Honourable senators, I did not expect this to be the first issue on which I would speak in this chamber, but I certainly feel compelled to do so today.

First, I would like to thank the witnesses we heard from on Saturday. Minister Hajdu, Minister Qualtrough, Jessica McDonald, Chair of the Board of Directors and interim President and CEO of Canada Post, and Mike Palecek, President of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers, all gave excellent, thoughtful presentations.

I think we can all agree that, regardless of which side of this labour dispute you fall on, this is a difficult situation for all concerned and this debate today illustrates that fact.

All of us have received important messages from our fellow citizens, from businesses and postal union members. They are pertinent, touching and relevant, and these messages keep coming in.

Despite the varying, often passionate opinions on all sides, especially given the seriousness of labour disputes, I was heartened by the general sense of decorum and respect with which everyone governed themselves here on Saturday. This speaks with pride to the value of our institution.

In that spirit, Canada Post should see this as an opportunity to work with the union to address present and future challenges, including changing business and working conditions to reflect new realities in mail and parcel delivery, health and safety, and especially pay equity issues related to women in the workforce.

The impact of disruptive technologies, as expressed by Senator Deacon, has pushed a new business model on the logistics industry all over the world. Adaptation continues, and it will continue to be key.

For its part, the union should demonstrate more clearly that it understands the economic and business challenges faced by Canada Post and be prepared to show greater flexibility in working with the corporation to address these challenges.

On both sides, there must be greater understanding of the fact that labour disruptions at Canada Post also disrupt the work and income of the many individual Canadians and communities, especially rural ones, that are most reliant on Canada Post. Of course, there are also the thousands of businesses, large and small, whose bottom line depends on the services provided by Canada Post.

I also wish to say that while doing so may not be completely understood, nor welcomed, by supporters of this legislation, or at least the need for it, I believe this house did the right thing in waiting for third reading until today.

The one day we took to reflect, instead of sitting yesterday, was an important opportunity to really think about this legislation and all that comes with it. That’s what I did.

I believe to have pushed it through on Saturday without due deliberation would have been harmful to the parties involved and, by extension, to Canadians and indeed to the Senate itself, particularly given that we received conflicting information from Canada Post and the union on the state of backlogs.

Whether there was disagreement about the number of trailers parked in Canada Post lots or whether they were empty or not, or about drone footage or media statements, or whether a million parcels is a large backlog or just a Monday, it is clear there was much for us to think about.

As a former international negotiator for various governments, I should add that I am not a hissy-fit type of person. That’s not part of my tool kit nor my lexicon.

We must also consider the gravity of the situation and the underlying principles of the freedoms of peaceful assembly and association, and the right to strike, the latter of which was, of course, affirmed as constitutionally protected by the Supreme Court in 2015.

When the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is concerned, we must be especially cautious. The Charter, and everything codified within it, must be respected and cannot be taken for granted.

I appreciate the clarifications provided by the Government Representative in this chamber earlier.

In other words, honourable colleagues, this is a decision we cannot take lightly. That being said, I will also say that in a situation such as this, which has national and now even global reach, we also have a duty to act in the national interest. We must do so, to paraphrase our colleague Senator Woo, with haste, but not hastily.

Colleagues, I support Bill C-89 because I believe the bill to be in the public interest. While I believe strongly in collective bargaining and the right of workers to strike when good faith negotiations falter, I also believe that Canada Post and Canadian businesses, both large and small, will suffer short- and long-term economic consequences if this dispute continues. Lost business will have to be regained, and that will have medium- and longer-term repercussions on everyone: industry and the workers of Canada Post.

Much has been said about the holidays being the busiest time of year for Canada Post and how many Canadian businesses rely on the increased profits that come with this season. It must be pointed out that these businesses rely greatly on our national postal service during the other 11 months of the year as well.

Colleagues, there’s no slam dunk resolution that back-to-work legislation provides. There is no solution being imposed other than the important one of enforced mediation.

It is clear from all presentations that the industry has changed and will continue to do so, hence the need for real and enduring compromise, if not a total reset of the employer-labour relationship. Canada Post and the union must come together to face this reality, but not at the expense of Canadians. Thank you, colleagues.