Fair enough. I appreciate that, Mr. Reid.

We are creating provisions for an organization with a constitution that falls under the auspices of many federal and provincial laws as it is. There are already criteria for them to be responsible to their membership; it is a form of responsible government in fact.

The criteria being proposed here are quite onerous and, frankly, I think these would be very, very detrimental to the ability of unions to fulfill their obligations.

As far as freedom of association is concerned, I think we have to make that freedom of association vital. If an organization is constantly having to report back the minutiae of its daily activities, I don't see how that in any way is in the public interest. It certainly isn't in the interest of the union as a judicial entity. Again, they already have reporting mechanisms. It's a democratic institution. Members are free to ask questions of their leadership at any given time, and disclosure is already done.

What we're talking about is creating public disclosure for all Canadians to see, and frankly there are even accounting principles of the House of Commons that aren't that publicly disclosed. I don't see why we would benefit from a certain degree of interpretation of accounting rules whereas unions would not.

I think it's putting a very heavy burden on associations, which, quite frankly, I think violates their constitutional right to exist. If we have a union that has that level of burden, I'm not sure that people would even want to join it. This would put in doubt a union's ability to gain membership. The provisions being proposed here are so onerous that, personally, I would think twice about becoming a union member, and I think a lot of people would agree.

Again, we are attacking the very foundation of a constitutional right to freedom of association. I think this bill takes that a step too far. We've had decisions in the past where the courts have ruled regarding the importance of the unions having the right to exist. In one particular ruling, Berry v. Pulley, one of the questions that came out of it was the loss of control of the union over its ability to represent its members.

Philip Toone

Transcript

Discussions (0)