SoVote

Context: House Hansard - 317 - May/24/24

May/24/24 1:00:09 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, you have already ruled on this in the past. There have been MPs speaking from a variety of locations. I would ask you to ensure that Conservative MPs respect the member's speech and respect the bill. If they are in favour of anti-scab legislation, there should be no problem with allowing the speech to continue. It is absolutely appropriate, as you have ruled in the past.

70 words

Speech
Scab

The Deputy Speaker

May/24/24 1:00:34 p.m.
Watch

While I appreciate that, there have been a number of occasions in the House, especially during the time that we had a lot of online participation, when we ruled on not having props in the background, not having words in the background and in some cases not having flags in the background. Therefore, maybe I can ask that we get rid of the wording in the background. That is perfect. There we go; when we ask, it shall be done. The hon. member for Burnaby South.

86 words

Mr. Jagmeet Singh

May/24/24 1:01:07 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-58 Bill C-1

Mr. Speaker, I notice that the Conservatives are upset because I was going to reference the Winnipeg strike, actually, and there are pictures of the Winnipeg strike behind me, which actually capture the story even better than the words do. I want to talk about why the strike is so important. Maybe this is why the Conservatives are upset: They do not like it when the power of workers comes together to fight back and defend working people. What happened in 1919, in the very same time in we find ourselves in right now, which is mid-May to late June, 30,000 workers, basically the entire workforce of Winnipeg, and in a lot of ways all of Manitoba at the time, came together and shut down the city and effectively shut down the province, fighting for fairness for workers. They were protesting the unfair work conditions, the poverty and specifically about issues like collective bargaining. It is so poignant that I am here in Winnipeg at the Union Centre, having just spoken with representatives of the Manitoba Federation of Labour and its president, Kevin Rebeck, whom I want to thank for all of his hard work. I also want to thank the MFL for all of its hard work. It is so poignant to be speaking to the bill today in this place, from this spot. I have to say what an honour it is that today our Bill C-58, which we fought for, would ban scabs once and for all at the federal level. It is a historic result of the hard work of New Democrats, and I have to say this would not have happened were it not for New Democrats' forcing the government to do it. I also have to acknowledge that this would not have happened were it not for labour and for unions that have long led the charge for anti-scab legislation, and I want to thank them. I also have to acknowledge that it is an accomplishment we have achieved that we are debating this right now in the House and that the Manitoba NDP is also going to move forward with it. I want to salute and acknowledge that. I have to say that it has been a long time coming. New Democrats have been fighting for decades for it to happen. In the past 15 years, New Democrats have tabled anti-scab legislation eight times. That is eight times that our unions, labour and New Democrats have fought for this. The last time it came up for a vote, in 2016, the Liberals and Conservatives teamed up to vote against it. The leader of the Conservatives voted against banning scabs eight times in the past, so it is clear whose side the Conservatives stand on. However, with the supporting guidance of our labour allies, union leaders and activists, we have finally secured this moment. The legislation is about giving more power to workers. It is about giving power to workers so they can negotiate a fair deal and so we can ban scabs once and for all. Let us talk about what that means. Banning scabs is about giving more power to workers and less power to the big bosses and to CEOs. It is about ensuring that when a worker makes the difficult decision to go on strike, their job is not stolen by scabs. That is what this is about. Banning scabs at the federal level is unprecedented. As with many things, Quebec was forward-thinking and already legislated this at the provincial level. This federal bill, which was negotiated by my colleague from Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, is inspired by the Quebec legislation, but goes even further. Many Quebeckers working in federally regulated businesses will now have more power thanks to the NDP. It is not thanks to the Bloc Québécois, the Conservatives or the Liberals, but thanks to the NDP. If our party had been in power, the bill would have been even better, but we were forced to work with the Liberals. Throughout these negotiations, the Liberals sided with the big union bosses. We sided with labour and I am proud of the work of my team. This is an historic moment. Banning replacement workers will give more power to workers and less power to the CEOs. Workers will have more power to negotiate better salaries. During this inflationary period, that is what workers need. This bill, Bill C-58, is about making sure that workers get the respect they deserve, which is needed now more than ever because we know times are tough. We know that workers are getting gouged by corporate greed, corporate greed at the grocery stores, corporate greed when it comes to corporate landlords jacking up rents and corporate greed in telcos that charge Canadians some of the highest fees in the world for their cellphones and for Internet services. Workers are fighting back. We are seeing workers organizing across this country. We are seeing it recently in Starbucks and in Amazon. We are seeing it in the public and in the private sectors. Unions are on the front line of fighting inflation because that is what unions do; they fight for working people, and New Democrats do as well. This anti-scab legislation is one additional tool to protect workers from getting ripped off and exploited by big bosses. However, I want to acknowledge that this is not the only thing New Democrats have fought for, specifically for workers. We have forced the federal government to bring in two additional measures already. We have made it the law of the land in Canada that federally regulated workers will get 10 paid days of sick leave, which was never the law before, and we made that happen. We also forced the Liberal government to bring in a sustainable jobs act, which would ensure that workers have a seat at the table, by law, and that anytime we discuss the future of jobs in our country, we talk about training opportunities for workers that go through unions and that we create good union jobs with good wages as we look towards a net zero economy. That is what we established with the sustainable jobs act, which again, is something that Conservatives tried to fight against every step of the way. Speaking of fighting every step of the way, I want to be very clear. When I say New Democrats made this happen, it is because we had to force the Liberals, we had to force the Prime Minister, to act. We know that the Prime Minister and the Liberal Party voted against anti-scab legislation just a few years ago. Without unions and without the New Democrats, nothing happens; none of this happens. New Democrats had to force the Prime Minister to bring in this legislation after decades, and even after forcing the Liberals to bring it in, they missed the mark. We had to fight to strengthen the legislation for workers with amendments. Earlier this month, we amended the bill to speed up the implementation from 18 months to 12 months. Workers will be protected sooner because of that. We also made sure that we closed loopholes to prevent any attempts of employers from skirting these laws. As well, we specifically made sure that workers will not be exploited by employers who try to use employees from another workplace, or use students or volunteers as scab workers. This is about ensuring that employees can strike for better wages without their bargaining rights being threatened. Big bosses will have to now show up in good faith to bargain at the bargaining table and to negotiate in a manner of good faith. However, imagine what we could have done if the out-of-touch Liberals were not in the way. Strong anti-scab legislation would already have been in place. Corporate greed and big bosses would be in check. I also want to talk about the serious risk presented by the leader of the Conservatives. The leader of the Conservatives likes to cosplay that he is there for working people, but we all know that the leader of the Conservatives and the Conservative Party want to wage a war against unions, a war against workers, in direct contrast to what this bill, Bill C-58, is all about. The leader of the Conservative Party would bring back anti-union legislation, as he did when he was in cabinet with the Harper government. He would bring in laws to make it harder for workers to fight for better deals. In 2013, the leader of the Conservative party said, very boldly, “I am the first federal politician to make a dedicated push toward this goal”—

1469 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/24/24 1:09:42 p.m.
Watch

I have to apologize to the hon. member, but the 10 minutes has gone by in a flash. Maybe he will have an opportunity to finish his speech in response to some of the questions. Questions and comments, the hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

47 words

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

May/24/24 1:09:54 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate where the leader of the New Democratic Party is. In fact, if he went a bit further down Main Street, he would see that we have the iconic image of the streetcar sculpture. It is a very significant icon because of its meaning with respect to the 1919 general strike, not only for Winnipeg but also, I would suggest, for all of Canada. It is really ironic in the sense that, today, we have anti-scab legislation, and that streetcar was perceived as coming in with replacement workers, so I really appreciate the background. It looks as though the legislation will get all-party support in passing, if not today, then possibly Monday. Whenever it happens, it happens. Does the member agree with me that it sends a very encouraging message to other jurisdictions? Hopefully, for example, the Province of Manitoba will quickly have anti-scab legislation on the books too. Could the leader of the New Democratic Party provide his thoughts on the federal legislation we have before us today?

175 words

Mr. Jagmeet Singh

May/24/24 1:11:16 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I had always hoped, and I know labour and union leaders had always hoped, that establishing anti-scab legislation at the federal level would be used as a tool to inspire and inform other provincial jurisdictions to bring in similar legislation. For New Democrats, union leaders and labour leaders, the goal is to ensure that nowhere in our country, in no jurisdiction and at no level, will workers ever be threatened with scabs stealing their jobs. That is ultimately the goal of New Democrats, and we want to make it very clear: We want workers to be able to negotiate fair deals and, if they choose to have to go on strike to fight for that fairness and fight for fair wages, to be able to do so without the threat of a scab stealing their job. That is what I hope to achieve with the bill. New Democrats and the labour movement hope it will inspire other provincial jurisdictions to bring it in. However, with Manitoba, rest assured, there is already a strong commitment from the premier to bring in anti-scab legislation. They have already tabled it, and it will be moving forward.

197 words

Ms. Monique Pauzé (Repentigny, BQ)

May/24/24 1:12:27 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I wanted to thank the member for Burnaby South for his speech. However, he did not give much credit to the Bloc Québécois. I would like to point out to the member that there are still holes in the bill. For example, federal public servants are not among the workers covered by this bill. There is, however, one aspect that interests me above all others, and that is the fact that the bill will come into force only 12 months after royal assent. The Bloc Québécois had proposed an amendment to bring it into force immediately after royal assent, as is the case for other bills. Could the member for Burnaby South explain how this 12-month delay is reasonable, considering that we are in a minority government and, therefore, the bill could die on the Order Paper?

148 words

Mr. Jagmeet Singh

May/24/24 1:13:26 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that we have the New Democrats to thank for this situation. There would be no anti-scab legislation without the pressure we were able to exert through the agreement between the NDP and the Liberal government. Without us, workers would not have this protection. This is really the fruit of our effort and the labour movement's effort. We are very grateful for the work done by the labour movement. As far as implementation is concerned, the Liberal government wanted an 18-month delay. We forced it to reduce that delay to 12 months. Let us be clear: Without the pressure that we brought to bear, this bill would never have been introduced and we would never have had this debate. It really is thanks to us that workers in federally regulated businesses in Quebec and across the country will receive this protection.

151 words

Mr. Blake Desjarlais (Edmonton Griesbach, NDP)

May/24/24 1:14:38 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, powerful paycheques come from powerful unions. I am proud to be a New Democrat today. I thank the leader of the New Democratic Party for their consistent efforts in making what we knew was possible a reality. For 15 years, New Democrats have tabled this piece of legislation. Eight times we have seen Liberals and Conservatives join forces to make certain that workers are not more powerful. This is a remarkable day for workers. I thank workers and all my colleagues in the New Democratic Party for this work. However, I am nervous and scared that we could possibly see a Conservative government try to roll back some of these protections and try to force workers back to work, as it often does when it joins forces with the Liberals, with back-to-work legislation. Could the member speak to how important it is to have powerful unions?

150 words

Mr. Jagmeet Singh

May/24/24 1:15:28 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I have to thank my colleague for that great question, and he is right to be worried. We know that the Conservatives have voted against back-to-work legislation the past. Their leader voted against it eight times in the past. He is in favour of back-to-work legislation. He has opposed anti-scab legislation. He has fought card-check legislation. He has voted against the minimum wage, not once but twice. He vowed to cut workers' pensions and to slash employment insurance to save half a billion dollars for CEOs, which would leave workers out to dry. We know this is a legitimate concern. We believe very strongly that we not only need to have this anti-scab legislation in place, but also need to be very clear that strong unions have to be supported so that they can fight for good wages for workers. The only way workers get fairness is with strong unions. Let us be very clear. The New Democratic Party is the only labour party at the federal level. We are proudly founded by unions. We will always defend unions' ability to fight for workers to ensure they get fair wages and fair working conditions.

203 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/24/24 1:16:29 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

Deputy

Mr. Peter Julian

May/24/24 1:17:02 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, for this historic vote, decades in the making, I would ask for a recorded vote.

17 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/24/24 1:17:09 p.m.
Watch

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

23 words

Hon. Steven MacKinnon (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

May/24/24 1:17:21 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to order made Wednesday, February 28, I request that the ordinary hour of daily adjournment of the next sitting be 12 midnight.

26 words

The Deputy Speaker

May/24/24 1:18:19 p.m.
Watch

Pursuant to order made Wednesday, February 28, the minister's request to extend the said sitting is deemed adopted.

20 words

Hon. Steven MacKinnon (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

May/24/24 1:18:46 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-49

Mr. Speaker, an agreement could not be reached under the provisions of Standing Order 78(1) or 78(2) with respect to the third reading stage of Bill C-49, An Act to amend the Canada—Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts. Under the provisions of Standing Order 78(3), I give notice that a minister of the Crown will propose at the next sitting a motion to allot a specific number of days or hours for the consideration and disposal of proceedings at the said stage.

110 words

C-49, An Act to amend the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Atlantic Accord Implementation Act and the Canada-Nova Scotia Offshore Petroleum Resources Accord Implementation Act and to make consequential amendments to other Acts

The Deputy Speaker

May/24/24 1:18:46 p.m.
Watch

The hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

9 words

Secretary

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

May/24/24 1:18:46 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Speaker, I suspect that if you were to canvass the House, you would find unanimous consent to call it 1:30 p.m. at this time so that we can begin private members' hour.

35 words

Hour
Time

The Deputy Speaker

May/24/24 1:18:48 p.m.
Watch

Is it agreed? Some hon. members: Agreed.

7 words

Mr. Luc Berthold (Mégantic—L'Érable, CPC)

May/24/24 1:18:53 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill S-216

Mr. Speaker, I would ask for unanimous consent for the following motion. That, notwithstanding any standing order, special order or usual practice of the House, the order for the second reading of Bill S‑216, An Act to amend the Income Tax Act (use of resources of a registered charity), standing on the Order Paper in the name of the member for Northumberland—Peterborough South shall be discharged and the bill withdrawn.

74 words