Debates of Nov. 22nd, 2023

Canada Labour Code

[Luc Desilets, Bloc, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Mr. Speaker, we are all quite happy to see Bill C‑58 tabled.

The bill addresses major inequity between what Quebec workers under provincial and federal jurisdiction experience. I would remind the House that Quebec passed similar legislation in 1977.

Since we are dealing with a minority government, the only problem is that we are talking about 18 months before the bill is implemented. Eighteen months is a long time. By then, we may well have had two more minority governments.

I would like my colleague to comment on this. What does he think about the delay, which I find huge?

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I think the government will probably take longer than 18 months to release the contracts on the deals that have been done. I do not know why we would want to do that in the auto business. I would remind the member from the Bloc that two of the subsidies in the auto business, where replacement workers can be brought in through the agreement, unless we are shown that it is not in the contracts by releasing them, are in Quebec. One of them, in fact, is in the leader of the Bloc Québécois's riding. I would think they would want to know that the Northvolt plant has the ability, potentially, to bring in Swedish workers. If the Liberals want to dispute it, they can release the contracts. The other one, which I mentioned earlier, is for EV battery parts and is with a South Korean company. Let us make sure that it is not doing that as well.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, in the fall economic statement yesterday, the government projected that, over the next year, unemployment is going to be up by 1% in Canada. I absolutely agree with the member that investments in battery plants have to lead to good union jobs here, although he did not say “good union jobs”. I will give him the opportunity in a moment.

What I am concerned about is that he did not talk about the legislation, and he is using replacement workers in a very different sense than the sense relevant to the legislation. If the Conservatives want to coin a new term, that is their business, but they should not do it to conflate issues and distract from the fact that they clearly do not want to talk about bringing home powerful paycheques for Canadian workers by protecting their right to strike with anti-scab legislation.

Would he now like to take a moment to talk about replacement workers in the relevant sense, who are people who take the job of someone out on strike or in a lockout, and tell us what the Conservative position is on this bill? He has not even talked about the content of the bill yet despite us being almost at the 15-minute mark.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Mr. Speaker, what brings home powerful paycheques and powerful union paycheques are contracts to build auto plants that do not involve bringing in replacement workers from South Korea, Sweden and other countries in Europe.

Perhaps the hon. member should defend the unionized auto jobs and the 7% unemployment rate that exists in Windsor. The government is refusing to ensure that those good-paying union jobs go to auto workers in southwest Ontario.

Business of the House

[Bardish Chagger, Liberal, Waterloo, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

There have been discussions among the parties, and if you seek it, I believe you will find unanimous consent for the following motion. I move:

That, notwithstanding any standing order or usual practice of the House, during the debate pursuant to Standing Order 66 on Motion No. 41 to concur in the tenth report of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development, no quorum calls, dilatory motions or requests for unanimous consent shall be received by the Chair and at the conclusion of the time provided for debate or when no member rises to speak, whichever is earlier, all questions necessary to dispose of the motion be deemed put and a recorded division deemed requested and deferred pursuant to Standing Order 66.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

All those opposed to the hon. member's moving the motion will please say nay. It is agreed.

The House has heard the terms of the motion. All those opposed to the motion will please say nay.

(Motion agreed to)

Before we continue, it is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, Public Services and Procurement; the hon. member for Regina—Wascana, Oil and Gas Industry; the hon. member for Kitchener Centre, Persons with Disabilities.

The House resumed consideration of the motion that Bill C‑58, An Act to amend the Canada Labour Code and the Canada Industrial Relations Board Regulations, 2012, be read the second time and referred to a committee.

Canada Labour Code

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Speaker, first I would like to thank my colleague from South Shore—St. Margarets for standing up in the House of Commons and raising the important issue of the replacement workers who will be hired at the Stellantis battery plant in Ontario. This is a matter that concerns us greatly for several reasons. Since Bill C-58 deals with the labour force, the unionized workers of this country, we have a golden opportunity to highlight this Liberal government's lack of perspective and clear commitment toward unionized workers.

Why do we say this? Unfortunately, we recently learned that in the contracts the government signed for battery projects, contracts that involve very large contributions from Canadian taxpayers, there seem to be no guarantees about several things. There is no guarantee that the jobs will be for Canadian workers. There is no guarantee that the natural resources used will be from Canada. There is no guarantee that these resources will be processed here. When I say there are no guarantees, I am assuming there are none, because I have not seen the contracts, though I would like to.

Under the Stellantis contract, the company will be getting $15 billion. This breaks down to $1,000 per Canadian household. When each family in Canada files their income tax return next year, it could be said that $1,000 of what they pay the federal and provincial governments will be going to Stellantis.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

The hon. member for Salaberry—Suroît on a point of order.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Salaberry—Suroît, QC]

Mr. Speaker, despite the respect I have for my colleague, he knows full well that he is completely off topic. We are debating a bill about anti-scab legislation. He is taking advantage of this, with the Chair's full knowledge, to debate a topic that is being dealt with at the Standing Committee on Industry and Technology. I believe he should take parliamentarians seriously, be rigorous, and debate the bill we are seized with today.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

As always, members are allowed to stray from the subject, perhaps far too far. I would ask the hon. member to make sure his speech remains germane to the subject at hand.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my colleague's remarks.

I will make a very direct connection. Bill C‑58 states that the Liberals will implement the legislation in 18 months. Once again, the Liberals are making a promise they will not keep.

I want to demonstrate here in my speech to all my colleagues that the current government's word is not worth much, so I want to look at what they have written on paper and see what that will prove. That is why we are anxious see the contracts of the Stellantis plant and of Northvolt, whose plant will be built in the Bloc Québécois leader's riding, Beloeil—Chambly.

In the Volkswagen contract, what kind of commitments were made to ensure that Canadians' money will be given to Canadian workers? That is our concern in the case of Stellantis. We absolutely must have access to these contracts, and given the magnitude of public funds involved—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

The member for Longueuil—Saint-Hubert on a point of order.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I think that the Chair ruled earlier. She gave the member a break, but he is taking advantage. That was two minutes ago and he is still hammering on about Stellantis, which has nothing to do with the extremely important bill we are now debating.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

As always, we try to provide some leeway. At the same time, I am trying to do my best to ask the member to make a connection between the two matters he is attempting to raise.

The hon. member for Mégantic—L'Érable.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the important thing is to know if these contracts and bills being introduced today are of any value to Canadians. That is a very good question we must ask ourselves.

Unfortunately, what we have realized, what we have seen and what we have discovered is that 1,600 jobs at the Stellantis plant are reserved for foreign workers to replace Canadian workers who could have been hired to do the work. We know because the company itself contacted the chief of police and the municipal authorities to say they needed places to house 1,600 foreign workers to replace the workers. That is really alarming.

Let me continue. In the call for tenders, to show the extent to which—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

The member for Elmwood—Transcona on a point of order.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Mr. Speaker, I think that one of the important questions raised during this debate is whether the Conservatives actually know what a replacement worker is. We are starting to wonder whether they even understand the term.

Perhaps our colleague could just reassure us that he does in fact know what a replacement worker is, notwithstanding the spin that the Conservatives are putting on the term today in the House of Commons.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

I would say that that is a good question to bring up when we get to questions and comments. Nevertheless, I will ask the member to resume debate on Bill C‑58 and try to explain the connection with the Stellantis issue, if possible.

The hon. member for Mégantic—L'Érable.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I absolutely do not believe the Liberals intend to implement this bill in 18 months' time. They want to get through the next election and let the debate die down on its own. That is the reality.

How can I be sure about that? I see it when I look at the contracts that have been signed but that we have not seen, the contracts that will allow for a third of the employees hired at Stellantis to come from overseas. If anyone does not believe me, if people and the NDP are not worried, I for one am very concerned about what is happening.

Let us consider the criteria in the job postings that have been published. Candidates applying for the position of general affairs specialist will have to be fluent in Korean. The company is looking for an electrode quality engineer. These are well-paid jobs. The job posting says that bilingualism in English and Korean is preferred. The plant down there is not even asking for a little bit of French.

What about the plant that will be built in the riding of the leader of the Bloc Québécois? Does the leader of the Bloc Québécois want to know whether the spinoffs of the plant that will be built in his riding will provide jobs to his constituents?

Is anyone making sure that the union jobs created through the contract the federal government has signed with these multinationals will go to Quebeckers?

Will there be the same requirement for knowledge of French for these jobs, or is the company going to demand knowledge of Swedish? Is it going to ask for knowledge of German for the other plant, over in Ontario? It is very worrying.

This is why it is absolutely necessary that we get to see these contracts. We cannot take the Prime Minister's word for it. He underestimated the cost of this project by several billion dollars before the shovels even hit the ground. He said the project would break even in five years. We now know that it will take 20 years.

As for this government's plans to implement Bill C‑58 in 18 months, I will believe it when I see it. In my opinion, what worries Canadians now is whether the money that Canadian families are giving the government is being used to fund good union jobs for Canadian workers.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I sincerely hope you will reread that speech if you have time after your workday is done, because what you just saw was a perfect example of a Conservative member from Quebec feeling uneasy about his party's position.

Quebec has long-standing anti-scab legislation. The federal government does not. Now a bill has suddenly come along, and this member is ill at ease with his party's position. He would not be able to look his constituents in the eye and tell them he opposes anti-scab legislation. He is making all kinds of excuses.

Now, I am going to ask him a very simple question. Should the Conservatives form the next government, will the Conservative Party introduce a federal anti-scab bill?

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have the interests of all Quebeckers at heart, particularly those of voters in the riding of Beloeil—Chambly.

Let me quote the Bloc Québécois leader, who said Northvolt's involvement in his riding “could help Vallée-du-Richelieu develop a whole innovative, high added-value supply chain”.

I would like the government to show us, in the contract, the guarantees it secured regarding workers. Will the workers be Quebeckers? Will francophone Quebec workers be able to participate and be hired? What about the natural resources? Will the company be able to get them from Abitibi? What about processing? I was mayor of a mining town, and I saw our materials get processed all over the world, without a cent staying in this country.

These are valid questions, and I am very proud to tell Quebeckers I am here to defend their interests.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I know my friend from Mégantic—L'Érable is an honourable member, so I was rather confused when neither he nor the speaker before him addressed any of the content of the bill and seemed to not understand the definition of “replacement workers”.

I wondered why, as an honourable member, he would try to conflate these two ideas and distract from the matter at hand. I then realized that it is because his party has never supported the rights of workers and has voted against precisely this kind of legislation on numerous occasions. In fact, in 2016, his colleague, the member for Louis-Saint-Laurent, said in the House:

If we pass this bill, it would prevent companies...from hiring replacement workers during disputes and upset the balance of power at the negotiating table. Let us not forget that striking workers can always go work somewhere else. However, under the bill, [businesses] would not be able to hire people from outside.

In our opinion, this disrupts the balance of power....

Could the member help the House understand whether that is still his party's position and whether he will be voting for the bill before us?

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I can see that the member of this costly NDP-Liberal coalition is worried, because he just referred to a bill from 2016 that is still not in force. He thinks that this government will now do what it says it will do with Bill C-58. Personally, what worries me are the jobs that will be available tomorrow in the Richelieu region.

Could this government be transparent for once and clearly prove to all Canadians, with documentary evidence, that it has taken the necessary measures to ensure that jobs created with Canadians' money will be jobs for Canadians?

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it was amazing that neither he nor the Conservative member who spoke before him mentioned the legislation we are talking about today. This really emphasizes the Conservative position on unions and reminds me of a statement by Mark Hancock, the national president of the Canadian Union of Public Employees, who said about the member for Carleton winning the Conservative leadership:

It’s too bad that, unlike [the member for Regina—Qu'Appelle], [the member for Carleton] does not hold American citizenship, because he would be right at home as Governor of a state like Alabama.

[The member for Carleton] is a career politician who has been collecting a six-figure salary on the public’s dime since he was 24, and he’s spent every minute of his time in office fighting against fair wages, good pensions and a better life for working people....

His leadership will be a disaster for working people in Canada.

Could the member comment on the statement?