MP welcomes bill’s second chance

Bill C-377 To Revert To When  It Passed third reading In The House On Dec. 12 – Nullifying  Senators’ Amendments, Deliberations.

By Alex Browne – Peace Arch News    August 21, 2013 3:00 PM

https://i0.wp.com/media.bclocalnews.com/images/29576whiterockHiebert-Russ0411FC.jpg

South Surrey-White Rock-Cloverdale Conservative MP Russ Hiebert

Russ Hiebert, Conservative MP for South Surrey-White Rock-Cloverdale, says he’s pleased by Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s decision to prorogue – or suspend – Parliament until October.

For Hiebert, prorogation means the clock will be turned back to last December on his controversial private member’s bill, C-377, which would require labour unions to publish detailed financial information.

Harper has said prorogation is in anticipation of a throne speech putting forward a new agenda for the government at the midpoint of its mandate.

Following heated debate, the Senate sent C-377 back to the Commons in June, with extensive amendments reducing the scope and impact of the bill that Hiebert claimed, at the time, had “gutted” it.

Under prorogation, according to the Library of Parliament, the bill will revert to the way it was when it passed third reading in the House on Dec. 12 – essentially nullifying the Senators’ amendments and the deliberations leading to them.

The unamended bill will subsequently be resubmitted to the Senate, Hiebert noted in a statement issued Tuesday.

“As such, I am hopeful my colleagues in the Senate will give C-377 appropriate and timely consideration,” he said, adding that the restored bill will “once again reflect the wishes of the elected lower house of Parliament.”

Wednesday, Peace Arch News asked Hiebert if that means he expects the bill will receive a smoother ride the second time around.

“I’m always hopeful,” Hiebert said, adding that he’s making no predictions about how quickly the Senate will deal with the bill when it returns to the chamber.

“This does give me an opportunity to communicate with the small number of members of my caucus who had concerns about the bill. I’ll do my best to persuade them that the bill should pass as it stands.”

Hiebert acknowledged going back to square one with the Senate also raises the possibility the bill could face further Senate Banking Committee hearings before being debated by senators.

“That decision would have to rest with them,” he said. “My hope is that, because we have already had three weeks of testimony, that could be taken into consideration. But it’s completely in the hands of the senators.”

A total of 16 Tory senators joined their Liberal counterparts in approving the amendments to Hiebert’s bill in June.

Hiebert has argued that since unions receive tax deductions through union dues, their finances should be made public, and that the transparency he’s asking for is no greater than that currently required for charities.

Opponents, however, claim the legislation – as it stands – will cost unions millions of dollars, adding that the bill also ventures into dangerous  areas of unconstitutionality and invasion of privacy.

Conservative Senator Hugh Segal was among those who spoke out against the bill in June, saying it was poorly drafted and likely to be challenged.

“Whatever may have been its laudable transparency goals, (it is) really – through drafting sins of omission and commission – an expression of statutory contempt for the working men and women in our trade unions and for the trade unions themselves and their right under federal and provincial law to organize,” Segal said.

Conservative Senator Diane Bellemare, a former economics professor at the University of Quebec, was also critical of the legislation.

“Even with the proposed amendments, this bill remains an unbalanced bill that has no similarity to other transparency bills in France, the United Kingdom and Australia,” she said.

CETA talks ‘re-launch’ in September: Council of Canadians to deliver petitions in Brussels

By Stuart Trew   August 22, 2013   http://rabble.ca

Council-of-Canadians's picture      Council of Canadians’ blog

CETA talks 're-launch' in September: Council of Canadians to deliver petitions in Brussels

Between September 17 and 19, the Council of Canadians will hand-deliver a CETA petition, signed by thousands of people in Canada, to Members of the European Parliament in Brussels. The petition focuses on the excessive (FIPA- or NAFTA-like) investor protections built into the proposed Canada-EU deal but it is more broadly designed to protest a deal that few people have heard of, even after four years of negotiations, and that a growing number oppose.

The timing of the petition delivery is especially important after news that the Harper government will “re-launch” the Canada-EU trade talks in early September, with the aim of wrapping up the negotiations before parallel EU-U.S. talks begin in October.

We need your help gathering signatures for the petition so it can have maximum effect in Europe and right here in Canada. There are two easy ways that you can help:

1. Circulate the petition to your friends and, if you’re a member of a union or other organization, to your colleagues as well. If you have a website, consider copying our web action image (top left) and use it on your site to link back to our petition page.

2. If you are holding or attending public events in the next two weeks, you could print off the letter and have people sign it right away. Hard-copy letters can be mailed to our offices at 170 Laurier Avenue West, Ste. 700, Ottawa, Ontario, K1P 5V5.

Council of Canadians Executive Director Garry Neil will travel to Brussels on September 17 to meet with Members of the European Parliament and trade justice allies, and will deliver the petitions at this point. So we would need to have all hard-copy petitions/letters at our head office by Monday, September 16. We will continue to accept online signatures to the petition up to September 17.

Thank you for your help and good luck!

For more information about the Canada-EU deal, visit Canadians.org/CETA

The Council of Canadians is Canada’s largest citizens’ organization, with members and chapters across the country. We work to protect Canadian independence by promoting progressive policies on fair trade, clean water, energy security, public health care, and other issues of social and economic concern to Canadians.

Raising low-wage workers out of poverty: What is the government doing?

By Jenny Carson   August 21, 2013  http://rabble.ca

Photo: Bob Simpson/flickr

That there has been a dramatic rise in the number of working poor in Canada is incontestable. In 2013, one in ten Canadians earn minimum wages, more than double the number ten years ago; half of those workers are in Ontario. A recent study conducted jointly by McMaster University and United Way Toronto found that barely half of all workers in the GTA-Hamilton area are employed in permanent full-time positions that provide benefits and a modicum of job security.

The explosion of precarious or insecure employment and the subsequent growth in income inequality are the result of both long and short-term changes in the labour market. The outsourcing of good-paying manufacturing jobs to the developing world, the expansion of the low-wage service sector, reckless Wall Street spending and the assault on unions have all contributed to the current plight of the working class. But also important is the erosion of state support for collective bargaining and basic employment protections.

Governments at all levels have abdicated their responsibility to balance corporate and worker interests to maintain a healthy and balanced economy. The consequences for workers — in the form of shrinking wages, increased job insecurity and declining health — have been disastrous.

It is with cautious optimism then that we should greet recent municipal, provincial and federal-level efforts to address worker poverty and income inequality. On July 19, Toronto City Council voted 28-3 to update the City’s Fair Wage Policy. First established in 1893, the Fair Wage Policy requires contractors and suppliers for the city to pay their workers the prevailing market wages and benefits in their field of employment or, for unionized fields, union rates. The policy was designed to protect workers from unscrupulous contractors trying to underbid their competitors by paying their workers less than the prevailing wage rates, and to enhance the city’s reputation as an ethical employer. However, because the rates had not been updated since 2003, until last month many of the city’s “fair wages” fell below the Ontario minimum wage of $10.25 an hour.

The July 19 vote to update the fair wage rates reveals that a majority of councilors understand that is bad policy for the city, as an employer, to add to the growing ranks of the working poor (this excludes councilors like Denzil Minnan-Wong who sees as any kind of wage control as “social engineering”) Under the new rates, contractors providing janitorial services for the city must pay their workers at least $12.43 an hour. Cleaners in the private sector in contrast almost always earn minimum wages.

Unfortunately, however, a fair wage is not a living wage, which the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives estimates to be $17.76 an hour in Toronto (a living wage covers the cost of basic necessities such as shelter, food, clothing and transportation). The city’s fair wage rate for cleaners would barely raise a worker out of poverty and, if she or he were supporting a family as is often the case, would in fact leave them in poverty. This then is only a first step if the city truly wants to be an ethical employer.

On July 19 City Council also agreed to devise a “job quality assessment tool” against which any jobs being contracted out would be measured. The basic idea behind this initiative is to ensure that the city is not turning good jobs into bad jobs through the contracting-out process. As well as considering wage levels, the tool will include other criteria such as worker health and safety, skills and training opportunities, working conditions and other factors which determine job quality. Ideally, the job quality assessment tool, which will be considered by Council at the end of this year, will provide some protection for city workers who will no doubt face another round of privatization pressure as Mayor Ford runs for re-election in 2014. How successful this initiative will be depends on whether workers and their unions are given a voice in its formulation and implementation, and it’s not yet clear if they will be.

At the provincial level, the Wynne government recently announced the creation of a minimum wage advisory panel that will consider how to calculate increases to Ontario’s minimum wage. The six-member panel, chaired by University of Toronto Industrial Relations and Human Resources professor Anil Verma includes representatives from labour, business and youth, the latter of whom are disproportionately represented among low-wage and precariously employed workers.

The minimum wage in Ontario has been frozen at $10.25 for the last three years, and will remain so for at least the next six months as the panel conducts public consultations and studies how other jurisdictions calculate minimum wage rates. Anti-poverty activists are justifiably angry that it has taken the Liberals more than two years to set up the panel, and wonder why, unlike many other provinces, Ontario does not provide automatic annual minimum wage increases pegged to inflation. Ontario Labour Minister Yasir Naqvi’s assertion that we need a “made-in-Ontario” solution raises more questions than answers.

Yet once again there is reason to be hopeful that this initiative will help low-wage workers, many of whom are newcomers to Canada climb out of poverty and contribute to the economic recovery we so desperately need (remember, low-wage workers tend to spend every cent they earn in the local economy). The panel will most certainly recommend a wage increase and, perhaps just as importantly, develop a more predictable formula for raising the minimum wage in the future (in the past this has been done on an arbitrary, ad hoc basis that resulted in a nine-year wage freeze under the Conservatives). Only time will tell whether the panel’s political masters, whoever they might be next spring support a progressive overhaul of the system.

Despite the chilly climate for workers on Parliament Hill, there may also be reason to hope for change at the federal level. Next spring NDP Member of Parliament for Toronto Davenport Andrew Cash will introduce a private member’s bill to expand EI access to part-time and self-employed workers and to eliminate the use of unpaid interns. Cash has a personal as well as professional interest in the issue as someone who spent most of his adult life precariously employed in the creative sector. His bill would modernize a program that no longer reflects the employment realities of many Canadians, and make it harder for employers to engage in unethical and often illegal practices such as hiring workers as “independent contractors” so as to avoid obligations under employment law. It would also reform a pension system that currently consigns large numbers of elderly Canadians to poverty.

Cash understands that legislative changes to EI are only part of the solution. He envisions a multi-pronged approach that includes affordable daycare (along the lines of Quebec), social programs to fight poverty, and decent and affordable public transit. While the chances of Cash’s bill passing under a Conservative government are next to zero, his laudable initiative has the potential to start a public dialogue about how the EI system is failing Canadian workers. It is also, as Cash explains, an issue which “spans the employment silos and class divides” that traditionally divides workers. His bill has the potential to mobilize a broad cross-section of the working class, from journalists to taxi drivers to computer programmers. Its long-term success depends in large part on whether this mobilization takes place.

Together, these initiatives reveal that government (or at least some within government) is finally beginning to heed worker and progressive demands for action that will stem the alarming growth of job precarity and worker poverty in Canada.

It is far from clear whether any of these initiatives will lead to real change for workers, but collectively they suggest that at least some of our elected officials understand that government has a stake in creating a more equitable society.   

Jenny Carson is Associate Professor in the Department of History at Ryerson University.

Photo: Bob Simpson/flickr

Examining Harper’s record and spotting a fake economic recovery

 

Duncan Cameron

By Duncan Cameron    August 20, 2013   http://rabble.ca

Photo: Liam Richards/University of Saskatchewan/flickr

A new report from Citizens for Public Justice (CPJ) on job creation in Canada arrived just as the Prime Minister said Monday he intends the next election to be about jobs and the economy. As part of a study of poverty, CPJ has published a set of fact sheets on job creation in Canada since the 2008 recession. It looks at regional and generational differences, assesses job quality and measures newly created jobs against new job seekers.

Anyone who believes what Conservative cabinet ministers have been repeating about job creation in Canada should read the CPJ fact sheets.

Carol Goar of the Toronto Star identified the CPJ report as explaining why many Canadians are still experiencing the recession. The Canadian employment rate is down: the number of jobs created (950,000) has not increased as fast as the population (1.8 million). Unemployment is stuck at 1.4 million. When talking about the unemployed, the government does not include discouraged workers, people with part-time jobs looking for full-time work, temporary jobs, or the under-employed. Add them to the total, and the real unemployment rate is one out of ten out of work.

CPJ explain about 500,000 jobs are needed to get Canada back to where it was before the recession. Stronger job growth where resource prices are strong (Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba) and in construction mask weaker job growth in services and manufacturing.

Employment trends are weakest for Aboriginal Canadians. Young Canadians suffer disproportionately from unemployment — about one in five is without work.

Sadly, paid work increasingly means precarious jobs: part-time, low-wage and unstable. Older workers are relying more and more on temporary work.

Policy analysts divide over what to do about a lackluster economy. Some want to leave the market alone, most think governments need to lead in order for it to recover.

Conservatives believe the marketplace works fine, and any problems can be fixed by allowing prices to adjust. Unemployment is explained by the failure of rates of pay to fall, because of minimum wages, unions, employment insurance, welfare and other market imperfections, which need to be eliminated or reduced.

The problem with this view is that rates of pay are falling — policies to reduce wages have been successful, increasing inequality as Stephen Gordon has shown in Maclean’s. For the Harper government, business-funded think-tanks, and other supporters of the market view, this just means wages have not fallen enough. More of the same is just what is needed.

Those unwilling to wait for the economy to correct itself will want to know how it can be improved.

In Canada the standard strategy for an underperforming economy is a currency devaluation, accompanied by fiscal tightening. Exports incomes increase, import increases are cut off, and the private sector leads the recovery.

Floating the Canadian dollar down used to only require lowering Canadian interest rates below U.S. rates. Unfortunately, the U.S. beat Canada to the interest rate bottom, with a “zero bound” rate, introduced to revive American capitalism.

Historically low rates do prevail at the Bank of Canada. This is supposed to encourage recovery, though without bringing a currency devaluation, it is hard to see how it is going to happen.

Former Bank of Canada Deputy Governor William White called low interest rates having one foot on the accelerator. With the Harper government curbing spending, White observed, Canada has the other foot on the brake.

This contradictory policy needs to be fixed. The obvious choice is for the government to take the foot off the brake and spend borrowed money for needed public investments in urban transit, retrofitting buildings to reduce energy use, recreation, culture, the arts, advanced education, child care, and straight job creation.

The Harper government is ideologically opposed to government spending, but expect it to consider taking its foot off the brake by lowering taxes. Another reduction in the GST would inject new money into the economy, for instance. And it would also be an excuse to reduce direct spending (and reduce wages) further down the road.

The Official Opposition have their work cut out for them just to expose the poor Canadian economic record, let alone engage Conservatives in a rational debate based on economic evidence.

Stephen Harper does not expect Canadians to discover that job performance has been poor and that the economy is not improving, while the standard of living for most Canadians is declining. He has announced plans to prorogue Parliament, cutting the fall session short. This will limit the time for parliamentary debate and the subjects raised by the opposition.

If the economy is going to be the ballot question in the next election, as Stephen Harper suggests, Citizens for Public Justice have afforded parliamentarians and all Canadians with what is needed to examine his government’s record.

Duncan Cameron is the president of rabble.ca and writes a weekly column on politics and current affairs.

Photo: Liam Richards/University of Saskatchewan/flickr

What legislation will ‘die’ when Harper prorogues Parliament?

By Kelsey Johnson    
http://thetyee.ca       Published August 19, 2013

Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s decision to ask the Governor General to prorogue Parliament until sometime in October will mark the end of several controversial pieces of legislation.

Under parliamentary rules, 19 government bills will die on the order paper in either the House of Commons or the Senate.

Among the pieces of legislation affected by the impending prorogation are the Senate Reform Act, the Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act, and the Not Criminally Responsible Reform Act, all of which have been met with varying degrees of criticism.

Delaying the return of Parliament also means the slates of the various standing committees have been wiped clean. This means the revision of the First Nations Elections Act and the Combating Counterfeit Products Act have been terminated, at least for the time being.

Studies by committee into questions surrounding animal welfare, bee health, infrastructure and the state of Canada lobster industry will also grind to a halt. The rules do not allow committees to sit when Parliament is prorogued.

While the bills have theoretically died on the order paper, the government could make a motion to reintroduce the legislation at the stage it was at before prorogation. In order to do that, however, it must get unanimous consent.

Otherwise, the legislation must begin the process all over again. Since the government has a majority, it is likely the legislation the government wants to reintroduced will be fast-tracked through debate.

As for private member’s bills, they are not affected by prorogation. They will automatically be reintroduced at the last stage reached in the House of Commons via a specific standing order.

Kelsey Johnson reports for iPolitics, where this article first appeared.