Hon. Senators: Agreed.

(At 5:40 p.m., the Senate was continued until Tuesday, February 14, 2023, at 2 p.m.)

Hon. Seamus O’Regan, P.C., M.P., Minister of Labour: Senator, I think this is the issue of contract flipping that you are referring to.

[Translation]

Yes, the Canada Labour Code has been amended to extend equal pay protection to workers when the contract moves to a new employer. This will ensure that workers affected by a new tender are not paid less than the amount set out in their previous collective agreement for the same or similar work. This provides more security and better protection for workers. Thank you for the question.

[English]

Hon. Seamus O’Regan, P.C., M.P., Minister of Labour: In this job, that’s probably the most loaded series of questions that I have ever heard in my career. There is absolutely no way, senator, I am going to comment on any of it. With all due respect — I think you appreciate why — I respect the table. I have learned to bite my tongue in this job — it is not easy for a Newfoundlander to do — but I do it because I want a deal. If you want a deal, then my job is to shut up and let them do the deal.

I am hoping no one has to brace themselves for anything. I obviously know parties on both sides of the table. This — just for the interests of senators — is not something that actually falls under my purview even though I have the title. It is the President of the Treasury Board; she is on one side of the table. The Public Service Alliance of Canada — led by a very proud Newfoundlander, Chris Aylward — is on the other side of the table. The best deals happen at the table. They do not come from the lips of the labour minister, even in this august chamber.

Hon. Pierre J. Dalphond: Thank you, Senator Cotter, for your very interesting speech.

I read the bill carefully in preparation for your speech. You said one word that struck me. You said that it was a framework to move forward toward something. I also noted that the legislation is scheduled to come into force no more than 12 months after the bill is passed. I noted that the government must report on the consultations six months after the legislation comes into force and that the government must table a report on the proposed regulations in both chambers within one year of the legislation coming into force. That already means a delay of perhaps two years.

In the briefings you had with the department, was there any discussion of a realistic time frame for the first cheques or benefits to reach recipients? I suspect there could be an election within the next two years.

[English]

Senator Cotter: In one respect, if I may say, Senator Dalphond, the occurrence of an election will be rendered somewhat irrelevant, because the framework will be in place and the department will carry on putting the program together. I hate to use a golf analogy, but I’m a 30 handicap at predicting elections, so I’m happy that it’s off to the side.

The message I keep hearing, which is informal and nobody is prepared to make an absolute commitment, is that it will be possible to do the negotiations and put the regulations in place in 12 months, hopefully. Once that happens, I think benefits can begin to flow.

There will be an application process as the bill is presently constructed, so it does mean that people will have to apply. However, the language people talk about is a 12-month period, and I hope that’s correct; I hope that’s the longest it is.

Senator Downe is right that we have an important job to do. We need to do it in as timely a way as possible, because my feeling is that each month that goes by pushes the time by a month, and that means tens of thousands of Canadians remain in poverty for one more month. It’s really important for them for us to do the best we can do.

Hon. Pierre J. Dalphond: Minister, this time my question is about a federal domain, airports. Service providers in the cleaning and security sectors were replaced. When that happened, the new contractor rehired people but did not offer them the same working conditions because there was no continuity of employment. Has this situation been remedied? I believe so, in accordance with the regulations, but if not, will it be done soon?

[English]

Senator Simons: What I heard from small publishers is that they would like changes in the mailing rate to make it easier to mail out their weekly papers. They are also really frustrated because Canada Post is outcompeting them in the flyer business. Now, flyers are not sexy, but they were the economic backbone of a lot of newspapers large and small, and what I hear from newspaper publishers is that Canada Post gives such great rates that the newspapers cannot compete. Now, Canada Post has a right to compete in the marketplace, but again, we have to consider the consequences of all these decisions.

(On motion of Senator Martin, debate adjourned.)

The Hon. the Speaker pro tempore: Honourable senators, we were also shocked at the devastation caused by an earthquake which struck Turkey and Syria this past Monday, leaving more than 19,000 dead and many more injured.

Our thoughts are with the people of Turkey and Syria as they mourn those they have lost and work to recover from this horrific tragedy.

Honourable senators, please join me in rising for a minute of silence in memory of the victims.

(Honourable senators then stood in silent tribute.)

[English]

Hon. Rebecca Patterson: Minister, I would like to ask you a question about the Pay Equity Act. We know that employers have until September 3, 2024, to publish their pay equity plans under this act. This means that about 4,600 employers have less than a year now to actually put these plans in place.

In her first annual report released last August, the Pay Equity Commissioner noticed that requests from employers seeking more guidance have been steadily increasing throughout the year.

Given the commissioner’s comments, are you confident that employers have sufficient time to develop comprehensive pay equity plans, especially given the pandemic-related interruptions since the act came into effect and given that decent work requires decent pay?

The Hon. the Speaker: Honourable senators, we were all shocked and saddened to learn of the tragedy in Laval, Quebec, which left two children dead and a number of others injured.

Our thoughts are with their families, as we express our condolences for those lost, and our hopes for a full recovery by the injured.

Honourable senators, please join me in rising for a minute of silence in memory of those children who did not survive this tragic incident.

(Honourable senators then stood in silent tribute.)

Hon. David M. Wells: Minister O’Regan, welcome back to the Senate.

My question to you is related to your responsibilities as Minister of Labour and minister responsible for Newfoundland and Labrador, and it is about the energy transition. It is in two parts.

One is the just transition that we hear so much about. To be clear, the just transition — the front part of that is the phasing out of the oil and gas industry, which we’ve heard from your government. Can you tell us how that phasing out of the oil and gas industry is “just” for the Newfoundland and Labrador workers on all our offshore rigs and for all our onshore suppliers, who have gone through education to learn about their craft and get well paid and keep that money in their families and keep our communities alive and, in fact, fill the coffers of our province? That is the first part.

The second part relates to a comment from your cabinet colleague Associate Minister of Finance Randy Boissonnault, who said the cost of this will be $100 billion to $125 billion a year up until at least 2050.

Given that Canada has — that contributes to 1.5 —

Hon. Pierre J. Dalphond: Welcome to the Senate, minister. My question is about a subject that you’ve already addressed, anti-scab legislation. I gather that the consultations are over. You said in October that they would end in December.

I have a specific question. You will undoubtedly look to the experience of Quebec and British Columbia. Are you planning to prohibit the use of both replacement workers working at the company and third-party subcontractors? In certain disputes, instead of hiring scabs, the employer has subcontracted the work to external companies.

[English]

Senator Miville-Dechêne: To my knowledge, since this crisis began, the Copyright Act has not been enforced in relation to articles that are shared because, yes, links are often shared. I don’t think the Copyright Act is the appropriate mechanism to protect journalism. I know this mechanism is used in France. We’ve been much more inspired by the Australian model, which has been successful in mitigating the crisis to some extent. We noticed that in Australia —

Hon. Pamela Wallin: I just have a quick comment, really, in response to some of your comments. Of course, we’ll discuss this endlessly at committee.

Speaking with local newspapers in my area, I heard that one of the things that troubles them is that while government, on the one hand, has agreed to pay them money, therefore compromising independence, they have also stopped 100% of their advertising in these local papers, which was a genuine and arm’s-length source of income. So if they wanted to support these news operations in small communities, they do have a mechanism.

Senator Simons: I would be delighted to take a question. We’ll pop like jack-in-the-boxes.

Senator C. Deacon: I wonder if you have thought at all about how new online platforms like The Logic, BetaKit or investigative journalism platforms that deliver podcasts, like Canadaland — how those sorts of models fit into the world that Bill C-18 imagines, because they seem to be fighting their own fight in a dramatically different media landscape. I just wonder if you have contemplated that. Thank you.

Senator Miville-Dechêne: I can’t see into the future, but for now, the government is giving tax credits. These tax credits have helped the media outlets that survived the crisis stay afloat, but they are at their limit. Obviously, these agreements with platforms are welcome and are helping newspapers like Le Devoir prosper more than it would have otherwise. However, who says that Google will still be around in 20 years? I believe I am out of time.

[English]

Senator Bovey: Thank you, Senator Cotter. I’ll be very brief.

In your speech, when you were going over the bill itself, you talked about the fact that there would be provisions for reconsiderations, reviews and appeals. Were those the right words, and are those in the cases of people being denied the benefit?

Senator Cotter: I have just pulled out the language here. The relevant provisions under section 11(1) read, “(h) respecting reviews or reconsiderations of decisions made under this Act;” and “(i) respecting appeals;”

So there’s an expectation that a model of reconsideration will be put in place and also an arrangement for an appeal process.

Senator Klyne: I have trust in the minister as well but, again, I have to hearken back to 2022, when the Saskatchewan government clawed back payments from people with disabilities. I think we’ll see a repeat of that unless we have some type of formal agreement before we go forward with this. I don’t want to stall it, I don’t want to see it slowed down, but we need some assurance to make sure that this goes to where it’s intended. I do want to see that happen. If there is anything I can say or do, please call on me.

Senator Cotter: I’m desperate not to run out of those five minutes. Senator Black in our Agriculture Committee often puts up his hands to get us to stop, and I was hoping that wouldn’t happen here.

The positive feature of this is that those agreements need to be negotiated and made public. It was a requirement in the bill; it was an amendment. You and I will be able to have a look at those agreements and see whether they are rich enough and strong enough to achieve the goals that you and I are looking for here. It will occur after the bill is passed, but it probably has to be in that fashion. I don’t think we have too many other options, but at least we get a good look to see whether the expectations and the commitments of the minister — and to the extent that I’m making any kind of a commitment, my commitment to you and people with disabilities — will be honoured. We can verify or unverify. Thank you.

(On motion of Senator Seidman, debate adjourned.)

On the Order:

Resuming debate on the motion of the Honourable Senator Audette, seconded by the Honourable Senator Mégie, for the second reading of Bill C-29, An Act to provide for the establishment of a national council for reconciliation.

Hon. Amina Gerba: According to data published by Statistics Canada in January 2023, two years after earning a bachelor’s degree, the employment income was lower among racialized graduates than non-racialized graduates.

For example, among women, West Asian graduates earned 16% less and Arab graduates earned 15% less than non-racialized women. Among men, Black, Southeast Asian, Filipino, Chinese and Korean graduates had the lowest employment incomes, earning from 11% to 13% less than their non-racialized counterparts.

Minister, what is the government doing to ensure more inclusion and fairness in the processes for recruiting racialized graduates in our country?

[English]

Hon. Seamus O’Regan, P.C., M.P., Minister of Labour: Senator, with all due apology, I wish my French was advanced enough on this subject that I could offer an answer in the language in which you have asked me.

Let me just say that in answering this question, I will get back to you with particulars on exactly what we are doing. I do not think there is any argument about where we want to be. I do not think that we have any argument about the goal. But I would like to get you a more detailed answer on precisely how we plan to get there, aside obviously from employment equity and other reports and legislation that we are working on.

I will get back to you on that.