Thursday, December 07, 2006

Dion's First Test

New Liberal leader Stephane Dion will soon face his first real test.

Will he oppose or support Bill C-257, a private member's bill that's making its way through the House of Commons?

This Bill would essentially make it illegal for federally-regulated companies to hire replacement workers during labour disputes.

The Bloc Quebecois and the NDP both support this Bill as have many Liberals.

And if that support continues Bill C-257 could become law, which would be bad news for Canada.

Simply put, such a law would drive away investment, kill jobs and infringe on the freedoms of Canadian employees, who may wish to work during a strike.

Traditionally, the Liberal Party has opposed these kinds of pro-union laws, but will they do so again?

Will Dion stand up for Canada's economy and reject Bill C-257 or will he side with socialists, separatists and big union bosses?

I guess we will find out if Buzz Hargrove is now calling the shots in the Liberal Party.

In the meantime, here's what the National Citizens Coalitions is doing to stop Bill C-257.

Media Update:

I debate David Rappaport of the Ontario Public Service Employees Union on this issue on CH Live at 5:30 PM EST and again at 11:30 PM EST. It gets a little heated.

1 comment:

Monkey Loves to Fight said...

Even some conservatives will vote for this bill. In fact both parties are split on this. I kind of suspect Dion as a backbencher would support it, but as a leader he will probably go with what his caucus wants. British Columbia and Quebec have banned replacement workers and in the case of BC it hasn't really crippled the economy when you consider BC is a leader in economic growth. At the same time it doesn't really seem necessary either as all the other provinces have done fine without it and the fact even Saskatchewan or Manitoba who have NDP governments refuse to introduce such a bill and the fact Dalton McGuinty hasn't touched the issue either (In fact his brother David McGuinty was one of the few Liberals who voted against it at second reading) suggests it isn't that urgent either.