Debates of June 23rd, 2011

Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Madam Speaker, I certainly appreciate my hon. colleague's comment and her points. Her points are well taken. Her question about representation in terms of what I think Canada's New Democrats are doing is to be commended, because I have heard from a number of my constituents and a number of members of CUPW.

I've heard from members like Michelle, for instance, who says: “I'm a postal worker from New Westminster that has sent you many letters. It's 12:30 Friday morning. I've been watching CPAC for hours now and would love for you to send my thank you to you and all your fellow NDP members, the biggest thank you for the fight and understanding of where we are coming from.”

She thanks us for the fight we are putting up for them. It actually brought tears to her eyes on that evening, she says, to see us standing up here and talking about those things that most of her fellow workers are fighting for. She just wants to pass on how much she appreciates the support we are providing and the comments we are making.

[Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville—Eastern Shore, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I hear from the Conservatives that they are getting all these letters from various postal workers. I am just wondering if the hon. member would agree that if they have those letters, they could table them in the House so that we could look at them and maybe concur with their remarks, if they wish.

[Fin Donnelly, NDP, New Westminster—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I think that is a great idea. I would like to see them. There have been hundreds of emails and letters coming in from across the country. I have certainly been getting dozens. We would welcome getting many more of those from members across.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, this is a grave moment. Yes, I know that it is around 3:33 in the morning. But no matter what the time might be, it is grave all the same. This deplorable situation and this bill, which is totally harmful to postal workers, cannot go on. What is more, all Canadian workers and their families must be respected. Bill C-6 is unprecedented. It will do harm, and it risks leading to a deterioration of working conditions for all Canadians. Is this what the Prime Minister wants? Is this what the Minister of Labour wants? Was this the intention of the Conservative government? I do not think so. I hope not. I dearly hope not. This is why we are here: to set the record straight. I spoke about the time earlier, and I am mentioning it again, to explain the situation to the Conservative government so that it can amend this horrible bill. Yes, this is a grave moment.

Let us once again explain the source of the problem. There was a negotiation process between the Canada Post Corporation and its employees. That negotiation was not easy. Negotiations are sometimes difficult.

The postal employees could have launched a completely legal general strike in accordance with the rules, but they did not want to go on strike. What they wanted was instead to use certain pressure tactics. Why? Because they like what they do. They want better working conditions. They wanted to work. Their aim was to use these pressure tactics. It is only natural that they should want to bring pressure to bear.

They also wanted to put pressure on management without hurting the Canadian people. That is most noble on their part and they should be applauded for it.

After the Canadian Union of Postal Workers began a series of rotating strikes, the union even offered to end the strike if the corporation agreed to keep the previous contract in effect for the duration of the negotiations. Incredible. The workers were even prepared to accept the status quo in the meantime, but Canada Post refused. The officials turned that down. Truly incredible.

On June 15, Canada Post decided to lock out all of its employees and shut down mail delivery. What a mistake. What an illegitimate action to take.

On June 20, the Conservatives tabled a regressive piece of legislation. Let us say it: this legislation is regressive. It would impose a contract on postal workers that includes, among other things, a wage settlement that is lower than what management offered. Can anyone in this House rise and dare call this good legislation? I challenge anyone in this House to rise and say that this part of the bill is good. I challenge all Conservatives to say that this clause is fair. I am speaking of course of the part that includes a wage settlement below the level in the management offer. It is incredible.

My riding assistant, Daniel Lemire—a nod to him in passing: I do not think he is watching at this hour, he must be asleep, but that is okay—recently met with the locked-out workers in Drummondville. He found people who were idle, frustrated, even very angry at being unable to go to work. Yes, they want to go back to work. First of all, they wanted to go back quickly. They said we should see to it that the bill is passed and they can go back to work. But after all the conditions in Bill C-6 were explained to them, they said, “Hold on a minute.” Now they are worried because the Conservative government wants to pull the rug out from under them and deny them their legitimate right to negotiate in good faith for better working conditions and for the good of their families.

The locked-out workers told us that they wanted to return to work. As I was saying earlier, they were not the ones who decided to stop working. This is a lockout. These people enjoy their work. They enjoy providing this service to the public. They are only waiting for the Conservative government to remove the locks from the office doors so they can return to work.

That way, they can go back to delivering the mail for the good of seniors, SMEs and all Canadians. However, they are not prepared to swallow the affront that is Bill C-6, which the Prime Minister is trying to force down their throats. They want to return to work with respect, dignity and honour.

Let us talk about postal services in rural regions. The riding of Drummond includes many small municipalities; it is a large rural region. How many small municipalities are there in the riding of Drummond? There are 19 towns in the riding of Drummond. I will not name all of them, but I will talk about the little town of Saint-Guillaume, where I lived for a long time. If my colleagues should have the occasion to go there, I invite them to drop by the famous Saint-Guillaume cheese factory, which produces excellent cheeses distributed all over Quebec and beyond.

Let me tell you something about town life. The post office is the heart, lungs, eyes, ears and mouth of the town. Towns cannot do without a post office. It is like a primary school or a financial institution. It offers local services essential to the survival of our precious municipalities.

Unfortunately, this back-to-work bill does not guarantee the survival, viability or vitality of these unique institutions, which enable our small municipalities to continue to prosper. In my riding, the town residents are highly engaged and very attached to services such as those provided by the post office. Consider how essential the postal service is to our seniors, our mobility-impaired people, and our SMEs. There are some SMEs in my constituency, and they are very dynamic and innovative.

In short, the back-to-work bill tabled by the federal government penalizes postal workers and rewards Canada Post for locking them out. It has to be said that it is Canada Post that has interrupted national mail delivery. It is Canada Post's fault. So what does the government do? It gives Canada Post the carrot and the employees the stick. It should not be that way; that is not logical. This is an unhealthy sign of real bias.

As I was saying earlier, the bill imposes wage increases that are below those offered by Canada Post, but I will give some actual numbers. Canada Post’s offers were 1.9% in 2011, 2012 and 2013 and 2% in 2014; this is well below the rate of inflation, which is 3.3%. The Conservative bill would further reduce those increases to 1.75% in 2011, 1.5% in 2012, 2% in 2013 and 2% in 2014. It is scandalous.

Here is some more information. Public postal service and postal workers do not cost the public purse anything. My colleagues mentioned this earlier, but it bears repeating: over the last 15 years Canada Post has made profits of $1.7 billion and paid $1.2 million in dividends and income tax to the federal government.

To summarize the situation, this is not a strike, but a lockout. The government is trying to impose a contract that is not a fair collective agreement. It is inappropriate for the government to intervene and impose a contract on the employees. We will oppose this bill and the government’s attempt to privatize Canada Post and reduce services to Canadians. I would have liked to read an email, but I will not have the time.

I will say this in closing: let us unlock the doors of Canada Post and finally make it possible to have real negotiations that respect both parties.

[James Lunney, Conservative, Nanaimo—Alberni, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the member's debate. This debate has been going on for a while, and everybody is enjoying it. Those who are not enjoying it, of course, are the Canadians waiting for their mail.

I notice that the member raised the fact that Canada Post is a profitable corporation. A few moments before, one of his colleagues also raised the point about profits. In fact, the member before thought it might be an idea for the government to fire the management after 15 years of making a profit. So profit is a bad word, according to the NDP.

In the provinces where the NDP have been, such as in British Columbia, my home province, they have certainly suffered. Two terms of the NDP put my province into a have-not status.

I wonder why these members are not more concerned about the people who are suffering. They want to say it is a lockout. Let us pretend that there was not a strike. Rotating strikes are okay. They do not hurt the economy; they do not hurt people. You cannot run a business when it is shut down city by city indefinitely. They have taken $100 million of profit out of Canada Post Corporation already.

By the way, Canada Post's profits since 2009 have been going into the transformative changes that will make sure Canada Post exists for these workers in the future.

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague made some interesting comments, to which I listened closely.

Despite everything, I would like to read the email I received, which I mentioned earlier. It provides a very good response to him. This lady is a letter carrier who has been locked out by Canada Post. She took part in the rotating strikes that were legitimately organized. She has lost her salary, since Canada Post does not want to bargain with the CUPW bargaining committee. She says she wants to work, like all the other CUPW members who are locked out. However, she does not think that the repercussions of the few days of strike activity organized by CUPW have been as significant as what Canada Post has imposed not only on all postal workers, but also on all Canadians. In no way was it the aim of those workers to take the population hostage.

It is very important to remember that the workers want to work and that this was a rotating strike, not a general strike. They could have called a general strike, but this was nothing but a rotating strike, precisely in order to minimize the inconvenience to the public. Who made the problem worse? Canada Post did, by—

[The Speaker, Conservative, Andrew Scheer]

I must interrupt the hon. member so we can move on to the next question.

The hon. member for Bourassa.

[Denis Coderre, Liberal, Bourassa, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I heard the same speech from a different member of Parliament. I had hoped that the member for Drummond would tell me whether the recipe for poutine came from there or Victoriaville, but I guess that will remain a mystery.

More seriously, they can drag out the debate as long as they want, but I am not sure that we are being effective. Committee of the whole is where things are resolved, when we propose amendments.

What amendments does the member for Drummond have to propose? Is he prepared to allow the House to go into committee of the whole so that we can discuss the amendments? I am not asking him to read what he is told to read, but I want to know what he really thinks. Is he prepared to make amendments?

[François Choquette, NDP, Drummond, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Bourassa, who is the funniest member in the House. It is pretty incredible. Sometimes he talks a bit too much, but I am saying that on a personal level. Since it is so late, I thought I would throw in some humour.

What is very important is that we remember the clause in one of the old settlements done by the government. This clause in the agreement between the Canada Post Corporation and its workers ensured that there would be a good work environment in the future. This is lacking in the settlement proposed by Bill C-6. A clause should be added to ensure that there is a healthy work environment after the situation is resolved.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by highlighting the fact that unionized workers at Canada Post were locked out by their employer. They were willing to continue to work with minimal delays. They were willing to deliver pension and disability cheques. They were trying to minimize public inconvenience because they believe the postal service is important to Canadians. It was the government that locked them out. Now small businesses are hurting and people are becoming more and more frustrated because they do not have access to the mail system.

The issue is that the members opposite, the members of the government, simply wish to stomp on the rights of workers and prevent them from negotiating an agreement with their employer. The government wants to force them back to work with this draconian legislation. The whole thing smacks of a setup: the workers are locked out, this creates a mail stoppage, the public is upset, and the government is able to use the lockout as a propaganda tool.

This also gives the government the opportunity to implement Bill C-6, to force workers back to work and cut costs at Canada Post. What is in Bill C-6 is a deal that is far less than the inadequate contract offer made by Canada Post.

I am very afraid for the workers at Canada Post, in fact for all those who work for crown corporations and as public servants in this country. If this legislation passes, their right to bargain will also be placed in jeopardy because this bill undermines Canadians' rights to collective bargaining and the legitimate expectation that there be fair treatment of workers by their employers and by their government. This right is protected in our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

I would also like to point out that this government claims bargaining is the best way to achieve a settlement for workers. They said this when they introduced their so-called pay equity bill. However, what we are really seeing is Conservatives undermining collective bargaining, leaving workers without the ability to negotiate a fair and appropriate agreement with their employer.

This back-to-work legislation reflects this government's true anti-union, anti-worker agenda. It is quite clear they are planning to chisel away the rights of workers--all workers. They want to take away the right to bargain for fair wages, safe working conditions, and pensions. It is pensions that are at the centre of this.

This outright attack on unionized workers sends a chill down my spine. I fear for public sector workers and employees of crown corporations, and indeed all workers in this country. Who is next? The CBC, the voice of Canadians, a part of our cultural history? Will employees of the CBC see wages and benefits rolled back? The National Gallery? Parks Canada? The Canadian Wheat Board? Of course, we know the government is trying every underhanded tactic to dismantle the Wheat Board.

Despite what some members opposite may choose to believe, unions have been very good for this country. We have all benefited from what they have negotiated at the bargaining table. It is not just fair wages. Unions have been on the forefront of human and equality rights and environmental protection. They also work for better pensions, health benefits, reasonable hours of work, and much more.

It was union negotiations that brought about the weekend. Interestingly enough, it was the CUPW's strike, the strike of 1981, that established maternity leave rights and benefits that set in place the opportunity for families to ask for and negotiate maternity and paternity rights across this country. The ability of young mothers and fathers to have time to stay at home to look after their infant children is owed to the men and women of CUPW, who went on strike for 41 days to gain those rights.

We know workers' rights are regularly threatened because employers do not just try to reduce wages, they attempt to cut corners. Unions are there to protect the health and safety of their members, to ensure they have fair wages, and they are treated with respect. Union members are not greedy. They are voters, and they elected us to represent them in this House. They deserve our respect, just as every Canadian deserves our respect. By attacking their rights, we are attacking all Canadians.

Now I would like to outline some of the issues of the current labour dispute. First, Canada Post management wants to eliminate sick leave and impose an inferior short-term disability plan that does not provide sufficient protection for short-term illness.

It also poses major problems concerning medical privacy. Recently the union offered to refer the issue to a government appointed arbitrator. CUPW believes that the current sick leave plan is adequate. It functions well and there is no need to change it.

Workers' health and safety is key. Postal workers deserve the right to work in a safe environment.

Canada Post also proposes a four-year agreement with wage increases and a cost of living allowance which will not provide sufficient protection for the wages of postal employees. CUPW believes the wage offer is too low considering the current annual inflation rate.

The people of this country know that food prices, the cost of energy, housing and prescription drugs just go up and up. Everyone is struggling, including postal workers. To add insult to injury, employees hired after the date of signing the Canada Post proposed collective agreement would have a starting salary 18% less than the current starting rate of the letter carriers. This would create a two-tier pay structure for the same job. That is far from fair. Canada Post has already cut many more jobs than is justified by the reported decline in volume, a decline that we know has been much exaggerated by the corporation.

As a result, there has been a significant increase in voluntary and forced overtime and a reduction in regular full-time positions. This harms workers and their families.

Changes need to be made. This entire situation needs to be handled differently.

The words of those directly affected by the strike are salient to this debate.

Karen sent me an email just yesterday. She said:

“I am a postal worker in your riding in London, Ontario. I've been watching the debate about the bill online and wanted to ensure that the NDP speakers knew some of the following details”.

“The corporation has demanded numerous rollbacks throughout the bargaining process despite the fact that Canada Post Corporation has made record profits for the past 16 years. CUPW members across the country voted 94.5% to go on strike because we do not believe these rollbacks are necessary. CUPW decided on rotating strikes in order to impact the public as little as possible. CUPW also informed the public in advance as to the locations that were going to be affected. Once the 72-hour notice was given, the employer immediately discontinued our benefits. On the date of the first rotating strike, provisions of the collective agreement were also discontinued; part-time hours were cut immediately and full-time hours were cut in half the following week.Many plants across the country are currently full of mail because the hours were cut and the mail could not be processed. But postal workers continued to sort and deliver the mail despite these harsh tactics by CPC. CUPW agreed to stop the rotating strikes if CPC reinstated our collective agreement. The Canada Post Corporation refused! Then CPC locked out postal workers across the country, affecting all Canadians. They did not inform the public before making this decision”.

“We are not on strike, we are locked out. CUPW has been reasonable throughout these negotiations, CPC has not. The issue of health and safety is very important to CUPW members because we have one of the highest rates of injury in Canada”.

I also heard from Geoff, a retired postal worker, who wrote:

“I and my brethren are very concerned about the obvious and predictable union-busting tactics of this ruling government. When the Conservatives got into power with a majority, I feared many things for our country's future, and sadly they are already taking place at breakneck speed. One of these things was that it would be glaringly anti-labour and this has obviously come to pass in the tabling of back to work legislation against Canada Post workers. I think it is incumbent upon the opposition party to hold this legislation up so as to force Canada Post to come up with something resembling a reasonable contract offer at a time when good jobs are disappearing all over the country. I watched my last 10 years in the post office, as routes got even longer, the route measurement system was systematically abused and we were carrying ever larger loads on ever longer routes, leading to more frequent injuries on duty”.

“Please stall this bill and get meaningful talks back to the table”.

Contrary to government assertions, many Canadians know that this is an unfair lockout by Canada Post aided and abetted by the Conservatives. Canadians want their mail. They want their mail sorters and letter carriers to get back on the job.

I call on the government to withdraw this unfair legislation and unlock the doors of Canada Post.

[Carol Hughes, NDP, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague is exactly right. These people have been locked out and that is why Canadians are not getting their mail. Could my colleague could talk about the outrageous bonuses that the CEOs receive? The company wants to reduce the wages of the workers who are busting their backs out there and yet CEOs are getting big bonuses. I am wondering if my colleague can speak to that.

We need to remind colleagues on the other side how many unionized workers are actually out there because those who are actually part of the Canadian Labour Congress, which they are affiliated through, number over three million and I know there are many more that.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague is quite right. Some 55,000 postal workers are out of a job. They have been locked out. All they wanted was to secure their pensions, to secure a livelihood for their families and to do the work they do best.

My colleague mentioned bonuses. I would like to refer to the reality in this country. We know that the CEO of Canada Post makes in excess of $600,000 per year and the profits of Canada Post last year were $281 million. Surely there is room in that fiscal reality for a proper settlement for postal workers so they do not have to worry about feeding their children and receiving their pensions.

I would also like to remind the House that the banks last year made $22 billion in profit and $11 billion of that went to CEO's compensation and bonuses. It seems to me that there is a rather skewed notion of fairness in this country.

[Cathy McLeod, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Revenue]

Mr. Speaker, I have followed this very closely over quite a few hours, as we all have. This was started with a speech by our Minister of Labour who talked about the comprehensive process, that there had been bargaining at the table for many months. There had been conciliation. There had been arbitration provided by the government. We looked at the rolling strikes and I think people are diminishing the impact of those rolling strikes. We have heard from our Minister of Health how that really impacted. She understands better than anyone in the House how much the north relies on the delivery of food, diapers and the essentials of life. Because business people were unsure about what was going to happen, it was just like having a strike.

Does the member opposite believe it is now time to pass this legislation, get mail to the north, let our businesses get back to work, and it is time to not pick sides any longer. Let us get this legislation passed.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Speaker,my colleague talks about picking sides, but the government already did. It picked the side of the corporation. It allowed the corporation to lock out its workers and then it brought in legislation that supports the corporation.

The Canada Post Corporation locked out its workers. The union members of CUPW are being punished with back to work legislation, legislation that reduces the stingy offer that Canada Post made.

I referenced an email that I received earlier in my remarks. That individual who works for Canada Post said the Canada Post tactic is consistently to refuse to negotiate until it gets a strike mandate from the workers.

The government talks about eight months of negotiations. There was no such thing. Canada Post would not come to the table. It did not come to the table until the workers had no choice but to take the strike vote and then it locked them out.

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Canada Post made nearly $300 million in profits in 2009. To be exact, it made $281 million in profits in 2009.

We do not have the numbers for 2010, which is actually a little surprising. I thought those numbers were supposed to be released two months ago. We are a little surprised and have to wonder why these numbers have not yet been released, and whether there is any connection with the current labour dispute.

In any case, we are talking about nearly $300 million in profits in 2009 and 15 years of profits. Canada Post has turned a profit for the past 15 years.

Also, as we heard earlier tonight, Canadians are satisfied with the services offered by Canada Post and with what this crown corporation represents to our communities.

There were rotating strikes that partially, but never completely, interrupted postal services. However, the employees were willing to continue working under the conditions of their old collective agreement.

Looking at all this, we wonder where the problem lies and what crisis made the Government of Canada allow Canada Post to lock out its employees—this is not a strike; it is a lockout—and deprive all Canadians, including small businesses, but really all Canadians, of a service that they appreciate, that they need and that is vital.

Where is the crisis that, on top of all that, is making the government want to impose back-to-work legislation that contains many completely unacceptable clauses? Things like pensions, for example, come to mind. Several issues are unacceptable. For instance, it is imposing wages that are lower than what Canada Post itself was willing to offer.

We do not understand what is happening. The Conservatives talk about the best interests of the Canadian economy. Yes, the economy is important, essential and vital, sure. However, this expression reminds us of the best interests of the nation. Our question is, best compared to what? Compared to the interests of Canadians, to the interests of workers?

We in the NDP believe that the economy exists to serve people, and not the other way around.

When we hear the Associate Minister of Defence questioning the right to strike, as we heard yesterday, and when we go over events that led workers who exercised their legitimate right to strike and who were prepared to go back to work to be locked out, we have doubts. We shudder, even. We wonder how far this government will go and who will be the next victim.

I am thinking, for example, about the people—and we see this a lot in Quebec—who are fighting for unions at Wal-Mart. What is going to happen, not only to those people, but to many others who want to use legitimate, recognized methods to secure acceptable living and working conditions? What is going to happen to them? Who will be the next victim? What treatment does the Conservative government have in store for Canadian workers as a whole?

With this bill, the government is targeting not only the postal workers, but all of us. That is why all of my colleagues have received so many emails from people who wanted to testify to this and who feel threatened themselves. I will not read you an email, but I will tell the House what a taxi driver told me a little earlier. I do not imagine he belongs to a big union. He told me to stay the course because the people need us.

I say to that taxi driver: yes, I am going to resist with all my strength, along with my colleagues in the NDP caucus, and we will be here day and night to resist and to stand up not only for the postal workers but for all Canadian workers and all Canadians. Because we cannot allow this government to undermine workers' rights in Canada, nor can we allow this government to undermine the Canadian postal service, a service that all Canadians believe in, which is more than a service, it is an institution.

We know what the post offices represent in our small towns and villages all across Canada. Mostly, it is the presence of the government in all the regions, from coast to coast, as you say in English. A settlement like the one that Bill C-6 intends to impose will create a situation at Canada Post that will be terrible and intolerable, poison labour relations and undermine the excellent service that all Canadians have come to expect.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to welcome this new member to the House. I am wondering something about her speech. The New Democratic Party has historically been very open to union leaders and is known for its ties with them.

How can she think that her party has an objective position? How can she think that her party represents all Canadians? Surely there is now a party that represents a sample of the Canadian population and that thinks about the interests of all Canadians. How can she think that the NDP truly represents Canadian interests?

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his question. This question gives me the opportunity to reiterate that the debate is not about union leaders, but about the workers and their families, their children, their parents and all Canadians. It does not concern just a small group, like Canada Post managers, the big banks or major industries, but all Canadians.

This gives me the opportunity to repeat the argument I made earlier, namely that the economy exists to serve people, not the other way around.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague talked about the profits that have been made over the years at Canada Post. In fact, for the last 15 years there has been considerable profit. She asked why on earth the efficiency of Canada Post and the fact that Canadians are very happy with their postal service is never mentioned and why it is not front and centre.

I wonder if perhaps it has something to do with the fact that the government and the corporation wants to create the impression that somehow workers are not doing their job and that somehow Canadians should be dissatisfied. It certainly helps the government in terms of its propaganda in regard to Bill C-6.

[Hélène Laverdière, NDP, Laurier—Sainte-Marie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my honourable colleague for his question.

It is clear that this legislation is sending the message that the workers are guilty in some way. It is Canada Post workers who are being punished by this legislation and who are being offered wages that are lower than what the employer offered them.

We are punishing them as if they were guilty, while throughout the process, their behaviour has been completely legitimate. They were prepared to return to work by accepting the conditions of their former collective agreement, while they were actually doing a job that Canadians appreciate.

I like to say that Canada Post is an institution that is respected across Canada. Why do we now want to punish the workers? I am at a loss for words.

[Pierre-Luc Dusseault, NDP, Sherbrooke, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would first of all like to wish a happy Fête nationale to all Quebeckers who celebrated this great holiday yesterday. I am sure that right now in my constituency there are still people celebrating, even though it is now 4:15 a.m. I would like to say hello to them. Perhaps they are watching me before going to bed.

Unfortunately I was unable to be with them for the Saint-Jean-Baptiste festivities. For that I would like to apologize. However, I am certain that the people in my constituency fully understand the reasons why I am here today. We have been obliged to remain here, in this House, and it is very important to explain the reasons for our absence from the riding.

It is very simple: we cannot let this bill pass without standing up for the workers of our country. I am also very proud of what our caucus has done today and in the last few days. The members of our party have indeed stood up together for the country’s workers. For it is not only the workers at Canada Post that will be affected, but all the workers of our country.

This bill sets a dangerous precedent that reveals the hidden agenda of this government, that being the privatization of public services. The NDP has always fought to preserve what we have achieved and to maintain our good public services, and that is what we are doing again today and what we may be doing again in the days to come. In spite of what anyone may say, Canada Post cannot and will never be replaced by a private corporation that will continue to offer the same good universal services as those offered previously.

The government seems to be taking only some members of the public into account. In the last 24 hours—and even more—of this debate about postal workers, I have not seen a single member of this government rise to talk about and stand up for postal workers. One might think that the hon. members on the other side of the House take mail carriers for second-class citizens and believe that they deserve no better than other Canadians. They constantly tell stories about people not receiving their letters or their cheques, about small businesses in difficulty. If it is so important to them to get the letter carriers back to work, all they have to do is call the CEO of Canada Post and ask him to unlock the doors so that the workers who want to work can finally return to work.

That is in fact what the workers were doing before the lockout, before Canada Post decided to close the doors: they were working, engaging in rotating strikes that were doing virtually no harm to Canadians. Even the Minister of Labour said that there were not many complaints and that no major disruptions had resulted, as the Conservatives are trying to claim.

The postal workers were very respectful, for they know that the service they provide is essential to the lives of many people. That is why they took care to demand their rights while ensuring that service to the public was still provided.

Here the government is once again trying to divide Canadians. It is once again trying to pit two groups against each other. In this case those groups are the postal workers and other Canadians. I would like to remind the government that the letter carriers and postal workers are Canadians as well, and that they too deserve acceptable living conditions, consideration and respect.

The Conservatives like to give examples of people suffering from this lockout, but I have also received messages from letter carriers who are pleased with our work and who admire the battle we are now waging for them. One letter carrier in my riding wrote me a message this morning that has given me even more energy to keep up this fight. In his message he says that he is recently retired from the postal service and was always well treated by Canada Post, but that now things have gone too far. He feels that the government is turning back the clock. He says that he lived through many strikes and that they are what gave him what he has today. He wishes to thank our leader, my colleagues and me for what we are doing for them. It is signed Robert, from Sherbrooke.

I want to reassure my constituent and say to him that we will continue on until this bill is amended and made acceptable to all the workers of this country.

This bill is retrograde—and “retrograde” is no harsh word I am using here. No, for not only has the government had the nerve to create a special bill to send the workers back to work, but it is sending them back with worse conditions than those already offered by Canada Post. How dare it make the management offer even lower? I totally fail to understand the government’s approach here. As my constituent said, the government is turning back the clock with this sort of measure.

If the government were serious and really wanted the mail to finally move, it would take the locks off the doors of Canada Post.

But how do we expect Canada Post to bargain with its employees when the government wants to impose a bill that dictates the employees' wages and working conditions? This is nonsense. The government is telling the employer that it does not need to bargain with its employees, the government itself is going to decide for them what conditions they deserve, and they will not be able to bargain, they will only be able to accept the legislation. I cannot get over what this government is doing. I say to myself that at this time of night, surely I must be dreaming, because I do not understand how the government can be introducing a bill that is this disrespectful.

I am happy to be here in the House at this late hour to fight for the rights of these workers, who have the same rights as all other Canadians. I really do wonder how the members who are going to vote for this regressive bill are going to be able to look their letter carrier in the eye the next time he comes to deliver a letter to them. If I were in their shoes, I would be ashamed. I will be proud to greet my letter carrier and to be able to tell him I was here in 2011, and I did everything in my power to ensure that he could continue to have decent working conditions.

I would like to quote Denis Lemelin, the president and chief negotiator for the Canadian Union of Postal Workers, who said: “… we make no apologies for refusing unreasonable concessions demanded of us by a profitable company.”

Over the last 15 years, Canada Post has made $1.7 billion in profit. And this is the corporation that wants to cut its employees' wages and take more money out of their pockets, when it is making profits and its executives are again going to pocket bigger bonuses, one of them amounting to 33%, if I recall correctly.

So I condemn this bill as it now stands and I will be voting against it.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Natural Resources and for the Canadian Wheat Board]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak this morning. The member gave an enthusiastic presentation, although I would question the accuracy of it.

We all know the reason we are here. It is not because of rotating strikes, a lockout, or even the government legislation. We are still here because of the NDP's stubbornness in not allowing this legislation to go forward and these things to move ahead.

I have a bit of an emotional reaction to what the NDP is doing. I come from Saskatchewan, a province where the NDP has done massive damage over the decades. Pretty much everything it has done in my province has been negative for the province. For many years it restricted land sales in agriculture. It nationalized and almost destroyed the potash industry until it was sold to private interests and now it is one of the major industries in the world. When it comes to resources, one of the failed provincial leaders made the statement that they were going to be left in the ground until there were better prices. By the time the resources began to be extracted, Canada was decades behind its neighbours who had developed them.

I have watched New Democrats represent special interest groups over the years, and I saw it again these last couple of days. They are not really that interested in the workers, they are interested in the union bosses. We see that in other areas. In agriculture, for example, earlier one of the members mentioned the Canadian Wheat Board. We see that they are not interested in farmers but in the leadership.

It was really brought to the fore this evening during the vote. We saw that the New Democrats themselves are not all that interested in this. It is more of an exercise for them to show off for their union bosses. We saw that only 70 of their 103 members voted in favour of their own motion.

I am wondering if he can comment on why his own members are not interested in supporting their position.

[Pierre-Luc Dusseault, NDP, Sherbrooke, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his question.

In his speech, my colleague strayed a little from the topic we are discussing today. I would like to assure parliamentarians that all the New Democratic Party members of this House have stood firm and will continue to do so throughout the days to come by voting against the bill, which is not respectful of workers. It is not just Canada Post workers who will be affected, it is all workers in Canada. The NDP is not just on the side of the union or the union bosses, it is also on the side of all workers in Canada. That is why we will continue to fight, for days and hours.

[Mathieu Ravignat, NDP, Pontiac, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I very much liked the hon. member's speech, and I am interested by one aspect in particular.

That is the relationship between the union movement and progress in society in general. Could the hon. member talk a little more about that? It would be very helpful.

[Pierre-Luc Dusseault, NDP, Sherbrooke, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Pontiac for his excellent question.

That unions have allowed our society to make great progress is a fact. The person who wrote to me also mentioned that in her 15 years of hard work she defended their interests and managed to get decent working conditions that let them lead a decent life, as every Canadian would wish to do. This is in part due to the unions who succeeded in defending their interests and in winning concessions from their bosses, who often do not view their employees with much respect.

[Ryan Leef, Conservative, Yukon, YT]

Mr. Speaker, I want to quickly correct the record. The member said in his speech that members of the government have not mentioned the postal workers. I was here from 8 p.m. last night until 6 a.m. this morning, and I can say that we did hear members of the government speak the voice of postal workers. That did happen.

I heard an opposition member for whom I have a tremendous amount of respect say that it is a democratic right to hold up the House to speak that voice. We acknowledge that, but there is a democratic right and then there is just right, and this is not right.

It has been a productive debate, do not get me wrong, but it became repetitive at about 3 a.m. Now it is 24 hours later. Canadians find it frustrating.

Speaking as a new member of Parliament, it is very frustrating that the Liberal colleague who is sitting way down there asked a question that did not get answered. He asked a direct question. It did not get answered.

When will the opposition quit beating its chest at the expense of Canadians and end this debate by bringing forward its solutions or by voting for this legislation?