Debates of May 19th, 2016

Agriculture and Agri-food

[Jean-Claude Poissant, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for Lévis—Lotbinière for raising this important issue.

I am disturbed by the fact that the question comes from an opposition member who co-chairs a leadership campaign that is in favour of abolishing supply management.

Supply management provides a degree of stability that guarantees a fair market and income security for thousands of families. How can the member say he wants to protect dairy producers while at the same time being in favour of abolishing the system that provides them with income security? That is completely unacceptable.

Unlike the opposition member, our government believes that the Canadian supply-managed sector is critical to ensuring a strong agricultural sector and a prosperous economy in Canada.

Yesterday, the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and I held productive meetings with dairy producers from across the country. We will continue to meet with the industry as promised as we work together to come up with a sustainable, long-term plan that will help the industry adjust to market concessions in the Canada-Europe free trade agreement.

In February, at the Dairy Farmers of Canada annual meeting, the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food announced an investment of $1.75 million in research for the dairy sector. This investment will support research by our scientists at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada in two key areas. The first is in increasing the quality of Canadian forages to help increase milk production, and the second is in understanding the role of dairy fat products, including their impact on type 2 diabetes.

That brings the total federal investment in the dairy sector to $13.75 million over five years. Last month, we brought down the federal budget, which includes important measures to support Canada's agricultural sector, including sectors under supply management.

The budget includes investments of $30 million over six years to support advanced research in agricultural genomics to mitigate the biological threats to agriculture associated with climate change. It also includes investments of $41.5 million to support the rehabilitation and modernization of agriculture and agri-food research stations and laboratories in British Columbia, Albert, Saskatchewan, Ontario, and Quebec.

The government is also working on developing an approach for additional investments in agricultural science and research, informed by the review of federal support for fundamental science. These are all excellent ways to measure the prosperity of Canada's agriculture industry.

The budget also mentions Canada's commitment to swiftly ratify the Canada-European Union economic agreement. This agreement will open access to markets in the European Union for key Canadian agricultural exports, such as maple syrup, beef, pork, grains, fruits and vegetables, and processed foods.

As I said earlier, we are developing a plan to help the sector adjust to the market-access commitments, in preparation for Canada's ratification of the Canada-European Union economic agreement.

We strongly support free trade and and support implementing the Canada-European Union trade economic agreement.

On this side of the House, we support the supply management system. We support the farm families who benefit from this system, and unlike members in the opposition, we defend this system.

[Jacques Gourde, Conservative, Lévis—Lotbinière, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am very disappointed by my colleague's answer. He delivered a partisan speech.

Members generally do not make partisan speeches in the House when we are talking about agriculture over the long term, because we are talking about people's lives.

In Canada, agriculture is a way of living. These people are very important to this side of the House. We need them every single day. My colleague read out the text that was given to him, I am sure. I hope for his sake that he understands the substance of what he said.

It is not acceptable to make a partisan speech when people truly need our help. My colleague needs to understand that the diafiltered milk problem has to be resolved. They have 15 days left to fulfill their promise. I would like to at least hear some talk about a possible solution. Our Canadian dairy producers deserve at least a glimmer of hope.

[Jean-Claude Poissant, Liberal, La Prairie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, as my colleague said, I am a dairy farmer, so I speak from experience.

It is rather ironic that the co-chair of an anti-supply-management campaign is trying to tell us how to protect that system. We are standing up strong for supply management and we will continue to do so. We are in regular contact with industry stakeholders, and we are listening to what they have to say about compensation. We are aware that compensation is important to the supply-managed sector.

Our government's investments will help the entire agriculture and agri-food industry, including hard-working producers in the supply-managed sector. We know that it is important to compensate the supply-managed sector in connection with the Canada-Europe free trade agreement. Engagement with the dairy sector is ongoing. We continue to engage with all farmers. We are there to support all farm families who benefit from the supply management system. We are all working together to ensure that they have a prosperous future.

Labour

[Sheri Benson, NDP, Saskatoon West, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the right to refuse unsafe work is one of the three basic health and safety rights achieved by the labour movement, along with the right to know about the hazards in one's workplace and the right to participate in workplace health and safety decisions. While procedures and circumstances may vary from province to province, just about all workers have the legal right to a healthy and safe workplace that allows, and in some provinces obligates, them to protect their safety by refusing to perform work they believe has the potential to harm themselves or others at the work site.

All workers in Canada have the right to work in a safe and healthy environment. Over the last decade, the previous Conservative government had undone many of the progressive advances for workers that had been achieved over generations.

On February 19, I asked the government why it had not tabled legislation to reverse some of the most egregious changes brought in by the Conservatives. Sadly, I did not get an answer.

On the health and safety front, the Conservatives used the omnibus bill, Bill C-4, to change the Canadian Labour Code to limit the rights of workers to refuse unsafe work, and also to do away with the independent health and safety officers, relegating their responsibilities to political appointees of the minister.

The bill also made sweeping changes to the Public Service Labour Relations Act to prevent federal public service workers from filing complaints with the Canadian Human Rights Commission. It also gutted public service collective bargaining by allowing the government to unilaterally determine which workers would be deemed essential and therefore forbidden from striking, without recourse to a third party review.

During the debate about these changes, many individuals and organizations brought forward grave concerns.

Larry Rousseau of PSAC wrote that the changes that were stuffed into the 309-page budget implementation act would turn the clock back 50 years for labour relations.

However, no voice was more compelling than that of Rob Ellis, whose 18 year-old son, David, was killed on the job. On David's second day of work at a temporary position in a bakery, he was pulled into an industrial mixer that was operating without a safety guard and lockout. David lacked the experience to comprehend the dangers of the workplace.

Rob Ellis, his dad, said:

We should not assume that new workers have enough experience to recognize or categorize the level of danger of every workplace condition. New or young employees should be encouraged to say no to unsafe work. And when they do stand up and say no, they should not be subject to discipline if their complaint is rejected without investigation...

During the federal election, the parliamentary secretary's website promised that a Liberal government would, “Repeal the Conservative definition of “danger” in the Canada Labour Code that is regressive and sacrifices the health and safety rights of workers.” Why has the minister remained silent? Through the hon. parliamentary secretary, I simply ask the minister this. When will the government repeal these draconian measures?

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Employment]

Mr. Speaker, I want to commend my colleague from Saskatoon West on her speech and of course her great interest in labour and labour issues. I would like to share with the rest of the House as well that we share a similar view on what transpired over the past 10 years and with the former Conservative government.

Canadians were not fooled. They understood fully that it was organized labour that was under attack under the last government. We saw that through many manifestations, through various pieces of legislation. We saw it in unprecedented use of back-to-work legislation. The legislation for Canada Post and for Air Canada come to mind. Even before those organizations were in a strike position and those unions were in a position that they could go out on strike, there was back-to-work legislation coming off the shelf to be presented in the House.

We saw that, and absolutely Bill C-377 and Bill C-525 were directed at organized labour. With Bill C-377 we saw that constitutional experts said it was unconstitutional. We saw privacy experts say that it compromised the privacy of millions of Canadians. We saw provinces and territories say that it infringed on an area of their purview, that constitutionally it was their area of responsibility.

That was what we saw. That was the table that was set in the last Parliament by the last government.

Certainly what we have tried to do since October 19 and since the new minister came in on November 4 was to set a different atmosphere around work and labour. Certainly the current Bill C-4, not the old Conservative Bill C-4, was the first piece of legislation our minister presented. It was to repeal Bill C-377 and Bill C-525, within Bill C-4. I was very happy that it was the first piece of legislation the minister tabled.

Over the course of my experience over the last four years dealing with both employers and employees, one thing that has been consistent and that has been clear coming from both areas is that any changes to the Labour Code have to be done through a tripartite approach with labour, employers, employees, stakeholders, the provinces and territories—everybody involved.

They said that clearly with Bill C-377 and they said it with Bill C-525. We believe that the 2004 definition that was brought in by past Liberal governments is the right way to go, but that any change in the code has to be undertaken with a tripartite approach. I hope my colleague from Saskatoon West will understand that is the approach this government would take in changing the Labour Code. It would be under a tripartite approach.

[Sheri Benson, NDP, Saskatoon West, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I do want to thank my hon. colleague for his comments and for his government's leadership in that very early period of stepping out of the gate when becoming a new government and focusing on some very important legislation that, for workers, was important to get changed quickly.

I would say to some of the member's comments about the Canada Labour Code that the changes that were made by the previous government were just changed unilaterally by the government.

What we are asking, particularly when it comes to workplace safety, is that we immediately go back and give more than 800,000 workers who work in federally regulated industries, including the public service, what they deserve. They deserve the right to refuse unsafe work; and they deserve the right to safeguard their health through a system of monitoring and enforcement by trained and neutral health and safety officers and, if necessary, a recourse to a tribunal staffed by independent decision-makers. They deserve the right to come home safely at the end of every work day.

I am asking the government to step up and step out sooner rather than later, and make sure everyone comes home safely.

[Rodger Cuzner, Liberal, Cape Breton—Canso, NS]

Mr. Speaker, again, for my colleague and everybody else in the House, the government is pledging to keep Canadian workplaces safe, fair, and productive, certainly in federal jurisdictions. Our intention is to work with all stakeholders, employers, employees, organized labour, the provinces, and the territories to ensure our labour code reflects today's workforce and the necessity to be safe, fair, and productive.

Let me be clear. We believe all Canadians should have, and deserve, the right to work in a safe workplace. Certainly our intention is to work toward that. We believe we are off to a pretty good start and we hope to continue on to ensure we earn the confidence of Canadian workers not only in federal jurisdictions, but all Canadian workers. We are committed to that as a government, and that is what we will do.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

The motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly the House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 10 a.m. pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 7 p.m.)