SoVote

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

Ms. Lindsay Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP)

Nov/27/23 5:25:46 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-58

Mr. Speaker, a lot of us have heard from constituents who are quite concerned about the cost of living increase and how hard it is for folks. She mentioned in her speech the necessity to ensure that workers have an ability to negotiate on an equal footing with their employers to have better wages. One of my concerns is the time that it takes to pass this legislation and that within the legislation the Liberals have put in an 18-month delay before implementation. I want to ask the member why she thinks this is justified, considering people are struggling now and workers need the supports in Bill C-58 to ensure they have equal rights to that of their employers.

121 words

Ms. Yvonne Jones

Nov/27/23 5:26:52 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, is important to realize that Canadian workers need to trust that the unions are there and can do the best job possible to represent their best interests, but more importantly they need to know that they have the right to fair, honest and balanced negotiations where they do not have replacement workers waiting in the wings to do their jobs. One of the things I want to flag for my colleague here is that this particular legislation was done in conversation with employers, workers, indigenous partners and the Canadian public. There were 71 submissions and a lot of round table discussions. As a result, we are here today to support legislation that can be rolled out in a way that is responsive to the needs of all who were able to participate in this process.

137 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.)

Nov/27/23 5:28:03 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, this was one of the commitments that the Liberal Party made in the last election. Of course, it is always good to be able to, in a minority Parliament like this, have other players who are willing to look for progressive ideas and policies as well. I wonder if the member wants to talk about how important that was for workers in Canada, how they demonstrated that prior to the election and why, as a result, we put it into our campaign commitment.

85 words

Ms. Yvonne Jones

Nov/27/23 5:28:39 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, this was a huge issue in the Liberal platform going into the last election. We made a commitment to Canadians that we would honour and support workers, and that we would ensure that the focus was at the bargaining table and not at the picket lines. This is allowing us to do that, to find the stability that workers need, and we did it in partnership with them. That is why we believe that this is the most transformative legislation in many decades in terms of benefits for workers and unions. We need to ensure that we get it right and we are getting it right with their input.

111 words

Ms. Niki Ashton (Churchill—Keewatinook Aski, NDP)

Nov/27/23 5:29:36 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-58

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to speak in Parliament today in favour of Bill C-58, a historic piece of legislation. It is a piece of legislation that is in support of workers, and in support of their fundamental right to organize and to bargain collectively. Fundamentally, this legislation is about fairness. By banning the use of replacement workers, also known as “scabs”, we are supporting fairness, and the right of workers to exercise their fundamental rights. Before I go on, I want to make sure I mention I am splitting my time with the member for New Westminster—Burnaby. Many may wonder why this legislation is necessary. We know that, historically, there are employers who have done what they can to attack workers and to undermine their rights. We know that scabs are often brought in during lengthy strikes, and it is not about providing essential services or other excuses that employers might use. It is about breaking workers. It is about breaking unions. We are all worse off for it. This legislation matters in my riding. I am proud to be from northern Manitoba. I am proud to be from Thompson, a working-class town, a mining town and a union town. I am proud to have been a union member before I got into politics. I am proud to represent communities like The Pas, Flin Flon, Churchill, Norway House and others where workers have a history of standing up and fighting back. Manitoba has a long history of labour activism. We all know the general strike of 1919 where there was a violent repression against workers fighting for their rights. There have been many strikes and walkouts in the history of our province here in northern Manitoba. We know that workers have stood up with everything they had to fight for better wages, for safety in their workplaces, and for support for our communities and our region. They have fought for all of us. Let us be clear about the fact that anti-scab legislation is a victory for working people everywhere. I am proud to be in the NDP, a political party that supports workers. We are part of a movement that was created, of course, in large part by workers and organized labour. We, in the NDP, are unequivocal in our support of workers and workers' rights, rather than the billionaire-class, corporate coalition the Liberals and Conservatives always fight for. Workers, as represented by organized labour, have made this call for anti-scab legislation for years, and the NDP has been there to support them every step of the way. Eight times in 15 years the NDP has introduced anti-scab legislation. We know that the B.C. NDP government brought in anti-scab legislation years ago. I also acknowledge that Quebec has had anti-scab legislation for a long time. I hope the newly elected NDP government in Manitoba brings anti-scab legislation into force as well. At the federal level, we must acknowledge that this is a historic moment. This is historic legislation. It feels like this time, the Liberals will finally pause their corporate, anti-worker coalition with the Conservatives for a brief enough time to pass this vital piece of legislation. It is legislation that, even through the negotiations with the Liberals, they had to be pulled kicking and screaming toward the finish line. Finally, we have it in sight. What workers are used to from the Liberals and Conservatives is lip service and not a whole lot else. I, along with my colleagues, hope that we can strike down the 18-month implementation period that is far too long for Canadian workers. We know that when not one billionaire tax cheat has been punished for parking their money in offshore tax havens, and when billionaires are given a free ride time and time again, we all see the power imbalance in this country for what it is. We see it when the Liberals let 123 corporations avoid paying $30 billion in taxes, all while patting themselves on the back as the defenders of workers that they pretend to be. We see it in the anti-worker, back-to-work legislation that both Liberals and Conservatives have consistently brought in and supported when workers collectively fight for their rights, like with postal workers, dock workers, Air Canada workers, PSAC workers and UFCW workers. Neither the Prime Minister nor the leader of the official opposition has seen a strike they are uncomfortable quashing. We now have the power to change that. At this point, it is pretty clear that workers have seen a lot from the federal government that is anti-worker. They have seen billion-dollar contracts with Amazon, while workers rely on food banks. They have seen how hard it is to afford rent or buy a home when billionaires are making record profits. It is also very important that we remind Canadians of the record of the Conservative Party and the leader of the official opposition who has reshaped himself into a so-called champion for workers, but when they look at his record, he is somebody who has made clear that he hates workers and the defence of workers' rights with the same zeal as the Prime Minister. In fact, when the leader of the official opposition was in government, he cut billions of dollars from health care that we all rely on, he cut EI benefits and he directly attacked workers. He attacked unions. He voted against raising the minimum wage and, of course, we know he supported back-to-work legislation. Simply told, he may talk a big game, but we have seen this before and workers will not buy it. Because both the Liberals and the Conservatives will try to fool people and they do it any time they need a political boost, out comes the “aw shucks” defence of working people. If we are lucky, some may show up to a picket line, but if either the Liberals or the Conservatives cared for workers, they would not push for trade deals that actively harm them. and it would not have taken the eighth try in 15 years to actually pass anti-scab legislation. It would have happened by now. I am proud of the work that our federal NDP has done to push the Liberals to bring this piece of legislation forward. We know that this is legislation that would not just lift workers up but would lift Canadians up as well. It is sorely needed to restore the power imbalance between workers and the billionaire class, where workers have been forced to fight for scraps while the ultrarich in this country make record profits. There is hope. I think of workers at a Starbucks in Chicoutimi who just signed their first union card, or workers in Montreal at Amazon working to unionize their workplace. It is time we fixed this power imbalance and it starts with enshrining worker protections, like anti-scab legislation, so that every worker has a voice. The reality is that billionaires and their enablers in the Liberal Party and Conservative Party are all too happy to quash the power of workers. However, with this legislation, fought for by the NDP, we have made it a bit harder. Any day we make it easier for workers and harder to be a billionaire is a good day for Canadians. I am going to make a prediction that the Conservatives are going to talk a good talk, as we are hearing in the House with respect to how tough people have it, but I predict that they are not going to support anti-scab legislation which is fundamentally tied to the ability of workers to fight for fairness. We know that from the track record of their leader and we know that from the track record of many MPs who were part of the previous Harper government, which was a dark time for working people in this country. I can pretty well guarantee that despite some of the verbal pronouncements of support for workers, we certainly will not hear them singing Solidarity Forever or see them standing up to vote for this legislation that would ban the use of replacement workers. The bottom line is that if they really support workers, if they really support their right to organize and their right to bargain collectively, and if they support the labour movement and believe that it is fundamentally tied to bettering the lives of workers and all Canadians, they will vote for this legislation. I hope all parties will do just that.

1446 words

Mrs. Brenda Shanahan (Châteauguay—Lacolle, Lib.)

Nov/27/23 5:38:14 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her interesting speech and for supporting the bill before us. We look forward to seeing what will be adopted in committee and what important elements will be added by members. My colleague has acknowledged that Quebec has had this type of legislation for a long time. We have expertise in industrial relations. Does she think that 18 months is a reasonable time frame for the other provinces to develop the same kind of expertise?

81 words

Ms. Niki Ashton

Nov/27/23 5:39:10 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I think that 18 months is an unacceptable delay. That was clearly said. We can move forward much more quickly than that. Obviously, we need this bill. From Quebec's and British Columbia's experience, we know that it can make a difference for workers. Workers in federally regulated sectors need this support as soon as possible. Eighteen months is an unacceptable delay.

65 words

Mr. Randall Garrison (Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, NDP)

Nov/27/23 5:39:55 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I wonder whether the hon. member shares with me my confidence that the new bill would do a better job than those in both British Columbia and Quebec, in that it attempts to address the question that is important in areas where the federal government has jurisdiction of remote work, especially in telecommunications. I wonder whether she shares the optimism that the bill would help address the use of replacement workers working from home.

76 words

Ms. Niki Ashton

Nov/27/23 5:40:24 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, that is a critical point. We know that the legislation is historic in many ways. It has been fought for over the course of many years, but it is also legislation that is very current, recognizing that many workers in particular sectors, and I am thinking of telecommunications and others, are increasingly engaged in remote work and deserve the protections and should have the rights that any other worker does. Importantly, the legislation would look out for remote workers. I think we all agree, certainly in the NDP, that we need to move ahead with this critical piece of legislation as soon as possible, much faster than the 18-month implementation period. Workers need the legislation now.

119 words

Ms. Kristina Michaud (Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, BQ)

Nov/27/23 5:41:30 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, as I said earlier, the Bloc Québécois introduced 11 anti-scab bills before the government introduced this one. To give a little background, when the member for Bécancour—Nicolet—Saurel, the dean of the House, introduced his bill in 1990, the Liberals voted overwhelmingly in favour of it, but the Conservatives voted against it. There were also 133 members of the House who abstained from voting, including a few New Democrats. Had the NDP caucus been united at that time, we would have had anti-scab legislation in 1990. It is rather surprising to see that the NDP has not always sided with workers, but I am glad to see that they have changed their position today.

128 words

Ms. Niki Ashton

Nov/27/23 5:42:22 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I do not know the details of that situation, but we know that the NDP has introduced this type of bill in the past and has supported anti-scab bills introduced by other parties, including the Bloc Québécois. Our priority was to ensure that this was part of our work in collaboration with the other parties, including the Liberal Party. To us, it is obvious that we need to move as quickly as possible without waiting 18 months for this bill to become a reality because the workers need it now.

97 words

Scab
Workers

Mr. Peter Julian (New Westminster—Burnaby, NDP)

Nov/27/23 5:43:15 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-58

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House to speak to Bill C‑58, which is being studied thanks to the NDP. It is thanks to the efforts of the member for Burnaby South, as well as our critic and deputy leader, the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, that we are here debating another anti‑scab bill. This is the eighth time the NDP has introduced such a bill in Parliament, but we know that it will stick this time. For anyone from any party to claim the opposite would be absolutely false. The NDP has been championing this cause for years. Eight times we did not succeed. However, NDP members keep working until we do succeed. This bill is a win for all workers across the country. I should also point out that we desperately need this NDP bill in the House of Commons. First and foremost, let us look at the gap between CEOs' annual pay and workers' annual pay across the country. Over the past 15 years or so, first under the Conservatives and then under the Liberals, the gap between what CEOs earn and what workers get has doubled. Seventeen years ago, before the Harper regime began, the ratio was 200 to 1, meaning CEOs earned $200 for every dollar a worker earned. Today, after 17 years of this corporate coalition, we see that the gap has doubled. CEOs now earn around 400 times what workers earn. It is extremely important to have a fair and level playing field for bargaining. That is what this NDP bill does. It ensures that workers who are negotiating in good faith can now improve their situation while doing their job. For example, they can vote in favour of a strike knowing that their employer cannot use scabs to take away their power to get fairer wages, a health plan and a safer, more secure workplace. These are all things that workers are seeking. Magali Picard, the president of the Fédération des travailleurs et travailleuses du Québec, said it like it is: Finally! That is what we feel like saying. We must commend the...government for its courage in resisting the employer lobbies and recognizing all of the hard work that has been done by the NDP, not to mention the unions, including the affiliates of the FTQ, which have constantly exerted pressure over the years so that the governments in place would introduce a bill to protect workers. Too often, unscrupulous employers under federal jurisdiction have taken advantage of the lack of anti-scab legislation to continue operating during labour disputes by hiring scabs. This bill meets our expectations. Let me repeat what Ms. Picard said: “recognizing all of the hard work that has been done by the NDP”. That is important. That is why the NDP pushed so hard and worked so tirelessly to get this bill introduced. Now, of course, we are going to see to it that the bill is improved, because there are still elements in it that need to be improved. When we talk about Bill C-58 and the NDP's long battle, over decades, to bring anti-scab legislation, anti-replacement-worker legislation, to the floor of the House of Commons, we have to understand the why of this. I can give no better illustration than just last weekend, when I was back in my riding of New Westminster—Burnaby. There are picket lines there that, of course, the member for Burnaby South, the leader of the NDP has visited. The members for Vancouver Kingsway, Vancouver East and Port Moody—Coquitlam, and, in fact, all members of the Lower Mainland caucus of the NDP, have been on the picket lines for the Shaw workers who were locked out by Rogers. Rogers, with the rubber stamp of the federal Liberal government, took over Shaw cable, a company that worked for a long time with unionized workers. It locked them out immediately because the workers wanted to continue to have their jobs; to continue, in good faith, to negotiate adequate salaries; and to make sure that work was not contracted out and, in that sense, hurting the entire community. The workers expected to see a negotiation in good faith. That is not what Rogers did. Rogers locked them out and immediately hired replacement workers. I have been on the lockout lines, as have my colleagues from the Lower Mainland NDP caucus. We have not seen Liberals there. We have not seen Conservatives there. It has been New Democrats standing up for the workers, the hundreds who have been locked out. The reality is, in an example like that, in federal jurisdiction, that the use of replacement workers is a benefit to the corporate executives who have decided to take the step. It is not in the interests of the community, of the public, nor even of the company. The executives took the decision out of pure greed. Eighteen months would be ridiculously long. The NDP is going to change that. However, the reality is that once Bill C-58 is implemented, companies like Rogers would have to act responsibly. They would have to sit down. They would have to negotiate in good faith. They would have to ensure that what they are doing is negotiating an agreement with their workers in good faith and above board. The bill is something that would level the playing field for workers. We have seen a massive concentration under the Harper regime and under the current government, where corporate executives have basically had all of the power. They have been able to take massive amounts of money overseas, as the Parliamentary Budgetary Officer tells us, $30 billion of taxpayers' money every year. That is money that could be going to seniors, students and families. It is $30 billion every year, as a result of the Harper tax haven treaties, that is taken offshore. Many of the corporate executives are the same ones who want to negotiate in bad faith with their workers and to lock out their workers, as we have seen in the Rogers-Shaw case, where the Shaw workers were locked out and are now seeing replacement workers stealing their jobs. The reality, and the important thing to note, is that levelling the playing field is in the interests of the entire community, because strikes and lockouts last a much shorter period of time. There are not the prolonged lockouts and strikes, because the use of replacement workers means that corporate executive do have to sit down and negotiate in good faith. They do have to negotiate in the interests of their business. They do need to negotiate in the interests of their community. It changes everything when the playing field is levelled. That is certainly what we have seen in British Columbia and in Quebec. The anti-scab legislation has actually led to fewer labour disputes, because management is finally compelled to actually negotiate in good faith with the workers in their jurisdiction. I come from the shop floor. I worked in plastic factories. I worked in the Annacis Business Park. I worked in a unionized situation at the Shelburn oil refinery, which is now closed. My life was a working life, and I saw the difference between non-union and union work. The reality is that working people do better when unions are present and laws provide for a level playing field for negotiation. The middle class counts because of organized labour and people working together. I am hoping the Liberals have finally been convinced to vote for the legislation. I salute that. I understand that the Bloc will be voting for it. That is important too. Above all, if Conservative members really believe in the middle class, working families and working Canadians, they need to get off the fence and vote for this legislation. I know the member for Carleton is obsessed with the price on carbon. There is nothing about the price on carbon in this bill, so Conservatives can vote “yes” on Bill C-58.

1364 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen (Kingston and the Islands, Lib.)

Nov/27/23 5:53:39 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am sure the Conservatives will find some rare excuse to link it to the price on pollution, as we have seen with other pieces of legislation. An hon. member: Oh, oh!

34 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Nov/27/23 5:53:48 p.m.
Watch

I will acknowledge the hon. member who just spoke out of turn. I would ask him to wait, because there is more time to ask questions and make comments. The hon. deputy House leader.

34 words

Mr. Mark Gerretsen

Nov/27/23 5:54:04 p.m.
Watch

To be fair, Madam Speaker, I did not even notice it; I am used to a lot of yelling on that side. The Liberals ran on this idea, as did the NDP. I genuinely believe that, because of the partnership we have with the NDP, we have a better piece of legislation now that Canadians can feel very proud of. Could the member for New Westminster—Burnaby inform the House of what it is like to be an adult in the room? Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

88 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Nov/27/23 5:54:42 p.m.
Watch

Order. Other members seem to want to answer that question, but it is not their time to answer. If they want to ask questions, they should stand when it is time. The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.

39 words

Westminster

Mr. Peter Julian

Nov/27/23 5:55:01 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would remind my colleague and friend that the Liberals ran for 25 years on pharmacare and 20 years on dental care. They never did it. They ran for a decade on anti-scab legislation, but they voted against it when the NDP brought it forward. The difference is that, this time, because of a minority Parliament, New Democrats are forcing the Liberals to do what they said they would do and never do when they hold a majority government. Yes, we are the adults in the room and the NDP is forcing the Liberals to do the right thing, from which all Canadians will benefit. An hon. member: Oh, oh!

113 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Nov/27/23 5:55:41 p.m.
Watch

I will remind the member that he had an opportunity to ask a question. If he wishes to continue to participate, he can stand at the appropriate time. Questions and comments, the hon. member for Calgary Centre.

37 words

Mr. Greg McLean (Calgary Centre, CPC)

Nov/27/23 5:55:54 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his impassioned speech. I am used to that from him in the House. I am going to ask the member a very serious question. He knows as well that the Liberal government previously voted against this same legislation before it was in partnership, as my colleague across the way calls it, with his party, the NDP. They are exposed now as being off to see the wizard together. Will the member comment on how the Liberals have completely flip-flopped on this in order to buy the support of his party for who knows how long in the House of Commons? An hon. member: Oh, oh!

113 words

Partnership

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Carol Hughes)

Nov/27/23 5:56:31 p.m.
Watch

I want to remind the member that it was not his turn to answer that either. I would ask members, in order for the House to continue to function smoothly, that they wait until it is the appropriate time to ask a question, make comments or respond to a question. The hon. member for New Westminster—Burnaby.

58 words