Jean-François Larose

[Safe Streets and Communities Act, September 28th, 2011]

Madam Speaker, as a father, it is completely unacceptable to me to watch a government that claims to be responsible hide behind pedophilia to say that some aspects of the bill are commendable and that we do not want to support it. That does not work.

Is it acceptable to hide behind one item in order to try to get others passed in such an irresponsible manner?

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

Madam Speaker, I want to let my colleague know that I really enjoyed her speech, as it shed light on the situation for me. I also want to ask her a question, as I am not sure I understood correctly. If my understanding is correct, the situation is very serious.

Am I right in my understanding that this government has fabricated a situation from beginning to end in order to push Canada Post workers into being incredibly productive, so that the government could sell Canada Post to the private sector in the long run? Did I understand that correctly?

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

Mr. Speaker, there have been amendments proposed. I am happy to hear that this government is open to amendments. I think it is important to be open.

The door is open, and it is now up to the government to act.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her question.

This is in fact a pattern on the part of the government. I think it feels a bit threatened. When something threatens people's very existence, the government takes a hard line, when it could just take the time to meet with people, as it has the gall to say it does, and understand the situation. I imagine that communication is not its strong point.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. The solution is very simple: for the postal service to get back up and running again, the lockout has to end. The union agrees to return to work on the same terms. There will be no strike; the employees will go back. They have to end the lockout.

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

Mr. Speaker, I would like to begin by expressing my best wishes to all Quebeckers on the national holiday. It warms my heart to learn that all francophones, everywhere in Canada, are also celebrating this national holiday. Let us continue the struggle. We will succeed.

I would also like to say to all my colleagues that I am extremely proud of all the speeches they have made up to now. They are speaking from their hearts. They are speaking from their experience, unlike this government, which seems to speak like a machine, an answering machine, constantly repeating the same message. I am concerned, since I myself have experienced special legislation in Quebec that had a horrible effect, not just on me but on a lot of people in Quebec.

I am going to talk about the history of Quebec, particularly because today is the national holiday. Let us recall the very early days of Quebec. The people who brought prosperity to Quebec and to Canada are the workers. They are the people who cleared the land with their hands. They are the people who built the roads. They are the people who set up local businesses. And later in our history, they are the people who came together to create Hydro-Québec so it became a people’s project. They are the volunteers who continue to work with and help people still today.

All these workers sacrificed their time and their energy. This is the people as a whole, let us not forget. This is a shared history, and the connection with the postal service is very important in that history. It is thanks to the postal service, thanks to that connection, that people were able to communicate. And still today, it is the most reliable service there is, and all Canadians know it. Everyone uses computers, but we still have the postal service. It provides us with unbelievable services.

Everyone in my riding is affected by the postal strike. Everyone realizes that the strike has to end, but there is a way to do it, and this government is not doing it the right way. This is absolutely unacceptable.

We are heading toward an historic event. We are a part of history, of a new millennium. Where is this government’s new vision? Where is its ability to go beyond the old methods?

In my own work experience, I have worked in unionized workplaces since I was 14 years old, in large and small businesses. I have even been the boss. I have also bargained positions. I have handled all aspects of bargaining. There is a common thread that connects all private and public enterprises, and that is that the proceeds are shared, the success is shared. Canada Post has absolutely no excuse. The corporation had revenue of over $281 million and it is continuing to prosper, but it is not sharing those proceeds at all. Canada Post absolutely did not want to bargain with the workers, who acted in complete good faith. They were even prepared to go back on the same terms, terms that provided for survival, for continuity.

This government’s pretext for the lockout is that the workers were acting in bad faith and are causing the corporation to lose money, when it just keeps making more.

Let us come back to history now, since it seems that this government always operates in the past. All governments that have acted like this, that have created a false situation, like the lockout, and that have then come forward with a special bill, have engaged in dictatorship. That is what I call it, and I will say it today.

Yes, that is where we are heading. It is a right-wing position that runs counter to all the rights of working people, without exception.

By the government’s definition, an essential service is one that is profitable. That is a very broad meaning, and if I look at all the workers there are, all occupations are profitable.

This government claims to be creating jobs. I hope that is true, but it remains to be seen. When workers use their right of expression, they are literally gagged, because it costs money. If I understand the government’s reasoning, no matter who the workers are, if it costs the employer money to settle an internal dispute, the workers will be gagged. That is the message being sent now, with this special bill. We have a problem.

There are all kinds of workers at present: agronomists, nurses, office clerks, restaurant owners, customs officers, security guards, painters, journalists, bakers, dentists, consultants, accountants, movers, electricians, mechanics, cabinetmakers, telemarketers, translators, sociologists, airline pilots, musicians, engineers, peace officers, bailiffs, guides, convenience store clerks, servers, school principals, and so on. What is their agenda? What influence will they have on the multinationals? What message are they sending? What influence will they have on the provincial labour codes?

If people cost even the slightest bit of money, they have the perfect excuse. Strip people of their right of expression, lock them out, fabricate a scenario and decide to bring in a special bill. Congratulations. We are truly heading in the right direction.

Employment contracts continue to decline. If I understand this reasoning properly, to be profitable, people have to work 60 hours a week and draw a pension at the age of 105. We are heading in an excellent direction.

Myself, I do not believe in any way in a society where the economy controls the people. The opposite is true: the economy serves the people. It is not the 2% who should be in control, it is the 98% of people who live ordinary lives, who want to see solutions with a vision.

I invite the government opposite to sit down with us. Instead of making decisions on its own, with a narrow vision, I invite it to take the time to sit down with us to see the broader picture, one that is widely representative of what people want.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am noticing something about the government opposite.

In negotiations—I do not know whether the hon. member can comment on this—my union experience always leads me to say that negotiations go on year in, year out. That is what we call communicating with the employer to make sure that possibilities always exist. And it costs absolutely nothing. This government seems to be saying that it had to impose a lockout because of the lengthy negotiations.

[Repentigny Relay for Life, June 20th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would like to thank my constituents, the people of Repentigny, for placing their trust in me on May 2.

My riding is a great place to live. Proof of this is the fact that, even though a multinational like Electrolux is closing, even though families and seniors are getting poorer, and even though our SMEs are overtaxed, the people in my riding still managed to join forces, open their hearts, donate their time and even empty their piggy banks for a good cause: the fight against cancer. The Repentigny Relay for Life, which was held last Friday, has become one of the largest in Canada. Together they raised the unprecedented amount of a little over $500,000 and organized an unforgettable evening.

I call on this government to reconsider its budget, to scrape together what it can and to give more to the people who are our everyday heroes.