44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 26, 2024 11:00AM
- Feb/26/24 4:09:29 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it has been many years that I have had discussions on issues like anti-scab legislation and final offer selection. I can go back to the very hot debate topics in 1989-90 inside the Manitoba legislature, and I like to think that I have been a strong advocate for anti-scab legislation.
I appreciate a number of the comments the member made. I often look at British Columbia or Quebec and to what degree public servants are incorporated into the legislation. I do not necessarily know the details. I think it is a legitimate question. I would like to see it maybe addressed in more detail as it goes to committee.
The question I have for the member is this. Does the Conservative Party support passing this legislation to go to committee?
135 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 4:11:02 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, although we are firmly in favour of this—we have stood up to defend this idea 11 times—I get the impression that there is a good deal of smoke and mirrors here. Again, I want to say that we strongly support it. In fact, Quebec has had its anti-scab legislation since 1977.
The bill before us mentions a rather vague exception that talks about a threat to the life, health and safety of any person. What does that mean? Would that not potentially circumvent the right to strike? That needs to be clarified.
Then, the fact that there would be an 18-month delay before the act came into force after royal assent means that, even if the bill were passed tomorrow morning, there would not be time to bring it into force before the next election. I get the impression that the Liberals, who have repeatedly voted down anti-scab legislation every time it has come up for a vote, are once again bribing the NDP by telling themselves that it does not matter, because in 18 months the Conservatives will abolish it when they are in power.
Does my colleague share my interpretation?
201 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 4:13:04 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I found the member's speech really interesting, although I do not necessarily agree with all the points, and I think she may be confused on a few issues.
The facts are that anti-scab legislation has existed in Quebec and British Columbia for quite a long time and, as my friend said earlier, the sky has not fallen. I have heard all of the Conservative arguments, which are really catastrophic, but we know that so many people in this country want labour to matter because, when scabs walk in, it takes away workers' power to negotiate. This is what this is.
I am wondering if the member will support this bill moving forward and if we are going to maybe get some ideas that the Conservatives want to bring forward. At the end of the day, I hope that every party in the House supports workers.
149 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 4:30:31 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I wonder if my colleague can provide his thoughts on the Province of Quebec, the Province of British Columbia and, now, the federal government moving toward anti-scab legislation. How can this provide national leadership so that, hopefully, other provinces will look at the legislation, look at what other provinces are doing and look at bringing in more anti-scab legislation across the country?
66 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 4:43:39 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am sorry to my hon. colleague from Sarnia—Lambton. I respect so much her pioneering work in engineering, but I went to law school. It does not mean I know more, but I do know that replacement workers are one thing only: In trade union relations and collective bargaining, replacement workers are scab workers, not workers who come from another country who do work Canadians could otherwise do.
72 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 4:44:12 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Saanich—Gulf Islands for her speech. I am not surprised that she supports the bill, because she is a woman with progressive values who generally supports this type of bill. We are very pleased to hear that, because, as we know, the Bloc Québécois is strongly in favour of this bill.
During her speech, I also appreciated her recognition of Quebec's pioneering role in this type of legislation. Quebec has had anti-scab legislation like this for 47 years and, since then, there have been two classes of workers in Quebec due to the federal jurisdiction we are trying to get rid of. We will get it done. We led the way for dental care, pharmacare and child care. Canada is taking its cue from Quebec, and that is a good thing; it makes us happy.
When Canada draws inspiration from Quebec like this, does my colleague not think that Canada should also not undermine Quebec by recognizing it and giving it its money? That does not apply to anti-scab legislation, but it will apply to dental care and pharmacare, because the new federal program will bring in another structure and undermine existing structures in Quebec.
With all due respect, does she not think the government should give Quebec the money it is owed and create programs for Canada? Obviously, we will be voting in favour of this, as long as it does not hurt Quebec.
252 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 4:46:25 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, absolutely, anti-scab legislation is necessary and we need to get on board. The NDP has tried to move it forward eight times in the last 15 years, and finally the moment has arrived.
One of the issues we have concerns with is that it is not a perfect piece of legislation. However, this is what we have. On the implementation date in the legislation, it is extremely long, at 18 months. Does the member think that needs to be shortened?
83 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/26/24 5:15:09 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, my question for my Conservative colleague is very simple, and it has to do with this anti-scab legislation. It seems that the Conservatives are against this bill. Once the Senate has passed this bill, it will take 18 months for it to come into force.
Can the member confirm that, if the Conservatives take power, they will tear up this legislation?
65 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
