Debates of Sept. 26th, 2024

Opposition Motion—Confidence in the Government

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Speaker, the member stood up on a point of order because he is so sensitive. However, he just finished referring to the Prime Minister by name. The member is somewhat seasoned, so he should know that he cannot say the name of the Prime—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

He caught that, and he said he was sorry for using it. Again, I would ask members to pay attention to what is going on in the House—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Order.

The hon. member for Mégantic—L'Érable has the floor.

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

Madam Speaker, the truth hurts the Liberals. I understand that. That is why they should step aside and go see the Governor General.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Madam Speaker, to me, there is nothing more harmful than an elected official trying to make the public lose confidence in institutions. For a while now, the opposition leader has been trying to stoke public discontent. When members say that the carbon tax is causing teachers to quit their jobs because there is no heat in the schools, that nurses are quitting their jobs because there is no heat in the hospitals or that people are requesting medical assistance in dying because they have nothing to eat, in my view, that is not serious. In my view, what they are trying to do is stoke public discontent.

That is why my Conservative colleagues are not being taken seriously. They will be taken seriously when they can introduce us to this famous electrician who captures lightning to power the lights in this room.

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

Madam Speaker, once again, the first member to rise here to save the government's skin is a member of the Bloc Québécois. No surprise there.

The Bloc Québécois has propped up this government nearly 200 times during non-confidence votes in recent years. It voted for $500 billion in inflationary spending. It is thanks to the Bloc Québécois and this government that Quebeckers are paying more for their homes, their rent, their food and everything else. The Bloc Québécois should be ashamed of itself.

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

Madam Speaker, we have tools in the House to bring forward serious issues, which is what opposition days are for. Yesterday, there was a vote of confidence in the Leader of the Opposition, and the House overwhelmingly voted that they did not have confidence in his strategy. Today, we are being told that the Leader of the Opposition is going to defend Quebec and that he demands an election, which is a serious issue to ask.

The Leader of the Opposition might be under his desk, but I believe he should be here. I would ask him this: Why has he abandoned Quebec today?

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Before I allow the hon. member to finish his question, again, I will remind members that they cannot say indirectly what they cannot say directly in the House. In addition, if they heckle, I will not recognize them for questions and comments or for debate.

Again, I would ask the hon. member to be very careful on how he words things. I will allow him to finish his question so that we can get to the answer.

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

Madam Speaker, the question is simple. The Leader of the Opposition is saying that he wants to bring down the government. He wants to force an election. I would ask him this: Why has he abandoned Quebec today if it is so important to him?

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

Madam Speaker, I would ask the NDP why it sold its soul by signing a coalition agreement that allowed this government to enact policies that drove up the cost of food and doubled housing costs. That is the reality.

The NDP made a big show of saying the coalition was over, but when the first confidence vote took place in the House, the NDP rushed to save its partner. Yes, the NDP is still the Liberals' partner. It is still a partner in all the poor decisions and bad policies that have made everything in Canada cost more for everyone.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Madam Speaker, it is always an honour to rise in this place and join in debate on behalf of the good people of Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola. I particularly appreciated the speech by the MP for Mégantic—L'Érable. He made many good points that I hope to follow up on.

Our motion today is a serious one:

That, given that, after nine years, the government has doubled housing costs, taxed food, punished work, unleashed crime, and is the most centralizing government in Canadian history, the House has lost confidence in the government and offers Canadians the option to axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime.

I have to say that although I did not know about this particular opposition motion until recently, I came to the topic well prepared today. Back home in my riding, I write a weekly MP report to my constituents, as I am certain many others in this place do as well. For the past few weeks I wrote extensively about this particular topic, as I knew, we all knew, it would be coming up in this place.

On September 4, I of course wrote about the leader of the NDP's tearing up his agreement with the Liberal government. When it came to answering a question on what it would mean to have an election, here is what I wrote: “The NDP can, and I suspect likely will, continue to vote with the...Liberal government”. Well, it is almost like I am psychic. Who could have possibly predicted that the NDP leader would continue to stand with the Liberal government after the great theatrical performance of tearing up the agreement?

When I was asked why I thought the NDP leader staged the theatrical performance, here is what I wrote in response: “In my view, the Leader of the NDP is responding to criticism for what has been his current NDP strategy of bitterly condemning and complaining about things...Liberals do outside the House of Commons that the NDP fully supports when inside the House of Commons.” Once again it was an almost psychic reading of the NDP leader.

Often I like to ask my local citizens a question at the conclusion of my report. The following week I asked the question, “If given the chance to participate in a non-confidence vote on [this Liberal] government, would you opt for an election now or prefer to wait until October 2025?” I suspect it will not surprise any member of this place to learn that an overwhelming number of Canadians want a carbon tax election, and that they want it now. The fact that even the leader of the NDP says he no longer stands with a carbon tax speaks volumes. I mention these things because I now can say with complete and total certainty that the good people I represent want a carbon tax election.

Let me go back to the leader of the NDP. Imagine for a moment that he broadcasts his own radio talk show. If people ever wanted to know about the incompetent and bad performance of the Liberal government, they could tune in to the NDP leader's AM radio show, as it would be 24-7 talking about just how bad the Liberal government is. It is the same Liberal government about which the NDP leader said, “The fact is, the Liberals are too weak, too selfish and too beholden to corporate interests to fight for people”.

The leader of the NDP is clear that the government is the enabler of corporate greed. Let us for a moment surmise that everything the NDP leader says is true. When it comes to the Liberal government's incompetence, he is not really that far off. However, here is the thing. Who is the greatest enabler of the Liberal government? It is, wait for it, the leader of the NDP. I know that is hard to believe. How can someone say that a Liberal government is so incompetent and yet still support the Liberal government every single day?

Once again, this week we learned that after all of the great theatrics, the leader of the NDP still stands with the Liberals. It is such a totally nonsensical situation to say, “Yes, I think it is the worst government ever and does not deserve to be re-elected whatsoever, but I will do everything in my power to keep its members of Parliament elected.” It literally makes no sense to anyone, yet it is a “wash, rinse and repeat” tactic for the NDP.

Of course, joining in now is the Bloc Québécois. To some extent, I can sort of see the situation from the NDP's perspective after many years of blindly supporting the Liberal government no matter what. Many people now view the NDP and the Liberals as largely one and the same. When I knock on the doors of many seniors in my riding who were long-time NDP supporters, they tell me that voting NDP used to mean something and that the NDP has lost its way.

I will now go back to the Bloc. The Bloc's suddenly standing with the Prime Minister is something I did not fully expect. After all, the Liberal government has failed to deliver for the people of Quebec just as badly as it has for the citizens of every other province and territory. The Liberal government has literally turned failure into an art form on immigration, foreign interference in our democratic process, softwood lumber and the now $60-million so-called gun buyback program that has not bought a single firearm.

Crime is up massively. There is corruption in the federal program for contracting, complete fiscal mismanagement, and failure with our military and in our foreign policy. Everywhere we look, there is so much failure. That is not good for our provinces and territories. It is not good for Canada.

Worse yet, the Bloc is now supporting a Liberal-NDP coalition that has doubled housing costs, taxed food, punished work and unleashed crime. We know that the House leader for the Bloc has said that there has been “excessive centralization” never before seen in history, and that a government that has difficultly managing it owns missions was starting to get its hands “into the jurisdictions of Quebec and the provinces.”

There is one quick note I would like to share with the Bloc members in this place. There is a small value-added business in my riding whose owner sources his raw goods from two places. One of those places happens to be Quebec. Every time the carbon tax increases, the shipping bill from the trucking company he uses to get the raw supply from Quebec becomes more expensive. The trucking company literally sent out a note making it clear that it is increasing its shipping rates because of the carbon tax. After the next carbon tax increase, it will be more cost-effective to get those raw goods from outside of Canada. What a shame.

The jurisdictions that do not have carbon taxes and the trucking costs from the border of the B.C. interior are much cheaper than Quebec. The business owner says the carbon tax makes him feel punished for trying to use Quebec-sourced goods or, for that matter, goods from any other Canadian province.

Does the Bloc think that is good for Canada? Why does the Bloc want to become the new NDP and stand with the Liberal government? It is so bizarre. Every Bloc member of this place will have to answer to their own constituents as to why the Bloc is now working for the Prime Minister instead of working for them.

Before I close, I have to come back to something the leader of the NDP said recently: “it is the people's time.” I could not agree with him more on this. Why not give the people an election so they can be heard, because we work for the people? I do not know about the Bloc, the NDP and the Liberals, but I work for the people who sent me here. I do not work for the Prime Minister.

Every time they vote against a confidence motion, they are voting against the people and against giving them a say on the Liberal government. It is well past time to give the people their say and have a carbon tax election. It is the people's time. I for one dare the NDP leader to stand for a change, using his own words, instead of standing for the Liberals.

Canadians want a government that will axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime. Canada's common-sense Conservatives are ready to do that for them. We believe government should serve the people, not the other way around. Therefore I ask my friends in this place to start putting the pressure on the government and to vote in support of the motion. I do hope that the voices of Canadians will be heard, not just through my words but also through our collective voice as a Parliament.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food]

Madam Speaker, imagine a member of Parliament who has spent 20 years of his life in this place repeating slogans like “build the homes", but the only plan he can come up with is a Nimbyism line for people to call for “not in my backyard”. I am wondering how many homes that is going to build. The point is that if Conservatives want to go into an election, they have to show Canadians a plan. Five lines is not a plan. How many homes is a phone line going to build for Canadians?

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Madam Speaker, I will remind the member that in 2015, when the then third party leader presented his complete platform, it was during the election campaign, at a press conference where he could not debate with other parliamentarians. We have been putting out exactly the direction that we believe the government should be going in.

The member talks about building homes. In my own home province, Kelowna proper has signed an agreement for the so-called housing accelerator fund. I have looked through the plan that the Liberal government and the housing minister have championed, and there is not one reference to building a home. It says bike lanes can be built; it says sewage or sewer facilities can be built to plug into housing, or even a bridge can be built. They are essentially giving more money to the people who are not building the homes. Housing starts in B.C. are down 34%.

How can the member stand up and say that the Liberals have any moral authority on housing?

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Madam Speaker, I do not know whether I want to congratulate my colleague on his speech. I often begin my remarks by congratulating a colleague on their speech, but instead I would like to address a few of the things my colleague said. Two things in particular stood out to me. He denounced the carbon tax and criticized the Bloc Québécois for supporting the government.

Allow me to set the record straight. The Bloc Québécois is not supporting the government. The Bloc Québécois is simply refraining from bringing down the government. There is a difference. In fact, we all know that the government is nearing the end of its life and that, inevitably, there will be elections sooner or later.

What we are doing is taking advantage of this to make gains that will benefit Quebeckers, such as increasing old age security benefits for seniors aged 65 to 74. We propose to fund that by paying less carbon tax and by sending the oil companies a bit less money.

What does my colleague think about helping seniors by spending less money on oil and gas?

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Madam Speaker, this is the most centralizing government in Canadian history. Bill C-11 has given more power to the CRTC over what is considered to be Canadian. That also includes content from Quebeckers. The member has essentially voted to give more power to Ottawa, to the bureaucracy, over people's online expression.

The Prime Minister has doubled the Canadian debt. That means Quebeckers will have to put more money each and every year to service that debt, to Ottawa, instead of to their own interests.

The member talks about a bill that the Bloc Québécois has put forward in regard to seniors. The Prime Minister has changed the way the Senate works. The government can get a royal recommendation from the Minister of Finance, but can it get through the Senate? I do not think so. It is like the equivalent of Jack and the Beanstalk; Bloc members are asking for some magic beans, and that is what the Liberal government will offer them, but they will not grow anything except bigger Ottawa.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Madam Speaker, one of the things the member said in his speech was that the Liberal government is the worst government we have seen. There are lots of challenges, and I am going to be speaking about my challenges with the Liberal government later on today. However, from my perspective, the worst government this country has ever had was in fact the Harper Conservative government, which cut supports for women and cut supports for health care. It cut supports Canadians need.

What the member is saying as well is that Canadians overwhelmingly want a carbon tax election. However, polling that came out on September 6 to September 8 shows that, in fact, the majority of Canadians do not want a carbon tax election. How does he square that circle?

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Madam Speaker, the member is making the point that her leader made: It is the people's time. Her leader rips up an agreement and says how terrible the Liberal government was, as she also does here, but when it comes time to put rubber to the road, they stand with the Liberal government and the Liberal Prime Minister.

My constituents have asked that we get them off the track the government has put them on, and the NDP is certainly part of the problem. It is definitely not the solution. A common-sense Conservative party's leading this country is.

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, it is a little awkward that we are here again today, just a few hours after the House voted non-confidence in the leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, but here we are. It is a little awkward because there is only one party in the House that does not want to work for Canadians.

Yesterday, after that vote of non-confidence in the leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, the Conservatives moved to obstruct debate so that we could not get to a second confidence motion on the ways and means motion. I guess they would be embarrassed to have lost two of those votes in one day. It is the only reason that I can surmise for moving to obstruct the business of the House. Then again, we know that those in the Conservative Party of Canada, its leader and its members, are only here for their own personal political gain. Its members are not here because they actually want to work on behalf of Canadians.

Yesterday, we saw that there are three parties in the House that want to work for Canadians. They are the Liberal members of Parliament, the Bloc members of Parliament and the New Democratic members of Parliament, and they are all here to get work done for Canadians. That is unsurprising to me as we have seen, particularly since this leader has become the leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, that he treats our democratic institutions as a joke. He does not take them seriously.

What I have found interesting is that today, even though they are moving again for non-confidence in the government, there is not the pomp and ceremony. In fact, it feels a little deflated in here. It feels like those Conservative members of Parliament do not have that same energy because they lost that motion yesterday and they are doing it again today. It feels kind of sad and desperate. That is what it feels like to me.

Let us look at the Conservatives' record. When we listened to the speech from the Leader of the Opposition on Tuesday, when he moved that first motion, he asked that we look at his record. He asked that we judge him on his record. There is really only one thing of note that he has ever done when he was in government, and it was not a positive thing. He, when he was minister of democratic institutions, brought forward what was considered to be one of the worst bills when it comes to electoral changes in Canadian history. It was widely panned by experts. It was widely panned by anybody who cares about rights and democracy. The only thing that he was able to accomplish was to make it harder for 500,000 Canadians to vote.

If we want to look at his record, we can see that the only thing he was able to achieve was to limit and decrease the rights of Canadians. He talks about making Canada the freest country in the world, but the only thing he has ever done is to take people's freedoms away. That is not something that Canadians want in a Prime Minister, and it is certainly not something that they want in the Leader of the Opposition. We think about his record as he talks about housing, and it is really cute to hear them talk about housing because of his record as the minister of housing. I can actually count on two hands how many houses he built: one, two, three, four, five, six. There are six in total. That is the record he is putting forward.

Let us take him at his word and look at what his record is for Canadians. The other thing that he did, and he did not do this as a private member, is that he was the architect behind the Conservative plan, when they were in government, to put anti-union, anti-worker, anti-women and anti-abortion private members' bills in place. This is a typical Conservative tactic.

Yesterday in the House, the Leader of the Opposition said that he would not reopen the abortion debate, but then he kind of did a wink, wink and nudge, nudge because that is exactly what Mr. Harper did when he was Prime Minister. He had his members bring those forward as private members' bills, through the back door, so he could pretend that it was not the government that was doing it.

We see that the Leader of the Opposition speaks on one side to say that, no, he is not going to do this, but then he looks at the members of his party who are social conservatives and tells them not to worry, that they can go, all-expenses-paid, down to Florida to anti-abortion conferences to talk about how they are going to bring those American-style politics up to Canada, to limit a woman's right to choose and to limit their ability to access reproductive health care in this country. He says that he will tell everybody that he is not going to do it, but to not worry because they can do it through the back door.

This is the issue that we have when it comes to the Leader of the Opposition: He refuses to tell Canadians the whole truth.

Let me get back to housing because the member who was just speaking talked about the Conservatives' great housing plan. They talk about their great housing plan, but they are not going to provide any funding to municipalities until they build the houses. For anyone who knows how municipalities work, or how development and planning work, are they just going to have a whole bunch of empty houses with no roads to get there, no sewers to use and no electricity? Those development charges, the funding that funds all of the stuff that builds healthy neighbourhoods, are required to get those houses built. The vision that the Conservative leader of Canada is putting forward is a whole bunch of empty homes with nobody able to get there or use them because there will not be any of the necessary services.

He talks about cutting taxes, but taxes pay for the services and programs that we care about as Canadians. They pay for the health care we receive, the education our children receive and the child care our children go to. They pay for the roads, the public infrastructure and everything that makes this country great and gives Canadians a fair shot at success.

Over the past nine years, our government has ensured that people have a fair shot at success and that the Canadian dream is an equal playing field, so that income, family background or where people come from do not matter. All people have an opportunity to succeed because Liberals believe that is the Canadian dream. When we have a Leader of the Opposition who only talks about tearing down the institutions that we have in Canada, the very institutions that have made this country great, that is not leadership. That is not someone who believes in this country or who wants to build a prosperous, successful and equitable Canada where everybody has a chance at success.

Our government is very proud of the record it has had over the last nine years. The Canada child benefit lifted 650,000 children out of poverty. Let us compare that to what the Conservatives did. They had the UCCB, which sent $100 a month to all parents, but it was all taxable. The Canada child benefit is tax-free. That is money in people's pockets that helps with the high costs of groceries, rent and raising a family.

When it comes to senior citizens, what is the record of the Leader of the Opposition? He was in a Conservative government that raised the age of retirement from 65 to 67. He was in a government that cut seniors' pensions. What have the Liberals done? The first thing we did was increase the guaranteed income supplement by 10%. We increased old age security for those 75 and over by 10%. We also increased the Canada pension plan for future seniors to make sure that everybody would have a dignified retirement in Canada. Our record speaks for itself.

Let us talk about workers' rights. The Leader of the Opposition is going around talking to workers saying that he supports them. He has one of the most anti-worker, anti-union records in Canadian history. He has done everything possible to try to bust unions, limit workers' rights and make sure they do not have the strength they need to continue to support labour rights in this country.

One of the first things we did when we came into office was to reverse those anti-labour laws that Stephen Harper and the leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, who was the minister of employment at the time, put forward. His record speaks for itself. He is anti-union and anti-labour. He simply does not care about workers' rights. What Canadians see, when they hear him speaking, is that he only tells half the truth. He neglects the part of the story that does not fit the narrative he wants to put forward, and he is hiding his true agenda. He can tell workers he supports them, but let us look at the facts. Let us look at what he has actually delivered for Canadians workers, and it is anything but pro-union and anything but pro-worker.

Let us talk about the future of the country. Let us talk about the fight against climate change. This is one of the most existential threats that our country, and indeed the world, is facing. If we want to have a country where our children can prosper and grow, and where our grandchildren can prosper, we have to fight climate change. That means we have to have a comprehensive plan when it comes to the price on pollution, the work to do with industry partners and investments in clean technology. We have to have that whole picture because this is a whole-of-society fight that we need to engage in.

The Leader of the Opposition says that he will do things for climate change, but right now, all he has is imaginary ideas that nobody has ever tested. The fact of the matter is that, when he was in government, when Stephen Harper was Prime Minster, we had the worst climate record in the world. Canadians were ashamed of our actions on climate change when the Leader of the Opposition was in government.

We just received news that our climate plan is working. The equivalent of 60 million cars has been taken off the road in climate-emission reductions because of the work we have put forward. Now, let us talk about our international record. Last fall, I thought the House was going to unanimously pass the Canada-Ukraine free trade agreement. I thought that would be something that would go smoothly. Instead, we saw obstruction at every single turn, which was led by the leader of the Conservative Party of Canada.

Canada has stood strong with Ukraine against Russia's illegal occupation and war. Again, we saw obstruction at every moment from the Conservatives. This was apparently because there was something about a price on pollution in the Canada-Ukraine free trade agreement, which was an absolute red herring since Ukraine already had a price on pollution. This was simply an update. It was a wink and a nod to the people online who are supporting the Russian occupation. The Leader of the Opposition did not want to necessarily rock that boat because he is one of those people who goes down those conspiracy theory rabbit holes.

He was absolutely against moving forward in support for Ukraine. Finally, he was shamed into doing so, but it took a very long time. It is shameful that he was trying to obstruct and obscure our standing alongside our allies. If we think about it, the very fact that he cannot even get allies in the House to support his little political games makes me wonder how in the world he is going to get allies around the world to support Canada's objectives moving forward.

The Leader of the Opposition takes this place for a joke. He takes Canadians for a joke. Canadians deserve more than that. They deserve more from their political leaders than to be treated as props and to be treated as symbols for political advancement.

On this side of the House, and indeed among the other political parties, the NDP, the Bloc Québécois and the Liberals, we are here to work for Canadians. We will continue to do that. We will continue to advance the important work of the House. The only question we have today is whether the Conservatives will stop playing their silly partisan games, get over these ideas of grandeur and, instead, actually work for Canadians. All we see today is the fact that the Conservatives are only here to work for themselves.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Madam Speaker, the member stated numerous times that they are very proud of the government's record.

The motion for today reads, in part, “That, given that, after nine years, the government has doubled housing costs, taxed food, punished work, unleashed crime, and is the most centralizing government in Canadian history”.

In my riding of Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, crime is out of control. The government's bills, Bill C-5 and Bill C-75, are directly responsible for that. It is like a hockey stick. We can see the crime going up exponentially. We have made a common rural town into a crime scene. Is the member very proud of that?

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

Madam Speaker, what I am really proud of is the fact that we banned military assault-style weapons. The Conservatives want to bring that back. I am also very proud that bail reform passed unanimously through the House. We have done what we need to do at the federal level.

The issues that the member is raising are questions that he should be raising with provincial governments, because it is their court system and bail system that we need to be questioning. However, I am not surprised by the fact that he does not know which level of government is responsible for certain things.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Madam Speaker, I would like ask my colleague a question.

She said her government had helped seniors by increasing old age security for seniors 75 and over. I just want to remind her that it was her government that caused this injustice in the first place, this unacceptable inequity, this hole in the pension program, by creating two classes of seniors.

The reason we are talking about this bill so much today is that the Liberals themselves caused widespread dissatisfaction among seniors aged 65 to 74, who still feel completely forgotten by this government to this day.

[Karina Gould, Liberal, Burlington, ON]

Madam Speaker, as I mentioned, we are very proud of what we have done for seniors in Canada.

As I mentioned, one of the first things we did for Canada's most vulnerable seniors was to boost pensions by 10%. We observed a change among seniors aged 75 and over. It is tougher to make ends meet, costs are up and their savings have dwindled. That is what led us to take action.

We acted for an important reason, which is to help the most vulnerable in our society.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, the hon. government House leader spoke at length about pro-worker policy, pro-union policy, yet the government does not exactly have a pro-worker track record. I reference its use of section 107 in the Labour Code against the Teamsters. What that does is essentially force binding arbitration in the middle of negotiations. The effect that has on negotiations is that it provides no incentive for corporations, bosses and management to come to the table and effectively bargain.

We have grain workers at the table right now, GWU Local 333. Therefore, will the government House leader now go on the record and commit today that the Minister of Labour will not intervene on fair bargaining and good-faith negotiations and will never use section 107 when it comes to negotiations for workers?