Gary Goodyear

[Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act, June 25th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I apologize for interrupting.

The member suggested that the NDP has put forward some compromises. I have not seen any such thing, just demands from the NDP. So I am asking him to table those amendments and compromises.

[Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act, June 25th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the member on her speech.

I would like to take a moment to congratulate the workers and management at Cambridge Toyota auto manufacturing in my riding, which just won as the best auto assembly plant in the world. I am very proud of them. Congratulations to them. The plant is non-unionized, by the way.

Folks in my riding have written to me indicating that they would be quite happy to work at Canada Post right now. They would be happy to take a few bucks an hour less, and less benefits. They want the job and would be happy to do the job.

Based on “fundamental rights”, if I could use the member's own words, does that person, male or female, young or old, have the right to work for Canada Post and not join the union? Is that fundamental right not to join respected by the union?

Current postal workers are being denied the right to vote on the offer. Why is that not a fundamental right?

[Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act, June 25th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the member is correct. John Deere is gone. The member's area has lost a lot of manufacturing jobs. In my area, Bundy of Canada has disappeared. Budd Automotive has disappeared. The common denominator here is unions, and we could get into that argument, but my question is not about that. We could also argue about bad employers who should go to jail and, if the NDP would support our crime agenda, maybe that too would happen. We could even talk about Jimmy Hoffa. We could go into this rhetoric.

However, I hear about how unions are democratic. I am not talking about the right to strike. I understand that 94%, so I ask the member not to go there. Postal workers are asking to have had the democratic right to vote on the offer by Canada Post. They were denied a basic democratic right. That is very offensive to Canadians. It is not about us taking the locks off the door. It is about the unions behaving democratically in the best interest of the country, not in the historic interest of the long gone Budd Automotive, John Deere and all of these industries that cannot compete, and guess why.

[Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act, June 25th, 2011]

On the same point of order, Madam Speaker, I am certain you would be able to see through that. Clearly, those are honourable things to do, and we are not debating those issues.

The issue is that members opposite came to Ottawa to fix an apparently broken Ottawa, and they are wearing a prop in complete violation of the rules.

[Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act, June 25th, 2011]

Madam Speaker, I apologize for interrupting my colleague, but I wonder if you could clarify this. About 12 hours ago the member was giving a speech, and I was in the House. I believe it is almost exactly the same speech.

I wonder if the Chair would confirm whether members are allowed to give the same speech over again. I know they want to filibuster, and I am okay with that, but I need some clarification.

[Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act, June 25th, 2011]

Madam Speaker, the member hits it on the nose that 55,000 workers are seriously inconvenienced by this. The government is very concerned about that. We are concerned that an agreement could not be reached after eight months. We were concerned about the rotating strikes that cost Canada Post, and ultimately taxpayers, over $100 million, and now the lockout. At the end of the day, what we are concerned about is all Canadians. We are concerned about small businesses that are losing money. There is strong evidence that the economy is being hurt and at a very critical time when the global economy is still fragile.

Would the member see that the best way to end this now, the most firm, complete and final way, is to agree with the back to work legislation, support the government's concern for all Canadians, not just those who are unionized, but Canadians who do not have unions, Canadians who want to go to work are being negatively impacted? As a result, seniors are not getting their cheques and folks are not getting their passports or their visas for family members overseas who are ill. The government is concerned about this on a whole. These workers need to get back to work, and this filibustering is not helping.

Would the member please consider supporting back to work legislation as the final and complete solution to this problem?

[Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act, June 25th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I want to make two comments on the member's speech.

One, she mentioned motorists honking at the strike initiative. She assumed the honking was in favour of the strikers. I suspect it was more likely small business owners going to work, simply honking at the strikers and saying, “Get the hell out of the way; I want to go to work”.

The other thing is that I have emails from postal workers who tell me they were not allowed to vote by their union. They are disappointed with that and are demanding that the union allow them to vote on what they thought was a very good deal.

I would like to know from the member: How undemocratic is that?

[Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act, June 25th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, I have two comments—

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

Mr. Speaker, first, if I could, I would like to congratulate Toyota. In my riding of Cambridge the workers and the management have actually received recognition as being the number one auto assembly plant in the world.

I want to put forward as well an email that I have received.

I [am] writing to you in a hope that you would help intervene in the CPC/CUPW strike. I want to work; the union is not allowing the membership to vote on the generous offer put forward. Please contact the appropriate member and give them the concerns that many postal workers are unhappy with the union's approach and would like the Gov't or CPC to order a vote.

My question to the member is this. It appears to me that the union has locked out their membership in a very undemocratic way. Will the member support a call to her union bosses and the conductors of the socialist party to demand that the union allow its membership a free vote?

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

Mr. Speaker, I want to ask a question on the last point, the self-inflicted wound.

There are two financial costs here. Of course, one is happening now; $25 million a day is the estimate. The other was caused by the rotating strikes. After eight months of negotiations there were rotating strikes caused by the members, which caused an interruption in service and a loss of stability to consumers of what Canada Post offers. This is something the NDP just does not get about business.

People start to outsource their needs. Canada Post starts to lose business. That was about $100 million. That was not caused by Canada Post. That was caused by the rotating strikes. So after eight months of free negotiations and rotating strikes, which caused a lockout, there is significant financial damage.

Here is my question. If the member is not willing to get the workers back to work, he obviously must be willing to have the taxpayers in his riding take up these additional and exorbitant costs, in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Why is the member not willing to get these workers back to work and let them negotiate the way they want? Why is the member so willing to allow his constituents to pay those high taxes?