to receive his chicks (chickens) before this...[lockout].

I know of people who are waiting for this conflict to end and are desperate for their cheque in the mail. The lack of Canada Post is a missing link in our lives and I feel people do not understand the significance of this void and perhaps will not understand until perhaps it is too late.

Obviously, the longer the...[lockout] continues, the less faith the public will have in the system, translating into less mail volume; This reduction will result in the inability to support our current level of service and will ultimately spell the demise of our current world-class postal system.

I believe in the importance of our Canadian Postal System. It is part of our culture and it is part of our heritage. Please do not allow it to perish.

I am grateful for your obvious concern and diligence; I appreciate your getting in touch with me.

I believe these sentiments from Mr. Coyne are shared by many, so I would say to the Prime Minister, “Take off the locks, Mr. Prime Minister”. Welcome the workers back and let them do their jobs. One phone call and you can stop this lockout. Take off the locks, Mr. Prime Minister.

[Kellie Leitch, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and to the Minister of Labour]

Mr. Speaker, we would actually all get back to work if the opposition made the choice to simply stop this debate and vote with respect to the bill to make sure people get back to work immediately.

Our government was elected with a strong mandate to complete Canada's economic recovery. Recent polls state that 70% of Canadians support back to work legislation to end the work stoppage at Canada Post.

In my riding, Simcoe—Grey, Canadians want their postal service restored so they can get back to business, so their charities can flourish and they can make sure they are going to be profitable and provide jobs to people.

Can the member explain why the official opposition is not on the same side with the majority of Canadians?

[Jamie Nicholls, NDP, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately this government is committed to maintaining this lockout. This approach has deliberately caused division and conflict among Canadians. I find it unfortunate that the Prime Minister and his ministers have chosen ideology over allowing Canadians to receive their mail.