House of Commons Hansard #89 of the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was workers.

Topics

The BudgetOral Questions

3 p.m.

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

Mr. Speaker, exports are responsible for one in five jobs in Canada and nearly a third of our GDP. Robust trade not only provides economic security for families and businesses but will also help reduce our massive federal debt. Despite being critical to our economic recovery, trade appears to be an afterthought in the budget. This is not a surprise. The same government missed a deadline to implement the trade continuity agreement with the U.K. and has still not negotiated a buy America exemption.

Why did the government fail to make trade a priority in its recent budget?

The BudgetOral Questions

3 p.m.

Outremont Québec

Liberal

Rachel Bendayan LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Small Business

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to take this question, because only a few weeks ago Canada ranked number two in the entire world in terms of foreign direct investment attractiveness. We take our exporters very seriously in this country. They are an integral part of our economy and will form an integral part of our economic relaunch.

We are certainly going to continue supporting our exporters, and when it comes to having their backs, this government has consistently been there for them, as we will continue to be through to the other side of this pandemic.

EmploymentOral Questions

3 p.m.

Liberal

Anju Dhillon Liberal Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC

Mr. Speaker, our government presented budget 2021 last week. This is one of the most significant budgets in generations. Our plan invests in those who are most vulnerable and in families from coast to coast to coast.

Can the Minister of Employment, Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion tell the House about the work our government is doing to bring employment back to pre-pandemic levels?

EmploymentOral Questions

3 p.m.

Delta B.C.

Liberal

Carla Qualtrough LiberalMinister of Employment

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle for the work she does for her community.

Our budget is a plan that invests in growth for all Canadians and an economic recovery that leaves no one behind. We are investing nearly $2.5 billion to help train workers while also helping Canadians transition to new jobs. We are creating 500,000 training and work opportunities, including 215,000 opportunities for youth.

We are also extending the wage subsidy and creating a hiring program for Canada's economic recovery. We are delivering on our commitment to create one million jobs—

EmploymentOral Questions

3 p.m.

The Speaker Anthony Rota

The hon. member for Chatham-Kent—Leamington.

The EconomyOral Questions

3 p.m.

Conservative

Dave Epp Conservative Chatham-Kent—Leamington, ON

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance has stated that, because interest rates are low, Canada can afford this massive debt and enormous endless deficits. She seems oblivious to the fact that interest rates have nowhere to go but up.

Finance Minister Paul Martin stated, “The debt and the deficit are not inventions of ideology. They are facts of arithmetic. The quicksand of compound interest is real."

Future generations, who will have to pay off this massive debt, want to know if Paul Martin was wrong, or if it is the current minister who is wrong.

The EconomyOral Questions

3 p.m.

Central Nova Nova Scotia

Liberal

Sean Fraser LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance and to the Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, there is no question the emergency measures we put forward to support Canadians during an unprecedented public health and economic crisis have been expensive, but doing too little would have been far more expensive. I point the hon. member to the report of the IMF, which indicates that, had we not put forward these measures, our deficit would be of the same scale, but our economy would have experienced economic scarring that would have hamstrung our recovery for a generation.

I point the hon. member as well to the recent reaffirmation of our AAA investment grade credit rating from the major credit rating agencies. It turns out those socialists at the credit agencies also believe that supporting families during their time of need and keeping workers on the—

The EconomyOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

The Speaker Anthony Rota

The hon. member for Beauce.

Agriculture and Agri-FoodOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Conservative

Richard Lehoux Conservative Beauce, QC

Mr. Speaker, the government failed on another front: foreign workers. This government gave a contract to a sole supplier, a Toronto-based unilingual anglophone company, to handle all its COVID-19 tests.

One business in my riding is on day 19 of what was supposed to be a 14-day process. The business has been trying to get a hold of someone for five days now, but nobody is answering.

I know the minister will tell me they signed another contract, but that does not solve the problem for those who are still waiting on Switch Health. What does she have to say to businesses in my riding?

Agriculture and Agri-FoodOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Delta B.C.

Liberal

Carla Qualtrough LiberalMinister of Employment

Mr. Speaker, all federal departments worked together to expedite and facilitate the safe entry of temporary foreign workers into Canada.

On April 26, we announced a new partnership with Dynacare to provide specialized support for testing temporary foreign workers arriving in Quebec by plane. Starting April 28, Dynacare will be providing temporary foreign workers with specialized support in French, English and other languages. This agreement will help meet the increased demand for testing in the coming months.

Agriculture and Agri-FoodOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Conservative

Jacques Gourde Conservative Lévis—Lotbinière, QC

Mr. Speaker, incoming temporary workers are taking longer to get to Quebec farms because they are still waiting for the results of their supposedly rapid tests from a company that, in addition to being slow, operates in English only.

This is a waste of valuable time and a blatant lack of respect on the part of this government for our francophone farmers in Quebec. What will the government do to speed up the process for those who are already waiting and to better serve francophones?

Agriculture and Agri-FoodOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Delta B.C.

Liberal

Carla Qualtrough LiberalMinister of Employment

Mr. Speaker, as I just said, effective April 28, Dynacare will provide temporary foreign workers with dedicated support services in French, English and other languages.

This agreement will help meet an increased demand for testing over the coming months, support essential sectors like agriculture, and protect the health and safety of foreign workers and Canadians.

COVID-19 Emergency ResponseOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Liberal

Sonia Sidhu Liberal Brampton South, ON

Mr. Speaker, Brampton has been one of the hardest-hit communities by the pandemic in Ontario. We have been on lockdown since November. Right now, we have a test positivity rate of 22% and the situation remains difficult. Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance tell this House how budget 2021 would help hot spots like Brampton get through the pandemic and help the community to recover once this pandemic is over?

COVID-19 Emergency ResponseOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Central Nova Nova Scotia

Liberal

Sean Fraser LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance and to the Minister of Middle Class Prosperity and Associate Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her ongoing advocacy for the people of Brampton.

The uptick that we have seen in case numbers in her community and, frankly, across parts of the country is deeply concerning. I would point to the fact that we have invested billions of dollars now to expand EI sickness benefits and implement the Canada recovery sick benefit so families do not need to choose between earning a paycheque and protecting their health.

We have now implemented over 13.8 million doses of vaccines in Canadian communities, and we are continuing to make investments, like through the safe restart agreement with nearly $19 billion to make sure that Canadians can return to work. As we go forward, we are going to continue to support Canadians in their time of need and ensure that their health and well-being is our first priority.

HousingOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

NDP

Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC

Mr. Speaker, the housing parliamentary secretary admitted that Canada is “a very safe market for foreign investment but...not a great market for Canadians looking for choices around housing”. He also said that Canada's housing market is “driven by speculation”.

The cost of housing in Canada has increased by 31% over the last year alone. This 1% vacant homes tax for non-Canadians living outside of Canada is not going to cut it. Will the government increase this tax, bring in a foreign buyers tax, and put in new money for the construction of social housing for those in core need?

HousingOral Questions

3:05 p.m.

Spadina—Fort York Ontario

Liberal

Adam Vaughan LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Families

Mr. Speaker, having just heard the NDP House leader talk about solving the housing crisis with an $8-billion investment, I am a little reluctant to take the advice of the NDP on housing policy. After all, the New Democrats have already spent that money on pharmacare, fighting climate change and basic income. I am not sure how far one simple tax will stretch.

The issue is this. We are focused on delivering to Canadians housing that they can afford, is safe and is secure. We are working on rental housing. We are working on first-time homebuyers. We are working on making sure the market is regulated back to shape so that foreign investors do not find a home before Canadians do, because our goal is to get every Canadian a home. That is what the national housing strategy is investing in.

The EnvironmentOral Questions

3:10 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, climate targets are not about politics, they are about science, and even though Canada has improved our target last week at President Biden's climate summit, we are not aligned with the science. Speaker after speaker at that summit made it clear that we must achieve the bulk of reductions this decade if we are going to hold to 1.5°C.

Will the minister and the Prime Minister be open to changing Bill C-12 with a specific target due in 2025 baked into the bill?

The EnvironmentOral Questions

3:10 p.m.

South Shore—St. Margarets Nova Scotia

Liberal

Bernadette Jordan LiberalMinister of Fisheries

Mr. Speaker, we support enhanced reporting to ensure we are on track to meeting our newly announced national determined contributions for 2030. To this end, we have proposed embedding Canada's new target for 2030 directly into the act, which is 40% to 45% below 2005 emission levels.

Climate change is an urgent issue and we must work together on it. We hope the Green Party will support the bill at second reading so that we can continue to work constructively to further strengthen the bill.

The EnvironmentOral Questions

3:10 p.m.

The Speaker Anthony Rota

That is all the time we have today for question period.

The hon. member for Kingston and the Islands on a point of order.

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderOral Questions

3:10 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Mr. Speaker, in our rules of order and decorum, they refer to Standing Order 18 and say, "Remarks...which question that Member’s integrity, honesty or character are not in order.”

During questioning of the Minister of Canadian Heritage, on a number of occasions it was referred to him as misleading the House. When someone accuses someone else of misleading the House, it certainly, at least in my opinion, would suggest that their integrity and indeed their honesty are being questioned in that regard.

I do not think it is necessary at this point to call out those members who were doing that, but it might be beneficial for you to remind members of that particular Standing Order 18 so that we can perhaps correct this moving forward.

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderOral Questions

3:10 p.m.

Conservative

Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to respond to the point of order by my colleague and I do agree with him. I would suggest to him to talk to the Prime Minister because the member for Papineau is always using that kind of argument when we are asking questions. He did that today.

Oral QuestionsPoints of OrderOral Questions

April 27th, 2021 / 3:10 p.m.

The Speaker Anthony Rota

I want to thank the hon. members for bringing that point up. I do want to remind the hon. members that in the chamber we are setting an example for Canadians, for children, for anyone who is watching and we want to set an example where we are arguing the ideas, not calling names. That is something that the rules point out. I understand that sometimes we forget and get caught up in the moment, but I want to remind everyone that the respect that we have here is something that permeates throughout the country and it is important that we set the example.

Members' Participation in Oral Questions—Speaker's RulingPoints of OrderOral Questions

3:10 p.m.

The Speaker Anthony Rota

I am now prepared to rule on the point of order raised on April 14 by the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands, concerning the participation of independent members and members of non-recognized parties in Oral Questions.

Following up on the point of order that she raised on February 16, concerning their participation in Oral Questions on Wednesday, on which I ruled on February 23, the member focused on the number of questions allocated to them during each sitting week. Since the number of independent members and members of non-recognized parties has risen from four to eight since the beginning of this Parliament, she feels that the number of questions should also increase.

As the one responsible for keeping deliberations running smoothly, the Chair is aware of the number and distribution of questions allocated during question period. I should add that, while the member raised the question from a different angle, I am still obliged to reconcile the three fundamental elements to which I have already referred rather than to address it by limiting the matter to a simple mathematical formula.

The first element is complying with our established practice. In this case, that means the practice of allocating Oral Questions primarily on the basis of negotiations among the recognized parties in the House. I note that this practice has changed in recent years, which has made it possible to give independent members and members of non-recognized parties a larger share of the questions.

The second, and I find that this relatively recent development has certain limits, relates to the wording of Standing Order 30, since 45 minutes are reserved for question period. The Chair has to make every effort to ensure that this rule is respected as much as possible, similar to ensuring the rules of governing the management of speaking times during our deliberations are adhered to. Members have undoubtedly noticed, as I have, that for many years now, it has been difficult to respect this standing order to the letter.

The third is linked to my responsibility to protect the rights of all members and, as I stated in my ruling last February 23, to find “a balance between the rights and interests of the majority and of those of the minority. In doing so, the Chair must try to be equitable and fair, without tipping the balance too far on one side or the other.”

In keeping with my commitment as Speaker to encourage meetings to ensure that our institution has harmonious parliamentary procedures that are based on co-operation, and having always insisted on the importance of co-operation to improve the decorum, process and overall operations of the House, I encouraged the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands to continue her efforts. I continue to believe that this is the approach most likely to produce a solution. In the meantime, I cannot unilaterally alter the agreement and practices already in place, unless the groups concerned reach an agreement.

Because this question has been raised in the past, and given the parameters of the Chair's authority in the matter, I reiterate my request that the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs study the question.

I thank the hon. members for their attention.

Proceedings on a Bill Entitled An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Operations at the Port of MontrealGovernment Orders

3:20 p.m.

Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas Ontario

Liberal

Filomena Tassi LiberalMinister of Labour

moved:

That, notwithstanding any standing order, special order or usual practice of the House, a bill in the name of the Minister of Labour, entitled An Act to provide for the resumption and continuation of operations at the Port of Montreal, be disposed of as follows:

(a) the bill be ordered for consideration at the second reading stage immediately after the adoption of this order;

(b) when the House begins debate at the second reading stage of the bill, two members of each recognized party and a member of the Green Party may each speak at the said stage for not more than 20 minutes, followed by 10 minutes for questions and comments, provided that members may be permitted to split their time with another member;

(c) at the conclusion of the time provided for the debate at the second reading stage or when no member rises to speak, whichever is earlier, all questions necessary to dispose of the second reading stage of the bill shall be put without further debate or amendment, provided that, if a recorded division is requested, it shall not be deferred;

(d) if the bill is adopted at the second reading stage, it shall be deemed referred to a committee of the whole, deemed considered in committee of the whole, deemed reported without amendment, deemed concurred in at report stage, and deemed read a third time and passed;

(e) during consideration of the bill, the House shall not adjourn, except pursuant to a motion moved by a minister of the Crown;

(f) no motion to adjourn the debate may be moved except by a minister of the Crown; and

(g) upon completion of proceedings on the said bill, the House shall adjourn to the next sitting day.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by acknowledging that I am joining members from the traditional territory of the Haudenosaunee and Anishinabe people covered by the Dish With One Spoon wampum agreement.

I am here today to talk about our intention to take action to end the labour dispute between the Syndicat des débardeurs, also known as CUPE Local 375, and the Maritime Employers Association, or the MEA.

My maiden speech in the House of Commons discussed a proud history of the labour movement in Hamilton and Canada. I spoke to how our government was passing a bill, Bill C-4, that replaced the previous government's anti-labour bills: Bill C-535 and Bill C-377.

I have been a staunch supporter of the labour movement that has done so much for my hometown and for Canada. I grew up in a community that was driven by labour values. Those values are what drive me today: hard work, fairness, safety and healthy and inclusive workplaces.

I want to be clear that neither I nor the government wanted the situation to come to this point. This legislation was always our least-favoured option. Our government believes in the collective bargaining process. The parties have been at the bargaining table for two and a half years. For over two and a half years, we have supported the parties throughout the collective bargaining process in the hope of them arriving at a negotiated agreement.

The Port of Montreal is essential for the economic prosperity of Canadians across the country, especially Quebeckers and the people of eastern Canada. We believe that the government has no choice but to take action.

Let me be clear. The government will continue to support the parties and strongly encourages them to reach an agreement as soon as possible. Let me provide some context.

The Port of Montreal is the second-largest container port in Canada. Every year it handles over 1.6 million 20-foot equivalent units and 35 million tonnes of cargo, representing approximately $40 billion in goods. It is also a major link in the various Canadian and American supply chains for raw materials and consumer goods.

The work stoppage we are seeing right now is causing harm. It has the potential to cause severe, immediate and lasting damage to the economies of Montreal, the province of Quebec and Canada. This work stoppage affects more than 19,000 direct and indirect jobs associated with transit through the Port of Montreal, including in the rail and trucking industry. In fact, it would affect the jobs of up to 250,000 employees in Montreal and 273,000 workers in Ontario employed in the production of shipping container products. Shippers that have been forced to reroute to other ports may not return immediately. They may not even return in the long term, meaning that the negative impacts on Montreal, Quebec and all of Canada could last longer as the work stoppage continues.

The Port of Montreal is a major link in many Canadian and American supply chains of raw materials and consumer goods. These goods are fundamental to the manufacturing, agriculture and health industries, among many others. Vital PPE arrives via the Port of Montreal. Important goods to various manufacturing industries do as well.

The August 2020 strike had a disruptive and protracted effect on the east coast transportation system. More than 21 ships were diverted to other ports, including Halifax and Saint John, leading to congestion, longer transit times and additional costs for shippers. The current work stoppage is leading to similar rerouting to other ports, including in the U.S. This is having a strong negative economic impact.

Earlier this year, long before the strike action took place, we heard from stakeholders such as the Shipping Federation of Canada, which stated:

The mere threat of a work stoppage by longshore workers at the Port of Montreal is forcing North American importers and exporters to divert large volumes of international cargo away from the port and is already causing havoc to supply chains...

At that time, the Montreal Port Authority also confirmed that some of its clients had pre-emptively diverted container goods to other ports. Of course, it is important to point out that we are in the midst of the pandemic and COVID-19 has exacerbated this situation.

If these diversions to American ports become permanent, they could have long-lasting negative effects on the integrated transportation and logistics network around the Port of Montreal. A direct effect would be lower demand for rail and trucking services in Canada that support the movement of cargo between Canada and the United States. We also know that production and manufacturing in natural resource sectors, such as forestry, were seriously impacted during the strike last summer. These sectors are once again seeing major impacts to their supply chains with this latest action.

For example, the Prince Edward Island Federation of Agriculture has said that seed, fertilizer, crop protection and other important inputs arrive at the port destined for farms across the region that need them to successfully get their crops in the ground.

Small businesses that rely on the Port of Montreal for supplies will be especially hard pressed to absorb the extra costs associated with the work stoppage if it is left to continue for a long period. Many of these smaller businesses cannot afford high-cost alternatives, such as expediting cargo through busy ports along the east coast of the U.S. at the last minute. They often cannot afford to pay workers while their businesses remain idle as they wait for operations at the Port of Montreal to return to normal.

All of this comes at a precarious moment in Canada's economic recovery from the ongoing pandemic. Supply chains have been disrupted for over a year now. Industries are working very hard to recover from and manage these complexities. These industries employ workers who are not just numbers: They are people who depend on their jobs to take care of themselves and their families and all those who depend on them. For businesses in central and eastern Canada, this second major work stoppage at one of the main gateways to international suppliers and markets is a serious blow in the already challenging COVID-19 environment.

The impact on our economy of these disruptions to supply chains will be devastating. Ensuring the uninterrupted flow of commodities and goods to and from international and domestic markets through the Port of Montreal is essential to the economic well-being of Canadians across the country, particularly now as we enter a period of economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Government of Canada has provided significant assistance to the parties. Over the last two and a half years, a federal government mediator has supported over 100 bargaining sessions. Despite our best efforts and this support, there is no agreement in sight as the parties remain unable to find common ground. This has now resulted in yet another disruption at the port with very real consequences for multiple industries that depend on access to international markets.

Our government firmly believes that the best deals are reached at the bargaining table. However, intervention is sometimes necessary when the parties are at a significant and long-standing impasse, particularly when a work stoppage is causing significant harm to Canadians. We cannot allow the situation we saw in August 2020 to repeat itself, particularly in the midst of this pandemic. If the current stoppage continues, serious accumulated and negative impacts will continue to be felt all over Canada.

Canadians are counting on us to help the parties resolve their differences as quickly as possible to avoid a worsening of the situation. Stakeholders are counting on us as well, many of whom have already reached out directly to urge the government to do everything in its power to protect the economy, workers' jobs and the well-being of Canadians. As I mentioned earlier, the government will continue to support the parties in their negotiations, and it strongly encourages them to reach an agreement as soon as possible. We take the use of this legislation very seriously. It is our least-favoured option. I very strongly encourage the parties to reach a deal as soon as possible before this legislation is passed. The parties are at the table now. I hope the message continues to be heard loud and clear, but we cannot afford to wait.

We are committed to free and collective bargaining, and we believe in the collective bargaining process. Negotiated agreements are always the best solution. The parties began this round of collective bargaining in September 2018, and the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service has been involved since October 2018.

In the last two and a half years, the parties have met over 100 times. This is a significant investment on the part of the government and clearly demonstrates our commitment to the process. The existing collective bargaining agreement expired on December 31, 2018. The agreement covers all approximately 1,100 workers employed by the member companies of the MEA engaged in the loading and unloading of vessels, and other related work at the Port of Montreal.

On October 11, 2018, the government appointed a conciliation officer from the federal mediation and conciliation service. On December 11, we appointed two mediators to attempt to help the parties resolve their differences and reach an agreement that worked for everyone. On February 4, 2021, I added two senior mediators to this file to assist the parties in their negotiations.

The Canada Industrial Relations Board has also been involved in this dispute.

On October 23, the MEA filed an application with the Canada Industrial Relations Board to determine which activities would need to be maintained in the event of a work stoppage at the port to prevent an immediate and serious danger to the safety or health of the public. Neither party could initiate a work stoppage until the CIRB decided on the matter.

The proceedings before the CIRB and related litigation in federal court lasted over a year. During this time, the parties continued to bargain with the help of the federal mediators, holding 40 bargaining sessions between December 11, 2018 and June 8, 2020, the date the CIRB decision was rendered.

Ultimately the CIRB found that the parties did not need to maintain any activities in the event of the work stoppage beyond their statutory obligation under the Canada Labour Code to continue service for grain vessels. However, the CIRB did acknowledge the union's commitment to continuing servicing two vessels that supplied Newfoundland and Labrador. The parties were legally entitled to begin a strike or lockout as of the date of the decision, provided they gave the 72-hour notice.

Less than a month after the CIRB decision was released, with the support of 99% of its membership, the union commenced a partial strike on July 2, 2020. Four work stoppages followed that summer, each one increasing in duration and impact, ending an unlimited strike that started on August 10, 2020. There was also increasing tension around the port on August 13, 2020. Eight people were arrested and charged with intimidation, mischief and assault, following a confrontation between union members and managers who were brought in as replacement workers.

Eleven days later, on August 21, 2020, the parties agreed to a seven-month truce, during the period of which they would keep bargaining and assume all port activities. That truce ended on March 21, 2021.

Throughout these events, the parties have continued to receive intense mediation support from the federal mediators. I want to take this opportunity to thank the federal mediators for their support.

However, despite these ongoing mediation efforts, at the start of February, the MEA filed a bad faith bargaining complaint with the CIRB, asking it to order the parties to binding arbitration. The CIRB issued its ruling on March 17, finding that any determination of bad faith bargaining would be premature, as the parties were still working on the negotiation of a new collective agreement.

My colleague, the Minister of Transport, and I have also reached out to the parties directly to urge them to continue to work toward an agreement. Despite these efforts, negotiations remain stalled and no end is in sight.

On April 10, the employer gave 72 hours' notice of its intention to modify the conditions of employment for members of CUPE 375. According to the notice, employees would no longer be guaranteed a minimum weekly income and would instead be remunerated only for hours worked.

Later that same day, the union gave 72 hours' notice of its intention to no longer perform overtime, work on weekends or participate in training. The union committed to maintaining services for vessels coming to and from Newfoundland and Labrador, and services for grain vessels that must be maintained in accordance with section 87.7(1) of the Canada Labour Code, which specifies that in the event of a job action, the movement of grain must not be affected.

On April 13, the parties implemented the actions described in their respective notices. Recently, the situation has escalated. On April 22, the employer advised the union that it would be invoking the provisions of the collective agreement that imposed a specific shift schedule requiring workers to work the entire shift.

The following day, the union gave notice of its intention to stop all work at the port, beginning at 7 a.m. on April 26. On Monday morning, that is exactly what happened, a complete general strike, unlimited in duration, began at the Port of Montreal.

The parties have reached an impasse and it is clear that despite ongoing assistance from federal mediators for the last two and a half years, they remain unable to find a common ground. We urgently need to find a way to move forward, particularly in light of the recent escalation in job action, which has paralyzed the port.

Our government has done everything we could to help the parties resolve their differences without a stoppage. We believe in the collective bargaining process. There are, however, exceptional circumstances where the government must step in. This is one of those exceptional circumstances. The impact is vast and deep and the situation is dire.

When it is only the two parties at the bargaining table that stand to suffer grave consequences as a result of work stoppage, there is no justification for the government to intervene. However, when a strike or lockout is disrupting the economy to the degree that it has and has caused significant and permanent damage to the livelihoods and well-being of Canadians across the country, such as what we are seeing with this escalating work stoppage at the Port of Montreal, the government must intervene even if it is to intervene with a heavy heart.

Canadians are counting on medicines and medical equipment, farmers are counting on receipt of seed and fertilizer to grow crops and feed Canadians and Canadians are counting on products and goods, including food, medicines and medical equipment, specifically dialysis products. This is a concern in the best of times. Now, in the midst of a pandemic, these concerns are heightened.

I have heard messages from stakeholders loud and clear. This is literally a matter of life and death has been the message communicated to me. If medical products and life-saving medical devices do not get to hospitals and patients in a timely manner, the health of Canadians is at stake. We know there are ships currently with COVID-related products, pharmaceutical and medical equipment, that now cannot get through. The impacts are vast and deep. Ensuring the uninterrupted flow of these goods is critical at this time.

The parties could not reach a negotiated agreement after two and a half years of negotiations, and the help of a federal mediator at over 100 bargaining sessions. We cannot afford to wait any longer to intervene. There is too much at stake. We must act before irreparable damage is done to the economies of Montreal, the Province of Quebec and Canada as well as the health and safety of Canadians across the country.

We will continue to work with both parties in an effort to help them find common ground. The federal government will continue to support the negotiations between the parties. As I have said, the parties are currently at the table. We strongly encourage them, with the support of the federal mediation and conciliation service, to come to an agreement at the table.

We also have a responsibility to act in the interests of Canadians whose lives and livelihoods are affected by the work stoppage, which is the result of failure to reach a negotiated agreement after the two and a half years of federally supported negotiations of the Syndicat des débardeurs, known also as CUPE Local 375, and the Maritime Employers Association. That is why we are introducing this legislation today.

Proceedings on a Bill Entitled An Act to Provide for the Resumption and Continuation of Operations at the Port of MontrealGovernment Orders

3:35 p.m.

Conservative

Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent, QC

Mr. Speaker, I first want to pay my respect to the hon. minister, who said some sentences in French. I deeply appreciate the fact that she did that, especially since this is a conflict concerning Montreal. However, that is the end of my applause for her because it is anything but good.

Today is anything but a good day for Parliament, for the economy or for the social and labour movements. The government is unfortunately introducing special legislation, which is the worst way to deal with a problem or conflict.

My question for the minister is the following. The Prime Minister is the member for Papineau, in Montreal. Did the Prime Minister himself pick up the phone at any time in the past few days and call both the employer and the union in an attempt to show some leadership, both as Prime Minister and as a leader, and find common ground before we ended up in the unfortunate situation we are in today?