On March 20, 1999 a number of stories were printed and broadcast across the country about the strike by the workers of the Public Service Alliance of Canada at the grain terminals in Vancouver. There was however, some misinformation in the stories and I would like to clarify some of the issues.

The reports stated that the government was ready to introduce "back-to-work" legislation and that Reform blocked a motion to get 70 PSAC workers, who were stalling shipments of grains on the West Coast, back to work. That is not true. Here’s the rest of the story.

Reform wants to get grain flowing at the terminals in Vancouver immediately. We want to get the PSAC workers back to work permanently, and called for an emergency debate on the issue. This was held on Thursday evening, March 18, 1999. The government neglected to recognize that there was even a problem until Reform pushed for an emergency debate in the House of Commons. In fact we had to ask for the debate twice before the Liberals agreed to discuss the issue.

What is even more astonishing is that the Liberals knew six weeks in advance that severe problems were going to occur as a result of the PSAC strike at the West Coast terminals. In the emergency debate I revealed that five Liberal Ministers were sent a letter on January 27, 1999 that specifically stated the backup of unloaded grain cars could cost Canadians millions of dollars and severely impact our critical trading relationship with foreign buyers.

Reform asked the government to adopt a permanent dispute settlement mechanism rather than relying on back-to-work legislation as a method of settling work stoppages. Time and again Reform has suggested final offer selection arbitration as a dispute settlement mechanism in areas where there are no alternative services and labour disruptions damage the national economy and harm innocent third parties. This procedure would ensure the continuous flow of grain to market.

The Treasury Board Minister was even asked if he would support the idea of "final offer selection arbitration". The Minister responded by saying he was looking at all options. Then not even fifteen minutes later without notice or consultation with opposition parities, the government asked for unanimous consent to introduce legislation without telling us what it was. The issue of removing someone’s collective bargaining rights is quite serious and should be done properly.

The government has the power to do what it wishes so it is quite ridiculous to suggest Reform held this up. This government has already used "time allocation" to ram 49 pieces of legislation through the House of Commons. We don’t agree with this but it does show that the government can be most undemocratic and do whatever it pleases.

Reform does not want to see work stoppages like the current one on the West Coast continually popping up and holding Western Canadian farmers hostage. What we want is a permanent dispute settling mechanism in place so that prairie producers can continue doing what they do best without having to worry about problems that are out of their control.

Sincerely,

Garry Breitkreuz, MP

Yorkton - Melville