SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 285 - Feb/26/24

Mr. Earl Dreeshen (Red Deer—Mountain View, CPC)

Feb/26/24 5:38:12 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-58

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to rise today to speak to Bill C-58 regarding labour issues in Canada. In both my former professional role as a teacher and my volunteer role as a hospital board member, I have dealt with labour strife over those years. The issue of replacement workers was always uppermost in the minds of both my colleagues in teaching and our community health care workers. One of my fellow hospital board members was Tony Silbernagel. He sadly passed away just a few months ago, but as an astute businessman and community volunteer, Tony taught me so much about compassion within our community. There have been a number of dear friends over the past couple of months who have also passed away. Erhard Poggemiller was the former mayor of Kerrobert, Saskatchewan. Once he moved to Alberta, he was a councillor in Didsbury up until the last election. His sudden passing was a shock to us all, but I know how committed he too was to health care in Saskatchewan. Two other dear friends, who served as Red Deer city councillors, passed away during the Christmas holidays. My childhood friend, Michael Dawe, was a treasured member of the city of Red Deer. As a historian and archivist, there was no one better. His former colleague, Frank Wong, also passed away during this time. Another icon of our community and former Red Deer alderman was Jack Donald. His philanthropy and care for our community were something that will be remembered forever. Communities have many leaders. Friends like Dave Brown, Winnie MacFayden and Jean Klepper did so much for our central Alberta communities. Whether in sports or agriculture, they were also leaders. Sadly, within my family, we just dealt with the passing of my wife's brother, Charles Moore. Charlie was one of the founders of then-premier Lougheed's dream of rural gasification throughout Alberta. He received lifetime achievement awards from the Federation of Alberta Gas Co-ops and the Alberta Association of Agricultural Societies for his unwavering commitment to community. He was also the recipient of at least five community, provincial and national medals and citations. It was all for the community, for each and every one of these dear friends who have recently passed away. My experiences with labour disruptions started in the late sixties, when I chose to remain at home while my family enjoyed a trip to California so that I could look after the farm and complete a correspondence course over the summer. I had just received all of my lessons when a postal strike started. It was more than three weeks later that I was finally able to send any lessons up to Edmonton to get marked. I received the input from the instructors only a couple of days before I had to write the final exams. Postal strikes take their toll. Coming from an agricultural community and having seen the effects of workplace actions, either at the ports or with the railroad, I am well aware of the costs that exist when Canada's supply chain is disrupted. This legislation looks at some of these issues, but there must be true certainty, especially now, as we look for solutions to get our country's economy back on track. It is with those thoughts in mind that I would like to address some of the key points of this legislation. With all of it, though, there is the underpinning of the responsibility of a federal government to ensure that everything in this country runs smoothly. The buck stops at the cabinet table. We may look at a labour minister as being the one with the responsibility to make these tough decisions, but if it does not have strong input from the ministers of other critical infrastructure, such as agriculture and natural resources, and from other regional ministers, the government never gets the true picture of the pain that these labour disruptions actually cause to the country. That is also why it is important for us, as legislators, to be able to deal with these issues. I wonder if it should be a common goal for all of us to ensure that cabinet can quickly deal with these issues, especially when back-to-work legislation can be interrupted by something as simple as the House not sitting. I have been on both sides of the table when it comes to negotiations. It is never easy, but having done so, I am well aware of the strategies that are involved with labour issues. The reality is, either as a teacher and a member of the Alberta Teachers Association at the time, or as a hospital board representative, the real decision-makers were beyond my reach. Negotiators do what they feel is in the best interest of negotiations, not necessarily the best interest of members. This is a harsh reality, but it is in fact true. However, that does not mean workers, companies and businesses cannot find common ground. If one looks at the results of many negotiations, once the threat of back-to-work legislation becomes evident, it is amazing how quickly two sides can get together. Unions would argue, and perhaps they are right, that is for us to see, that this type of legislation helps on the other side as well. When they do, of course, there is a sense of pride and accomplishment if it is managed to be done without government intervention. That is the way it should be. As government, we should find ways to ensure that is the rule and not the exception. A fair and logical approach for replacement workers, one hopes, would make negotiations more meaningful. This bill was tabled in November 2021, and we are now here, in February 2024, debating it. The Liberal-NDP coalition sure likes to take its time with the legislation it tables for debate. Nevertheless, moving on, Bill C-58 would do two major things. First, it would ban replacement workers in federally regulated industries, such as banking, airports and telecommunications, but it does not ban them in the federal public service. Second, Bill C-58 would amend the maintenance of the activities process to encourage not only quicker agreements between employers and trade unions on what activities should be maintained in the case of a strike or lockout, but also faster decision-making by the Canada Industrial Relations Board in this connection. The provision of Bill C-58 would only apply to federally regulated workers. If enacted, the provision of Bill C-58 would enter into force 18 months after royal assent has been received. One of the concerns with rail and port disruptions in agriculture is that any delays for a producer getting their product to market has a serious impact on their cash flow. In fact, it can be days or weeks of obstruction for farmers, and that ripple effect could last the entire season. When it comes to the movement of goods, it is not just the issue of the days workers do not show up. All the way down the supply chain, affected businesses need to adjust their schedules. It can sometimes be weeks to get the system running smoothly again. Everyone deserves to have a safe workplace, a beneficial relationship with their employer that is built on a foundation of trust and goodwill. Just the same, businesses need to be able to operate and meet their clients' demands in a manner that allows them to continue to operate. My concerns with this bill, Bill C-58, have nothing to do with workers' rights to organize or to engage in collective bargaining, because Canadian workers undoubtedly have those rights. However, labour legislation is always controversial in Canada. I want to be clear. There is a big difference between the boots on the ground and the suits in the union offices. The agendas are not always aligned. Conservatives believe that the government should work with unions and employers in areas of federal jurisdiction to develop dispute settlement mechanisms and to encourage their use to avoid or to minimize disruptions to services in Canada. Of course, the Liberal government, ironically, has put a lot of money into contract workers and replacement workers. It is basically the same type of thing. GC Strategies, a two-person IT company that does no actual IT work, was paid nearly $20 million for ArriveCAN. That money could have been spent much more wisely. In conclusion, I have concerns about the impact and the reach of this legislation. I have concerns about whether this bill draws the right balance between employer and employee. There are mixed signals from the Liberal government. On one hand, it speaks glowingly about banning the use of replacement workers but on the other hand, it is investing heavily in consultants. As Canada rebuilds from the pandemic, from the imposed mandates and the economic consequences of undisciplined spending, it is vital that we rebuild our economy and workforce with sound labour policies.

1503 words

Mr. René Villemure (Trois-Rivières, BQ)

Feb/26/24 5:48:15 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, obviously, we have said, and reiterated today, that we are in favour of such a bill. We are a bit shocked that it will not come into force for 18 months, because this government will likely not be in office 18 months from now, and we are concerned about that. With regard to the Port of Montreal longshore workers and the Canadian National and Air Canada employees, would it not have been smarter to take advantage of that delay to have them learn French?

88 words

Mr. Earl Dreeshen

Feb/26/24 5:48:49 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it would certainly have helped if I had learned some French over the years. My interpretation said 18 days, but it is 18 months, as we know. There are concerns and one is if the House is not sitting and there is an expectation of having right-to-work legislation. When the House sits, we can deal with that when needed, but if it is not, then all of a sudden it gets dragged out. We can always say that is allowing the process to work. However, we do not work our way through that problem, and maybe that is something we should be looking at as well because it is something we see happen with the ministry of labour. As I mentioned during my address, it is important that everybody talks to the labour minister because there are a lot of other things that happen other than just his discussion with businesses' employees.

156 words

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

Feb/26/24 5:49:56 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I believe I heard my Conservative friend bemoan the fact that this bill was tabled in December and yet here we are, in late February, still debating it. I have two simple questions. The first is whether the member wishes this bill moved through the House more speedily and, second, whether he will be voting for this bill at second reading.

63 words

Mr. Earl Dreeshen

Feb/26/24 5:50:20 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, what I said is it was a couple of years ago when it was first proposed and now we are finally seeing it come for discussion. The other question was whether we should have 18 months. There will be a different government in 18 months. It still comes back to: What have we heard? What we are looking at? Are there are any assurances that the restrictions on replacement workers are going to speed up negotiations? Those are the questions and what I believe everyone is talking about here today.

92 words

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

Feb/26/24 5:51:18 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, it is encouraging to hear members of the Conservative caucus talk relatively positively about the labour movement, but they have not been clear about their intentions with regard to the legislation. After listening to the member's speech, I would ask the member to reflect on how he will vote on the legislation.

59 words

Mr. Earl Dreeshen

Feb/26/24 5:51:49 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, a lot of Canadians are in suspense right now as well because they want to know what would happen if we have an election. I am prepared to listen to whatever the electorate says in that regard as well. We are talking about three westerners from the Liberal Party. I hope that the member is one of them.

60 words

Mr. Ted Falk (Provencher, CPC)

Feb/26/24 5:52:20 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I want to publicly extend my sympathies to the member for Red Deer—Mountain View on the passing of his close friend and brother-in-law Charlie Moore, whom he referenced in his speech. I have gotten to know the member really well on the natural resources committee and I know he is a fierce advocate for his constituency of Red Deer—Mountain View, as well as for agriculture, but specifically as an advocate and defender of the world's most ethical energy, and that is Alberta oil and gas. I want to thank him for his advocacy. True to Liberal form, this is another bill that seeks to divide Canadians. We have seen it over and over. Whether it is on social, economic, cultural or regional issues, the Liberal-NDP government has chosen to divide Canadians. Again in this bill, we see that federally regulated industries are captured in this bill, whereas federal employees are not. What is the fairness?

165 words

Mr. Earl Dreeshen

Feb/26/24 5:53:20 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, part I of the Canada Labour Code “sets the rules for unionization, collective bargaining and labour disputes in federally regulated sectors. More specifically, Part I applies to” and it then goes through the list, “the federally regulated private sector, which includes key industries such as: banking; telecommunications and broadcasting; air, rail and maritime transportation; most Crown corporations (for example, Canada Post);...First Nations band councils”. It also applies to “all private sector businesses and municipal governments in the Northwest Territories, Nunavut and Yukon”. Therefore, the question becomes why we are taking certain groups and carving them out. From what I have heard in the last couple of days, there has really been no discussion about that. I think this is something that really deserves more of that thoughtfulness.

136 words

The Deputy Speaker

Feb/26/24 5:54:18 p.m.
Watch

Is the House ready for the question? Some hon. members: Question. The Deputy Speaker: The question is on the motion. If a member participating in person wishes that the motion be carried or carried on division, or if a member of a recognized party participating in person wishes to request a recorded division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.

65 words

Mrs. Cathay Wagantall

Feb/26/24 5:55:04 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, we request a recorded division.

7 words

The Deputy Speaker

Feb/26/24 5:55:08 p.m.
Watch

Pursuant to Standing Order 45, the division stands deferred until Tuesday, February 27, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.

23 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Feb/26/24 5:55:28 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I suspect if you were to canvass the House, you would find unanimous consent at this time to call it 6:30 p.m. so we could possibly begin the late show.

34 words

The Deputy Speaker

Feb/26/24 5:55:36 p.m.
Watch

Is that agreed? Some hon. members: Agreed.

7 words

Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP)

Feb/26/24 5:56:04 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to address the House virtually this evening and to pursue a matter I first raised in question period late last year, on October 27, 2023. It deals with an issue that is of concern to many Canadians, just at the time when Canadians are feeling pain at the pumps. While I know my colleagues on the Conservative side of the House think that it is due to the carbon tax, it is far more due to the excess profits being experienced by the oil and gas sector. A minuscule impact is from carbon pricing. There is a pin on my jacket to show that we stand with Ukraine. Ever since Putin invaded Ukraine, that has had a very serious impact on fossil fuel prices globally. It has been to the benefit of large fossil fuel companies, and they are reaping extraordinary, record-breaking profits in the tens of billions of dollars every month all around the world. It would be fantastic if our sanctions against Russia bit deeply enough to mean that selling Russian oil would become off limits, but we know that many countries continue to buy Russian oil. The modest proposal I raised in question period comes from the hon. colleague from Kitchener Centre, who has put forward Motion No. 92 to put an excess profits tax on oil and gas as is currently done for insurance companies and banks. It is a very reasonable proposal to apply the Canada recovery dividend to fossil fuel companies. This particular proposal, Motion No. 92, has been reviewed, and the benefit to the Canadian treasury has been calculated by the Parliamentary Budget Office at over $4 billion. In other words, those are funds we could be receiving as a nation from excess profits. As Eric Reguly in the business pages of The Globe and Mail noted some time ago, these profits are not based on business acumen or sound planning or great management by the oil and gas sector; they are pure and simple war profiteering. That is what they are. The companies are making a lot of money as Ukrainians face the brutality of Putin's regime. Other countries are applying excess profits tax at much higher levels than what is proposed by my colleague in Motion No. 92. In fact, Motion No. 92 itself points out that the United Kingdom is charging excess profits tax at a level of 25% and generating £5 billion; and Europe is charging excess profits tax at 21%. This modest proposal, using the same Canada recovery benefit that is currently being applied to banking and insurance, would be at 15%. While I cannot say he answered my question, when the hon. Minister of Environment responded to it, he spoke of other things the government is doing. He did not speak of the finance question at all. Why are we not taxing the excess profits of the oil and gas sector at the very time that it is reaping extraordinary rewards in war profiteering? The oil and gas companies are also hiking prices at the pump and profiteering from price gouging. The time is certainly overdue to ensure that we bring in the profits from the oil and gas industry, through proper taxation, to national revenues so that they could be used on such things as the disability tax credit. Then, the poorest of the poor in this country could receive additional financial support in this time when we are all feeling the pinch from the affordability crisis. I hope the parliamentary secretary will provide a better answer than the minister did.

604 words

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

Feb/26/24 6:00:15 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I have always enjoyed having exchanges with the leader of the Green Party. I know she gives a great deal of thought to her presentations and, ultimately, her questions. I think some questions are a little easier to answer than others. We have a Prime Minister and through the Prime Minister a Minister of Finance, our Deputy Prime Minister, who have taken the issue very seriously. I do not need to tell the House, because everyone knows, of the ethnic heritage of our Minister of Finance and how she really does have an appreciation of what is taking place in Ukraine today and the impact that oil is having in supporting Russia. I do agree with the leader of the Green Party when she talks about the misconception of the price on pollution as being the sole source of the exorbitant prices that people are having to pay for gas. It is something that is not necessarily new. She put a great deal of emphasis on, today in particular, the war. There is no doubt that it has had a significant impact. I would suggest that excess profits is something that has been ongoing. Governments in the past have tried to deal with it, both at the federal level and at the provincial level. We have seen regulations in different provinces, both in Atlantic Canada and out west, where there have been attempts to deal with some of the excess profits. At the national level, standing committees have attempted to deal with it. I understand that the leader of the Green Party is saying to just have an excess profits tax imposed. I do not fully understand how that works, to be honest. What I do know is that the Minister of Finance has been very open in terms of listening to arguments, in particular those that have come out of the pandemic, with regard to the huge amount of profits in different sectors. I am thinking of the financial area, where we have put in some specific taxes on companies where there was extreme wealth. I do not know to what degree there is a willingness to do something today on that front. I do believe that there is a great deal of discussion taking place. I think that we also have to factor in other elements of the debates. At the end of the day, I do not think anything is off the table, per se. Some might take a little longer to move forward. The cost of fossil fuels, as I indicated, has been a frustration of mine for many years. In fact, shortly after getting elected in 2010, I had a presser that talked about the price of gas and the collusion that was taking place that led to excess profits. Maybe one of the ways we can deal with that is to enhance competition or boycott one particular station until it lowers the price of a litre of gasoline to a certain level. I think that consumers are frustrated. I am really encouraged that in Winnipeg we have a new gas company, 204 Fuel's, which has provided a great deal of competition. I can say that where that gas station exists, the price of gas has actually been going down; its price is consistently lower than everyone else's.

557 words

Ms. Elizabeth May

Feb/26/24 6:04:25 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I do hope that we will see the Minister of Finance move to tax the windfall profits of the oil and gas sector. We do know how to do it. It is not complicated. The Minister of Finance is already doing it in applying it to the excess profits that have been occurring in the banking and insurance sector. Surely we can align our policies to move away from fossil fuels and ensure that we get support to Canadians without going deeper in debt, without expanding the deficit, by bringing in more revenues. That is how one balances the budget. Bring in more revenues from excess profit taxes and from wealth taxes on what is going to offshore tax havens, making sure that we deliver for Canadians affordability on a planet on which we can survive and on which our children will survive.

145 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Feb/26/24 6:05:23 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would like to assure the leader of the Green Party that the government is very much aware, particularly the Minister of Finance, of the many hardships that many Canadians are having to endure. Not that long ago, we had inflation rates that were close to 8%, I think in June 2022, and we are finally getting inflation rates under control. The cost of providing fuel for transportation does have an impact through the gouging that we all have seen. Is there a policy alternative? I can assure the member that the Minister of Finance is looking at a wide spectrum of options. The idea is to support all Canadians and have their backs.

116 words

Mr. Michael Barrett (Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, CPC)

Feb/26/24 6:06:28 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, today, I would like to recognize an eastern Ontario legend, George Tackaberry. George has recently won the Lifetime Business Achievement Award from the Brockville and District Chamber of Commerce, and that is supported by the 1000 Islands Community Development Corporation. To call George Tackaberry a legend is a bit of an understatement. He is a decades-long community leader, a philanthropist and a very successful business owner. Starting in 1957, G. Tackaberry & Sons Construction has grown from a humble family business to a thriving operation throughout eastern Ontario, employing 100 full-time workers and 200 seasonal workers. It is clear that throughout George's life, he has made it his mission to enrich the lives of people in our community through his philanthropic endeavours. Brockville General Hospital, the Gord Brown Memorial outdoor rink, the United Way Leeds and Grenville, dozens of charities, youth athletic teams, service clubs, parks, community gardens and schools have all benefited from the great generosity of the Tackaberry family. The Brockville Airport was able to extend its runway to 4,500 feet because of George's donation of materials, time and money. More recently, and near and dear to my heart and everyone in our community, George and his family donated $500,000 to Maple View Landings redevelopment project that will see the Maple View long-term care home greatly expanded and retooled to become a shining example of care for our seniors and the vulnerable in Ontario. George has a big heart for our community and he has a big heart for all of his passions, and that includes Tack's Toys, his extensive collection of vehicles and equipment, and among them is a limousine of a former prime minister and a former president. What does George do with Tack's Toys? He makes them available for tours for a donation to support local causes. I congratulate George on the award and lifetime of exemplary service and dedication to our community. Our entire community, our province and truly our country are so much better because of all that he has done. I want to hearken us back to the first time that I put this question to the government. The number that we were dealing with was different. Since then, we have had an Auditor General's report. The Auditor General has told us that the cost of the arrive scam is at least $60 million, not the $54 million we were talking about before. Common-sense Conservatives, on the one hand, have said that we will axe the tax, build the homes, fix the budget and stop the crime. On the other hand, we have a Liberal government that is lining the pockets of insiders, while Canadians are lining up at food banks. For the NDP members' part in the costly coalition, they are doing everything that they can to help them, including voting eight times to continue shovelling money out the door to insiders, including GC Strategies, a two-person firm working out of a basement that received $20 million but did no IT work. My question to the parliamentary secretary is very straightforward. The Liberals voted against the Auditor General conducting an audit. Will the parliamentary secretary ensure the government's full co-operation and waive any cabinet confidences for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police when it investigates?

559 words

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

Feb/26/24 6:10:24 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, just to start off, I have a very brief comment. What the member highlights is a success story that many of us could easily relate to within our own constituencies or jurisdictions. We often talk about individuals, but we do not talk enough about small- and medium-sized businesses and the profound, positive impact they have in our communities. I am very respectful of and admire the work of those entrepreneurs, those small businesses that invest their time and resources. Ultimately, they take a substantial chance in terms of creating opportunities for literally hundreds, if not thousands, of people. I just want to tip my hat to the many entrepreneurs and business people in our communities. That principle applies in every region, where we get them coming to the plate, helping to build a healthier and stronger community. Having said that, I know that the member opposite and others have been very concerned with regard to the whole ArriveCAN issue and what has been taking place with it. Interestingly enough, I would suggest to the member that it does not really matter what side of the House one sits on; all members are very concerned. I do not think there is a member inside the House who does not have a question or two, in terms of what has actually taken place. We have to put things into the proper perspective. At the time when this was occurring, the federal government was literally spending billions of dollars during a worldwide pandemic. There were a number of demands on a wide variety of different departments. That does not justify any sort of abuse, in any fashion whatsoever. Unfortunately, when that kind of money is spent, when those types of programs are created, there are going to be mistakes. This was a very big mistake. The Government of Canada has recognized that and has taken the actions necessary to ensure that there is some justice at the end of the day. The Government of Canada values the tax dollar just as much as the Conservative Party does. We want to get to the bottom of this issue, and we will do so. After all, the ministers responsible, either directly or indirectly, have been wanting to see results, both internally and externally. At the end of the day, we expect the procurement process to be followed properly. When that does not take place, we have to ensure that there is an appropriate consequence. This has been, and always will be, the case. This is not the first government where we have seen some things go wrong at times within procurement. What is important is how the government reacts when something does go wrong. The government has reacted very positively and quickly on the issue, whether it is through those internal reviews that we see taking place or the comments in the standing committees. We will continue to ensure that there is a consequence to any sort of inappropriate behaviour in this whole issue.

502 words