House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2015, with 35% of the vote.
Postal Services Resumption and Continuation Act November 22nd, 2018
Mr. Speaker, government members have been trying to justify back-to-work legislation by noting that management and the union did not avail themselves of arbitration.
I am wondering if the member for Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge could clarify whether the government is contemplating back-to-work legislation that would require binding arbitration or whether the government is contemplating back-to-work legislation that would impose a settlement designed by the government itself.
Postal Services Resumption and Continuation Act November 22nd, 2018
Mr. Speaker, the member for Jonquière and I both worked on the government operations committee study on the future of Canada Post, which clearly showed that cutbacks and concessions are not the way forward for Canada Post.
Today the government is introducing a motion that would sharply limit the amount of time to debate and consider back-to-work legislation for Canada Post employees. This is particularly concerning in light of the 2016 Ontario Superior Court ruling that the 2011 Conservative back-to-work legislation had been unconstitutional.
I would ask the member for Jonquière whether she believes that the Liberal back-to-work legislation is any more likely to be considered constitutional, or whether it would be yet another unconstitutional violation of fundamental workers' rights.
Postal Services Resumption and Continuation Act November 22nd, 2018
Mr. Speaker, the last time the Government of Canada ordered Canada Post employees back to work, the courts ruled that legislation to be unconstitutional. One of the ways we normally try to make sure legislation is constitutional is by having a full debate on it in this House and by having a full study of it at committee.
Why is the minister putting forward a motion to limit consideration of this potential legislation to only a couple of hours, and how is she so confident that it is going to be constitutional this time?
Natural Resources November 19th, 2018
Mr. Speaker, with the lack of pipeline capacity, the price of western Canadian heavy oil has fallen to a record low, undercutting employment and public revenues.
The Alberta government and industry are considering temporarily cutting output to improve prices, but are concerned about federal competition rules.
Can the government assure Alberta and Saskatchewan that the federal Competition Bureau will not interfere if they coordinate a production cut?
International Trade November 7th, 2018
Mr. Speaker, I certainly appreciate that the parliamentary secretary has stated the government's opposition to the illegitimate American tariffs on our steel and aluminum exports. I think everyone in the House shares the goal of removing those tariffs. The question we are debating this evening is how to achieve that goal.
The parliamentary secretary mentioned the government's existing retaliatory strategy, which was largely based on targeting certain American electoral districts. Now that the U.S. mid-term elections are over, I wonder whether the parliamentary secretary believes that strategy has worked or whether he would agree with me that some new strategy is now required.
I would like to hear some kind of a response to the possibility of instead targeting President Trump's personal business interests, rather than continuing with retaliation that targets the American people. I would also like a commitment that the government will not sign USMCA until these tariffs are lifted.
International Trade November 7th, 2018
Mr. Speaker, in June, I asked whether the government would consider sanctioning President Trump's personal business interests in order to lift the American tariffs from our steel and aluminum exports.
I would like to begin by mentioning the high cost of these tariffs for our country. Not only have they reduced current exports and cost jobs in the present, they are also hurting investments in Canada's steel and aluminum industries, which will be costing our economy and employment in the long term as well.
What has the government done so far? Well, it has applied reciprocal tariffs on American steel and aluminum coming into our country. It also has retaliatory tariffs targeting products coming from politically sensitive American electoral districts. While that was a very clever type of retaliation, I really think it has run its course, given that they had American mid-term elections yesterday, with whatever political consequences have been felt. Unfortunately, the U.S. steel and aluminum tariffs still apply to Canadian exports. Therefore, we need to look at other options.
As I suggested back in June, one option could be to sanction the personal business interests of President Trump. Unlike previous American presidents, he has not divested his business assets. This makes him uniquely vulnerable to the possibility of sanctions from other countries. I would like to hear what the government's response is to that option.
I think another option we need to look at involves the recently agreed to USMCA. Just this evening, CBC reported that our ambassador to the United States has indicated that the Prime Minister will not participate in a signing ceremony as long as the American steel and aluminum tariffs remain in place. However, it does seem that the government is prepared to go ahead and sign the agreement. CNN interviewed the Prime Minister, and he said, “We're not at the point of saying that we wouldn't sign if it wasn't lifted, although we're trying to make that case.”
It sounds as though the government is prepared to go ahead and sign the USMCA, even if American tariffs continue to apply to Canadian steel and aluminum exports. I think that is a big problem.
One of the obvious goals of a free trade agreement should be to not have that type of tariff in place between our two countries. Therefore, I find it concerning that the government is already signalling, by way of this interview the Prime Minister did on CNN, that the government is prepared to go ahead and sign the USMCA, even if the U.S. keeps these tariffs in place. I think we need our government to take a much stronger stand on that point, and we really need to see some strong action to get these American tariffs off our steel and aluminum exports.
To sum up, we have these American tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum being sold south of the border. It is imposing huge costs on Canada's economy and on Canadian workers. My constituents and other Canadians need to know what the government's plan is and what the government's timeline will be to have these American tariffs removed.
Steel Industry November 6th, 2018
Mr. Speaker, after determining that China was dumping and subsidizing structural steel, the Canadian International Trade Tribunal applied countervailing duties. However, LNG Canada has sought an exception so it can ship in steel modules from China rather than building them here. We should seize this opportunity to develop Canada's steel industry.
Could the government commit to enforcing existing tariffs against unfairly traded Chinese steel?
Public Services and Procurement October 30th, 2018
Mr. Speaker, tomorrow night, Canadian children will be curious to see what gets into their Halloween bags. Unfortunately, trick or treat remains an apt metaphor for how our federal public servants are compensated under the Phoenix pay system. Tomorrow is also the two-year anniversary of the government's deadline to fix Phoenix.
How many more years will it take for the government to implement a payroll system that pays its workers accurately and on time?
Elections Modernization Act October 29th, 2018
Mr. Speaker, CCF agrees to apply and will vote no.
Elections Modernization Act October 29th, 2018
Mr. Speaker, CCF agrees to apply and will vote yes.