House of Commons photoWon his last election, in 2025, with 66% of the vote.
Business of Supply May 31st, 2016
Mr. Chair, the record will show that the minister chose not to answer my question. I was hoping he would be as open about expenses as he is when he is talking about his personal life.
I want to ask the minister this. Does he believe that Canada should ever balance its budget?
Business of Supply May 31st, 2016
Mr. Chair, I appreciate that substantive answer.
There are some other things I want to address. I have here Question No. 94, an Order Paper question that deals with the expenses associated with ministerial travel. The minister went to New York, brought three political staffers with him, and each of them charged about $4,000 for a round-trip flight to New York. There were two public servants on the same flight and each of them charged about $1,000 for a round-trip flight. I do not know how one gets a round-trip flight to New York for about $4,000.
I wonder if the minister can explain why it costs so much more to move political staffers than it does to move public servants.
Business of Supply May 31st, 2016
Mr. Chair, that is an absolutely ridiculous response and I would appreciate it if members did not cut into my time with applause.
Is there anything that the government does in terms of the services it provides that the minister does not define as infrastructure?
Business of Supply May 31st, 2016
Mr. Chair, is there anything that the government does that is not infrastructure?
Business of Supply May 31st, 2016
Mr. Chair, is it the view of the minister that child care is a form of infrastructure?
Business of Supply May 31st, 2016
Mr. Chair, I would like to seek unanimous consent to split my time with the member for Milton.
Public Service Labour Relations Act May 30th, 2016
Mr. Speaker, I want to correct something the member for Winnipeg North said. He said that voting against the bill would be a rejection of the principle of the bill. Both the NDP and the Conservatives are going to vote against the bill not because we reject the principle but because we reject the specific measures in it. The member who is in this place fairly frequently should know that at second reading we vote on the principle of the bill then at third reading we pronounce finally on the content of the bill.
I want to ask the member about the secret ballot. We have advocated the importance of ensuring that the secret ballot occurs. What is the harm in a secret ballot? Why not allow RCMP members to pronounce through a secret ballot on whether or not they want to join a union? If they want to join they can vote yes in a secret ballot with no problem. What is the harm of the secret ballot?
Public Service Labour Relations Act May 30th, 2016
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question and for the excellent work he is doing on this bill.
I do find it unfortunate when members make arguments that are about things unrelated to the legislation, when they try to dress this up in something that really is not about the substance of the bill. We have been clear on this side of the House about what our specific concerns are. Some members of the government are willing to engage on that point, but others would perhaps like to divert and make this discussion about something else. I and members on our side of the House have been very clear about the importance of implementing the Supreme Court decision and the important role that unions play.
I am grateful for the contribution of unions and union members in my community and I was grateful to have the active involvement of some union members as part of my campaign. Union members are not monolithic, and in general many are involved with the Conservative Party. Part of that is because our emphasis is on respecting process and on respecting them and the important role that unions play, but also on ensuring that certification happens through a proper, open, democratic process that ensures that people can express their views without having it be in a very public way.
Public Service Labour Relations Act May 30th, 2016
Madam Speaker, I am sure the member listened to my speech and is well aware of my position with respect to this bill generally and with respect to unions more generally. Unions have an important role to play and it is certainly important that this Parliament respond to and indeed implement the Supreme Court decision with respect to RCMP entitlement to collectively bargain. There is no dispute around that, and of course Conservatives have been constructive throughout this process of Bill C-7.
However, good intentions are not enough. Good intentions in terms of implementing this process are not enough when there is this huge problem, what I would call for me a poison pill in this legislation, which is the refusal of the government to respect the right of those who play a critical function defending our democracy, standing up for our political and democratic rights; and that they would not be given the right, through a proper democratic secret ballot process, to be involved in determining whether to form a union and exactly which union they would form. These are important issues, and I just cannot vote in favour of legislation, however good some parts of it may be, that has that kind of lack of respect, I would argue, for this important Canadian institution.
If the government is keen on getting consensus, I hope the Liberals would consider even at this late stage working on a possible change for this legislation that would make it more supportable. However, at this stage of course the government has the votes to pass this legislation if members come for that vote. I cannot support legislation that contains such a significant problem for our democracy.
Public Service Labour Relations Act May 30th, 2016
Madam Speaker, I appreciate the member's kind words. He and I worked together on the Canada-Tibet Interparliamentary Friendship Group. I appreciate his work there and the opportunity to work on that other important issue.
With respect to his comments here today though, he said that members seem to want to form a union according to surveys. If that is true, then what is the issue of having a secret ballot? It goes both ways. If it is going to happen anyway, then what is the harm of using a proper secret ballot process, a proper democratic process? There really is no harm in that.
I will just remind the member that the question in any certification discussion is not just whether or not to join a union, it is also whether or not to join that particular union and not to perhaps respond to a different, possible certification application. Even if members agree that they are interested in having a union, the question remains of what kind of union, which union might well be more contentious. That is why it is important to have the fair process of a secret ballot.