Whatever you think of the Sun as a newspaper, they deserve kudos for commissioning a poll on
this issue. The federal government passed
legislation that would have compelled unions to disclose the salaries of union
officials making more than $100,000 a year, spending on political activities,
and general spending for sums as little as $5,000.
If such a law had been in place by 2004, CUPE would
have had to disclose to its members that is was sending a representative to
yearly terrorist conferences in Cairo (see here).
But despite the Commons passing the law, corrupt
and radical unions still don’t have to fear scrutiny. The unions spent millions
of dollars of their members’ money on a lobbying campaign and convinced the
Senate to gut the bill. Now if a union wants to drop $100,000 of their members' money to rebuild a biker strip club, they can go right ahead, and still no one
the wiser…
By Brian Lilley,
Parliamentary Bureau
OTTAWA - Union funds used to rebuild a
biker strip club, false expense claims sometimes totalling $4,000 in a day for
a single executive and plenty of connections between top union officials and
organized crime. These are just some of the shocking revelations to come out of
Quebec's Charbonneau Commission into corruption in that province.
The allegations might also explain why
union bosses have fought so hard against disclosure laws that their members
support in droves.
The latest poll of working Canadians,
including a strong sampling of union members, shows that 83% of all working
Canadians agree that unions should be required "to publicly disclose
detailed financial information on a regular basis."
Broken down further, the poll showed
that 84% of union members back such a law compared to 81% of working Canadians
who have never been unionized and 89% of those who formerly belonged to a
union.
"We don't see it very often,"
said Leger vice-president Christian Bourque, when asked about how often eight
in 10 Canadians agree on any proposed law.
Bourque also said they asked a high
number of unionized Canadians to ensure they were adequately reflecting the
views of union members.
"We also asked the question
multiple ways to make sure the wording of the question did not influence the
outcome," Bourque said.
A law passed by the House of Commons in
late 2012 would have amended the income tax act to require public disclosure of
union finances including executive salaries, political activities and general
spending over $5,000.
In June, after an intensive lobbying
campaign by organized labour, estimated to have cost millions of dollars in
union dues, unelected senators essentially gutted the bill removing all
meaningful requirements for disclosure.
Union leaders have warned that such a
bill would add increased costs for their movement, which would result in higher
dues or reduced benefits. However, when presented with a range of options on
how to deal with any increased costs, the most popular option was reducing
donations to political parties followed by reduced pay for union leaders and
reduced spending on political or social causes.
The phone survey was conducted by Leger
Marketing July 29-Aug. 18, among a representative sample of 1,400 English or
French speaking employed Canadian adults. The maximum margin of error obtained
for a sample of 1,400 respondents is +/- 2.62, 19 times out of 20.
No comments:
Post a Comment