Dean Del Mastro

[Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act, June 24th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to again engage in this debate with the members of the opposition.

It is interesting that the NDP keeps making the case that this is unheard of, that we are breaking new ground. In fact the history of Canada Post indicates that sometimes the government has had to get involved when the parties have not been able to agree.

It is always a last resort. There have been eight months of negotiations. There was more than three months of work with a conciliator and more than a month with a mediator, and they have not been able to come to an agreement.

The last time this happened, in 1997, the then-Liberal government did bring a bill that set in place the wage rates moving forward. This bill has followed that structure. That is what we have done.

We want to bring stability. There are raises and there are protections for the workers. There is an opportunity for them to put forward their position to a mediator who will then select the offer from Canada Post or the workers, one or the other. That is what the government has put in place.

What we want is stability. We want the mail to flow. We do not want more rotating strikes. We do not want more harm to our community. We want to stand up for all 33 million Canadians, including those at Canada Post.

[Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act, June 24th, 2011]

And no strikes, Mr. Speaker. The member is right: no lockouts, no strikes.

Would the member be in favour of listing Canada Post as an essential service? If so, does he think it would be a good idea that the workers would not be able to strike or be locked out in the future? Would he support that?

[Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act, June 24th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to once again engage in some questions with hon. members from across the floor.

A number of members across the floor talked about Canada Post as being an “essential service”. Essential services in Canada often have special rules that apply to them, including—

[Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act, June 24th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to be here this evening working on behalf my constituents.

I stand with 165 members of the strong, stable, national Conservative majority government who ran on a pledge to be here for Canada, and here we are defending the rights of every Canadian worker. Is that not interesting?

It seems, from what I am hearing from the NDP this evening, that working families have a union card and everyone else does not work. That seems to be what I am hearing. What I seem to be hearing is to heck with small business; we are not worried about them. To heck with the economy; if that stops, it does not matter. Let us just be irresponsible. Let us take our marching orders from the big union bosses who will not even allow a vote from their membership. The tyranny, the intimidation--women working at Canada Post are afraid to say anything other than, “I will fall in line. Sure, I will follow the big union boss who will not allow me to vote on contract offers.”

That is what she is fighting for. Is she proud of it?

[Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act, June 24th, 2011]

Was it a megabyte?

[Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act, June 23rd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I listened quite intently to the Leader of the Opposition give his speech. There were a number of things, frankly, on which we agree but there were a number of things on which we disagree.

I do have concerns when I hear conversations about different levels of Canadians. Well there are, sadly, Canadians who have not been at the table in these negotiations but, believe me, they are being deeply impacted.

His motion, which would suggest a hoist motion, to move this in six months, unlock the doors of Canada Post, for what? Is it so we can have more rotating strikes? Maybe tomorrow it would be Toronto that shut down. Maybe next week it would be Peterborough or somewhere in Ottawa or elsewhere. This is not a solution.

I have received notes from postal workers asking why they have not had an opportunity to vote. Their union would not let them vote on this contract. There is intimidation within the ranks of CUPW and workers are afraid. Does the member know that?

Would he call on CUPW and ask it to allow a vote on the last offer by Canada Post, or is he simply going to allow this kind of tyranny from the top union leaders?

[Resumption and Continuation of Postal Services Legislation, June 23rd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, first, I thank my hon. colleague from Calgary for what I thought was an outstanding intervention. He talked about the process the federal government has gone through in following all of the legislation and trying to assist in bringing the two sides together to get a deal. We have always indicated that we wanted to see a deal worked out between the two sides. However, it is clear that is just not going to happen, and the government must act.

We have certainly heard the NDP members say that they think the government is not being fair. Does the member think that it is fair that CUPW has not allowed any of its membership to vote on the three Canada Post contract offers? The union members have not had the opportunity to vote on any of that, including the most recent contract offer that Canada Post made to its members. Is he aware of that? Does he think CUPW should have allowed the individual members the right to vote? It seems democratic to me.

[Resumption and Continuation of Postal Services Legislation, June 23rd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, there is this misperception that the NDP really wants to project to Canadians. In fact, it is not truthful to say that the government locked out Canada Post workers.

In fact, did the minister, who is responsible for Canada Post, lock out Canada Post workers or was the decision taken by the executives, who have been appointed to run Canada Post on behalf of Canadians?

[Resumption and Continuation of Postal Services Legislation, June 23rd, 2011]

Madam Speaker, as I said earlier for one of the other members, bargaining on this current contract began last October. Clearly, the parties had a significant number of issues to discuss, and not the least among them is the fact that the Canada Post business model is changing dramatically. In fact, many Canadians, if they live in an urban setting and if they have access to broadband and Internet, have found ways to significantly replace a lot of their mail. In fact, Canada Post's own numbers indicate that postal flow is dropping fairly dramatically.

One of the things that really concerns me, and I wonder if it concerns the member, is this. From the moment in time that the rotating strikes began and then throughout the lockout period, it was clear that Canadians, financial institutions, utility companies and others had been encouraging people to move away from using the mail and to move toward use of electronic statements. This is damaging the post office's long-term business structure.

I am concerned that rural Canadians in my riding are going to have to pay inflated prices for mail because the Canada Post business model is being permanently damaged by these actions.

[Resumption and Continuation of Postal Services Legislation, June 23rd, 2011]

Madam Speaker, I listened with interest to the member's comments. He said that it takes two willing parties to negotiate such a deal. I believe he said, “We have to have a partner to dance”. I would agree.

Negotiations on this contract have been going on since October. One thing is clear. Whether through the rotating strikes that were occurring, which were having impacts on Canadians from coast to coast to coast in this country, or the lockout that ensued, this is punitive on the Canadian public, punitive on the millions of Canadians who are not at the bargaining table.

I wonder if the member has considered those Canadians or if he has thought about them. The NDP had a motion on small business yesterday. Has he thought about the impact that this impasse is having on small businesses, on seniors, on everyday Canadians? What about them?