SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 256 - Nov/27/23

Mr. Mark Strahl (Chilliwack—Hope, CPC)

Nov/27/23 12:42:28 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the member's speech, and he talked about the legislation and how necessary it is. Why, in 2016 and in 2019, did he vote against legislation that would have done the same thing that the bill before us would do?

45 words

Speech

Mr. Peter Fonseca

Nov/27/23 12:42:47 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's party has always been anti-labour. The member cannot even say the word “labour”. He cannot even say the words “organized labour”. I have never heard the member say the word “union”. That is because, on that side of the House, Conservatives do not believe in labour, in fairness and in supporting workers. That is what I have seen from that side. We see it day after day. The Conservative Party is against labour, organized labour in particular, and unions here in this country.

96 words

Mr. Luc Desilets (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, BQ)

Nov/27/23 12:43:33 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my colleague why the government waited so long to introduce anti-scab legislation. Quebec passed its law in 1977. Canada has had models for years and has watched Quebec evolve in that regard. First of all, I would like to know why the government waited so long. Second, why call for an 18-month delay before the legislation comes into force? Is it because the government is hoping for a change in government before then?

82 words

Quebec
Delay

Mr. Peter Fonseca

Nov/27/23 12:44:08 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-58

Mr. Speaker, the member is quite right that the legislation is long overdue. The way the legislation has come together is the right way. It has been a tripartite type of agreement where business, government, and labour and unions are at the table working together. With respect to the prolonged period, the 18 months, we are working together with those groups. That is what we want to do: ensure that we get it right and that we have all the pieces in place so we have the best labour stability here in Canada. We are learning from what is happening in Quebec, with its legislation, and in British Columbia. We are taking all the best ideas and bringing them into Bill C-58. That is what we have done. We will do it at the table, working with all the parties.

141 words

Mr. Taylor Bachrach (Skeena—Bulkley Valley, NDP)

Nov/27/23 12:45:07 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I heard my friend, in his speech, decry the fact that the Conservatives voted repeatedly for back-to-work legislation, yet, if memory serves, the Liberal Party was right there with the Conservatives when the Port of Montreal was out on strike and when Canada Post was out on strike. Does the member's speech reflect a change of heart? If so, and I very much hope that is the case, will he apologize to the workers who were affected by such draconian legislation?

86 words

Mr. Peter Fonseca

Nov/27/23 12:45:43 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-58

Mr. Speaker, the member would know or ought to know that this is something the Government of British Columbia was asking for. What is most important here is that we understand that the best agreements are those had at the table, and that the legislation to stop replacement workers is the right legislation. It is the legislation that would level the playing field and bring fairness to workers, unions and labour, which for too long they have not had. I am proud to stand here in my place in Parliament, advocate for Bill C-58 and make sure we bring in the best legislation possible for the workers of Canada.

110 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Nov/27/23 12:46:35 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we often talk about labour in terms of unions, but the union movement has had a profoundly positive impact on a wide spectrum of social issues and has improved conditions of non-union members. Can the member provide his thoughts on that issue?

45 words

Mr. Peter Fonseca

Nov/27/23 12:46:54 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the member is so right. This is not just about union and labour workers; this is for all workers. They have improved health and safety conditions in the workplace, improved wages in the workplace and improved benefits in the workplace. The Conservatives have voted against all of those measures and all of those things to help workers in Canada. It is unfortunate the Conservatives have been against helping the worker. I know this legislation would help all workers in Canada.

82 words

Mr. Andy Fillmore (Halifax, Lib.)

Nov/27/23 12:47:30 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-58

Mr. Speaker, it is a great pleasure to rise today to speak in support of Bill C-58, an act to amend the Canada Labour Code and the Canada Industrial Relations Board Regulations, 2012. With this piece of legislation, our government is taking meaningful action to improve labour relations in Canada and ensure that Canadian workers can benefit from good, middle-class jobs. As we know, I come to this chamber from the riding of Halifax. Our city is home to many private and public sector unions and their workers, who continue to contribute to our local economy, to enrich our community and to build the Halifax of tomorrow. One may be a health care worker or a schoolteacher with NSGEU, a child care worker with CUPE, a firefighter with PSAC, a shipbuilder with Unifor, an electrician with IBEW, a trucker with Teamsters Canada, a port worker with the Halifax Longshoremen's Association or a postal carrier with CUPW. These are just a few of the many union jobs done by workers in Halifax. Since the days of Confederation, unions have gone on to build and shape the economy as we know it today. In fact, the middle class, weekends, and maternity and parental leaves were created by unions. A union job promises a living wage that supports families and communities; it is permanent and helps build toward a pension. It provides protection and security in the workplace. These are the values that the current government believes in and the kinds of jobs that we believe Canadian workers deserve. With Bill C-58, we are staying true to the promise by banning replacement workers. Unions have repeatedly told us that hiring replacement workers goes straight against and flies in the face of their free and fair collective bargaining power. It undermines the workers’ legitimate right to strike. It takes away a lot of power from them at the bargaining table. It literally puts their back against the wall. It also brings frustration and increases tensions, which can sometimes lead to violence on the picket line. That can lead to rifts in a community. Hiring replacement workers can have an impact on labour relations. Unions have told us that this creates an unequal footing in negotiations. They explain that allowing replacement workers weakens workers’ main tool to exert pressure, which is the right to withhold their labour, to withhold the means of production. Bill C-58 would set clear rules for both parties. It would set the table for free and fair collective bargaining. It would put the employer and the union on equal footing. All they would have to do is sit down together and find a solution. If they can do that, they will bring stability and certainty. They will stimulate the country’s economy and prosperity. On top of that, with clear and fair rules in place, we may be able to avoid unnecessary strikes and lockouts. This would create more stability for Canadians and more certainty for investors. That will secure good jobs with good working conditions for the workers. We are banning the use of replacement workers, or scabs, because we believe in a balanced table, in truly free and fair collective bargaining. We believe that it is not us against them. It is us, with them. Nobody should be afraid that anyone will try to take something away from them or be better off than they are. It is about helping each other out and finding a solution that will work for everybody. That is what we are doing with Bill C-58. We are working on getting rid of some of the entrenched resentment that has built up over the years during labour disputes. We are making one of the most significant changes to the federal collective bargaining system that Canada has ever seen, in fact. Why are we doing that? It is because workers are the backbone of the Canadian economy, and the lifeblood of our communities. They are entitled to safe workplaces and to good working conditions. We have already done a lot in this direction. We ratified the International Labour Organization’s convention 190 to end harassment and violence in the workplace. Federally regulated private sector workers now have 10 days of paid sick leave. We are modernizing the Employment Equity Act. Bill C-58 is the next step that will help improve work and working conditions for Canadians. It is about keeping parties focused at the table and providing more stability and certainty for the economy. When people have good working conditions and are treated fairly by their employers, our society and our economy are more resilient. When the parties focus on the table, the deals get done and they last. The labour movement was founded on the idea that our workplaces and workers’ lives can be better. That is what we should all keep striving for.

822 words

Mr. Mark Strahl (Chilliwack—Hope, CPC)

Nov/27/23 12:52:45 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the member's speech. He talked about how necessary it is to have anti-replacement worker legislation, so I would like to give him the same opportunity as his colleague from Mississauga, who refused to answer. If this legislation is so good and so necessary, why did he vote against similar legislation in 2016 and again in 2019?

65 words

Mr. Andy Fillmore

Nov/27/23 12:53:13 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member may recall that in both cases, those labour disputes were protracted. They began to impact all Canadians in a way that was harming the economy and harming Canadians, their prosperity and their unfettered access to the services and goods they needed. However, I will stress what the member for Mississauga East—Cooksville said to the same hon. member, which is that the legislation we are presenting today is not about picking sides. It is about working together. This spirit of togetherness is going to keep people at the table. As we all know, the table is where the best work gets done.

108 words

Hon. Michelle Rempel Garner (Calgary Nose Hill, CPC)

Nov/27/23 12:54:02 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I was alarmed to hear that the government was spending billions of dollars on a plant in Ontario that would use over 900 workers from South Korea. These would essentially be replacement workers. This is after telling Canadians time and time again how many jobs this would create. If the government is so supportive of labour in Canada, why is it essentially farming out jobs that should be going to Canadians and sticking Canadian taxpayers with the bill?

80 words

Mr. Andy Fillmore

Nov/27/23 12:54:45 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it sounds a little bit as though the question is straying from the intention of the bill. I am going to take the opportunity to talk about the bill a little bit more and remind members that we are banning the use of replacement workers. That is going to be very productive at the bargaining table. As we know, the use of replacement workers prolongs disputes. It can poison the workforce for years. A good collective bargaining system and a worker's ability not only to work but also to strike are absolutely fundamental to our democracy and to the functioning of our economy.

106 words

Mr. Luc Desilets (Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, BQ)

Nov/27/23 12:55:25 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, my colleague is being very insistent. He is saying that this bill must pass, that it is important, that it is crucial and that it will make huge changes. However, why should it pass now, in 2023, when there have been 11 attempts over the past few years? Eleven similar bills have been introduced in the past, mainly by the Bloc Québécois. What is so special about our current situation for this to be so urgent and for the Liberal government to finally believe in it?

92 words

Mr. Andy Fillmore

Nov/27/23 12:55:59 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I hope my colleague will not mind if I respond in English. In fact, this commitment was in the Liberal Party's election platform in 2021, which flowed from an affirmation of the Supreme Court in 2015. Therefore, it has long been a part of Liberal DNA to protect workers and to make sure that they have access to the fair bargaining they deserve. As the member knows, the world has been very complicated for the last couple of years, with the pandemic and the interruption of Parliament. However, I think we are pleased to be coming to this very important legislation today.

105 words

Mr. Ken McDonald (Avalon, Lib.)

Nov/27/23 12:56:40 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, a quick question for me is this: Does this include all unions not having anti-scab legislation? If it does not, why not?

25 words

Mr. Andy Fillmore

Nov/27/23 12:56:58 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, that is a very good question. This legislation, of course, affects what is in the purview of the federal government, which would be federal employees. These changes to collective bargaining relate only to federally regulated industries. I can be more specific for the member: The federally regulated private sector includes the following industries: banking; telecommunications and broadcasting; air, rail and marine transportation; most federal Crown corporations, for example, Canada Post; and first nations band councils.

77 words

Mr. Clifford Small (Coast of Bays—Central—Notre Dame, CPC)

Nov/27/23 12:57:36 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the hon. colleague from Halifax leads right into my question. This legislation is going to apply to small airlines that deliver pharmaceuticals and fly air ambulances, as well as to firefighting, which could be very serious. Lives are going to be put at risk because small airlines are not going to be able to bring in replacement pilots in emergency situations. How is that going to be addressed in this legislation?

73 words

Mr. Andy Fillmore

Nov/27/23 12:58:13 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, the legislation is very clear that the elimination of replacement workers would not apply in certain specific cases. These cases include potential danger to life and safety, and that is what the member is referring to; damage to the environment; significant damage to private property; and some other very limited cases, which would be under the watchful eyes of the labour regulation board.

65 words

Mr. Mark Strahl (Chilliwack—Hope, CPC)

Nov/27/23 12:58:52 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of my constituents in Chilliwack—Hope. I will be splitting my time today with the hon. member for Calgary Rocky Ridge. It has been an interesting debate this morning. We have heard the Liberals talk about how the legislation is long overdue. They have asked how anyone could not support this type of legislation. The fact is that over the last couple of decades, and even during the eight long years of the Liberal government, every member of that caucus has voted against anti-replacement worker legislation on multiple occasions. The last two Liberal speakers voted against anti-replacement worker legislation a couple of times each, both in 2016 and 2019. The Minister of Labour, who has been on a cross-country tour meeting with union leaders to extol the virtues of the bill, voted against similar legislation when it was introduced through private members' bills by the Bloc Québécois and the NDP. He has voted against it on numerous occasions. Therefore, everyone will forgive us if we take with a grain of salt the high and mighty words and condemnations of other members of Parliament when the Liberal government has members, including the Minister of Labour, who voted the other way on this type of legislation on multiple occasions. What has changed? We know what has changed. The government, which is continuing to make life more difficult for Canadians, owes the NDP. The NDP is back-seat driving for the Liberal government and it is quite happy to go along as long as it gets chauffeurs for their ministers and continues to enjoy the benefits of power. Multiple times the Liberal government voted the other way, so it is hard to take them seriously when Liberals talk about the urgency and necessity for legislation that they themselves railed against in the very recent past. Therefore, we will take no lessons from the Liberals on supporting union workers. We will take no lessons from the government, which hectors the official opposition on its support for Canadian workers. Not only is the government supporting replacement workers, but it is using taxpayer dollars to do it. Let that sink in. We are talking about union and non-union workers getting up before it is light out and going to do their blue-collar jobs, in many cases sending 30%, 40% or 50% of their paycheques to different levels of government, including Ottawa. The government is then giving that money to multinational corporations that are going to use foreign replacement workers to build the plants. It is bad enough that the government would bypass skilled Canadian labour to build projects such as the Stellantis battery plant, but to take the money those workers send to Ottawa and use it against them is the height of hypocrisy. The Liberals want to lecture others about replacement workers, but they are using foreign replacement workers not only at the Stellantis plant but at the Northvolt project in Quebec. We now know that hundreds of taxpayer-funded, which means worker-funded, foreign replacement workers will be filling jobs that should be going to Quebeckers despite over $7 billion in taxpayer subsidies going to this project. This is the record of the Liberal government when it comes to replacement workers. It is bringing in foreign replacement workers to do the work that we know Canadians can do. The Liberals have talked about the Stellantis battery plant not having the specialized skills available to set up the plant, that they need 900 to 1,600 foreign workers, depending on who one talks to, from South Korea. I have news for the government: We have the skilled labour that can set up those plants. We know that if we give them the plans and blueprints, they have the know-how and they will get the job done. However, the government is bringing in foreign replacement workers. Because the government refuses to release the contracts on these “investments” of workers' money into those projects, the Conservatives have demanded that the industry committee look at this. We are demanding the release of the contracts. How many foreign replacement workers did the government negotiate in these deals? There is $45 billion in major projects. We know now that two of them include foreign replacement workers, and we assume that the others do as well. We want answers. That is why the member for South Shore—St. Margarets has demanded emergency meetings on this issue. We will not allow the government to let this slide, at $15 billion a crack at these plants and bringing in foreign workers. This is supposed to be about Canadian jobs and Canadian workers, yet the government continues to provide the money that Canadian workers send to Ottawa for foreign replacement workers. That is absolutely shameful and reprehensible, and the official opposition is demanding answers. We want those contracts released. If the government is still proud of those contracts, it should have no problem releasing them. However, of course, we have to fight tooth and nail every step of the way, and we are up for that fight as well. The government continues to punish workers, not just union workers but all workers, with its carbon tax and its policies that are driving up interest rates, making it harder for workers to afford a home. It is hard to take the Liberals seriously. They feign how much they care about workers, but everything they are doing is punishing those workers who simply want to provide for their families. We heard just this morning that a record number of Ontarians are seeking help from the food bank. That is the record of the government when it comes to workers. People are using the food bank for the very first time. Two million people a month are using a food bank. People do not know how they are going to afford to live in their own home when their mortgages come up for renewal. More money is going to service the national debt than is going to health care facilities in the provinces. These workers have to wait eight to 16 hours for their kids to be seen when they have RSV or other seasonal issues. When they are sitting in the emergency room, they can know that it is because of the reckless fiscal policies of the government that punish workers, that more money is going to service the Prime Minister's deficits and debt than is going to our health care system. Therefore, we will take no lessons from the Liberal government on supporting workers. We will support workers by standing up for the jobs they need and standing up for the projects in which they work. The Liberal-NDP government has been the most anti-worker government in Canadian history, voting against, acting against and advocating against major energy projects, for instance, that give family supporting jobs right across the country. The government opposes those. The Liberals cannot tell me and other members of the Conservative Party that they are pro-worker. They are against the projects that workers need to put food on the table. They tax those workers and send that money to foreign replacement workers. Their policies are making the cost of living for those workers out of reach. Interest rates are going up and up. Inflation is going up and up. The government is not only doing nothing, it is making it worse.

1258 words