Translate Politics Parliament in plain language.

Labour

During question period on labour, members discussed Bill C-39, the Building Canada Strong Act, which among other things changes the Canada Labour Code’s rules for collective bargaining, including giving the Minister of Labour new powers related to disputes. Bloc Québécois members, citing concerns raised by unions such as the United Steelworkers and the CSN, opposed the bill, saying it would give the minister power to suspend strikes and force workers back to work, which they said would infringe on freedom of association and has no equivalent in other G7 countries. The Liberal minister responded that the bill is meant to support major projects and investment, that most parties successfully negotiate agreements on their own, and that the bill would provide special mediators and departmental support to help the small number of parties who cannot reach a deal.Written by AI from the debate. Updated .

Official text

4 statements

Andréanne Larouche

Bloc Québécois
“I oppose this bill. It gives the minister the power to end strikes and force employees back to work. No other G7 country allows this. The government is trampling on workers' rights.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, Bill C‑39 continues to raise concerns. Yesterday, the United Steelworkers sounded the alarm regarding workers’ rights: The power the government is trying to give [the] minister here is a power that does not exist in other G7 countries. Even in the United States...there is no such power to force an end to a strike and send employees back to work. This is something that...should send a signal. There are a lot of red flags being raised.... No other G7 country goes as far as Bill C‑39. Why do the Liberals want to continue trampling on workers’ rights?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A+ View analysis

Steven MacKinnon

Liberal
“We need this bill to build big projects and bring in investments, like the $500 billion recently promised. It helps workers and employers reach fair deals at the bargaining table.”

  • Government answer in Question Period

    Relevance 100 of 100

    Of this answer, 100% addressed the question that was asked.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, Bill C‑39 is intended to build Canada strong by advancing major projects and major construction initiatives, as requested by workers, among others. People are also looking to make significant investments. At the recent investment summit, we know that commitments of $500 billion in investments were announced. We want a very healthy labour-management climate. We want to provide a framework for these discussions and support them so that many more collective agreements can be reached at the bargaining table.

View on ourcommons.ca Grade B+ View analysis

Gabriel Ste-Marie

Bloc Québécois
“I oppose this bill. It gives the minister dangerous and permanent powers to stop strikes without proper limits. The government needs to realize it is out of control.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, there is a big difference between the wishes expressed here and what is written in the bill. People are still talking about Bill C‑39. Here is what the CSN said this morning: The powers given to the minister to suspend a strike...are...a serious infringement on freedom of association. Even framed by the national interest, it remains arbitrary, vague and...unacceptable. Yesterday, law professor Maxime St‑Hilaire criticized Bill C‑39 for making emergency measures permanent without any guardrails. He said that he has observed several instances of totalitarian behaviour on the part of the current government. Will the Liberals finally realize that they are out of control?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A View analysis

Steven MacKinnon

Liberal
“That claim is an exaggeration, and we disagree with it. Most workers and employers reach deals on their own. This bill gives extra help from mediators to the small number that struggle, so they can reach an agreement.”

  • Government answer in Question Period

    Relevance 100 of 100

    Of this answer, 100% addressed the question that was asked.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I think that is an exaggeration. We obviously do not share that view. What we want to do is support the parties. Ninety-five per cent of parties successfully negotiate collective agreements. We want to better support the remaining 5% with special mediators and support from the Department of Labour, so that collective agreements can be reached in the federal sector.

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A View analysis

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 156

All 46 items ·
  1. Government Orders Business of Supply 105 statements
  2. Oral Questions The Economy 8 statements
  3. Oral Questions Housing 6 statements
  4. Oral Questions Oil and Gas Industry 4 statements
  5. Oral Questions Finance 10 statements
  6. Oral Questions Labour 4 statements
  7. Oral Questions Steel and Aluminum Industry 5 statements
  8. Oral Questions Veterans Affairs 2 statements
  9. Oral Questions Housing 8 statements
  10. Oral Questions Intergovernmental Relations 6 statements
  11. Oral Questions Government Appointments 4 statements
  12. Oral Questions Fisheries and Oceans 8 statements
  13. Oral Questions Youth 2 statements
  14. Oral Questions Small Business 2 statements
  15. Oral Questions Natural Resources 6 statements
  16. Oral Questions International Trade 2 statements
  17. Oral Questions Rail Transportation 2 statements
  18. Oral Questions Marine Transportation 2 statements
  19. Government Orders Business of Supply 41 statements
  20. Oral Questions Natural Resources 2 statements
  21. Government Orders Business of Supply 17 statements
  22. Private Members' Business Relieving Grieving Parents of an Administrative Burden Act (Evan's Law) 2 statements
  23. Government Orders Committees of the House 2 statements
  24. Private Members' Business Relieving Grieving Parents of an Administrative Burden Act (Evan's Law) 4 statements
  25. Orders of the Day Concurrence in Committee Reports 71 statements
  26. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  27. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  28. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements