Jim Gouk

[Points Of Order, November 25th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, today in question period in frustration I used a word that was inappropriate. I do apologize for that. I hope the Speaker would realize that is not in character with the way I speak in this House.

However I would ask the Speaker if he could enlighten me as to why, when other people use words which are inappropriate, the Speaker rises and tells them that he finds that word inappropriate and asks them to withdraw it and then the question is answered. Why did he not do that in my case but simply passed me over and I did not get a response to my question?

[Canada Post, November 25th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, a dispute? They are out, for God's sake.

The other day I pointed out to the Minister of Labour that Canadian businesses are losing hundreds of millions of dollars a day and he does not care. I pointed out that tens of thousands of Canadians are laid off and he does not care. We have a Canada Post negotiator beating up a CUPW negotiator and he still does not care. Thirty million Canadians have lost their mail service and he does not care.

What the hell does the minister care about?

[Canada Post, November 25th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, the minister keeps saying let collective bargaining work. It is not working. We have Canada Post negotiators beating up a CUPW negotiator. We have CUPW president Darrel Tingley writing threatening letters to Canadian business. We have the Minister of Labour on national television claiming the minister responsible for Canada Post mis-spoke and should be chastised.

Not only is collective bargaining not working, Canadians are not working. When is the minister going to invoke legislation and allow these negotiations to still continue under mediation?

[Canada Post, November 24th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, strike in 1987, legislation; strike in 1991, legislation. Now we have a strike in 1997. The cost is thousands of layoffs with Christmas coming, a one hundred million dollar a day cost to business, an erosion of Canada Post Corporation and the ultimate loss of jobs for CUPW.

How many strikes is it going to take before this government recognizes the need to protect Canada's 30 million people and bring in a permanent no strike, no lockout solution to Canada Post disputes?

[Canada Post, November 24th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, back to work legislation also includes a strike alternative to settle the dispute.

It is well known the government is in a position of conflict of interest due to its plans to have Canada Post reap huge profits which it then turns over to a cash hungry Liberal government.

Given this conflict of interest what impartial dispute settlement mechanism does the government intend to use when it finally gets off its you know what?

[Canada Post, November 20th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I have a little collective bargaining lesson for the Minister of Labour.

Collective bargaining has four parts: negotiate, conciliate, mediate and a settlement mechanism. Canada Post and CUPW do not have a settlement mechanism; they have a confrontation system.

When will the minister put a settlement mechanism in place and stop holding Canadians to ransom?

[Canada Post, November 20th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, if the minister thinks that an average of a strike every two and a half years is a good record, I hate to think what his bad record is.

Over 1,000 people in direct marketing were laid off prior to the strike actually starting. Tens of thousands more in direct marketing, charity organizations and businesses that depend on mail in the operation of their business will soon be joining them. Merry Christmas, Canada.

Can the minister tell this House how many people need to be laid off and how much suffering they and their families have to go through before he will act?

[Canada Post, November 20th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday on CBC TV the Minister of Labour said he would not interfere with postal negotiations because 90% of all collective bargaining in government sectors is settled without a strike.

That may be so but Canada Post certainly is not one of them. This is the third strike in 10 years, the fourth if we count the two separate strikes we had in 1987. That brings Canada Post's 10 year average to less than 50%.

Will the minister admit that Canada Post is not one of his success stories and legislate an end to this disruption?

[Request For Emergency Debate, November 20th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I seek leave to present a motion under Standing Order 52(1) and 52(2) for the adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter that requires the urgent consideration of all hon. members, the current postal situation.

It is appropriate that we examine all the issues that affect every one of the 31 million Canadians in this country. I am not asking that we specifically debate something like back to work legislation but rather that we should examine the impact and ramifications of this current action, that we examine all the different possibilities in terms of what might be appropriate actions to take to reduce the harmful impact of this and collectively arrive at some decisions as to how we may best serve the interests of all Canadians.

[Request For Emergency Debate, November 20th, 1997]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to ask for some guidance. I understand it is customary that I read the actual application I made to the House for this.