Letter to Lawrence Cannon, Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities - Re: Strategic Review of Canada Post

BY MAIL AND EMAIL

 

Lawrence Cannon
Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities
Place de Ville, Tower C, 29^th Floor
330 Sparks Street
Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0N5

 

Dear Mr. Cannon:

Re: Strategic Review of Canada Post

I am writing on behalf of the 56,000 members of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW) to raise concerns, ask questions and urge changes in connection with the government’s strategic review of Canada Post.

First and foremost, CUPW is concerned because the government is not planning on holding public hearings as part of its review and is expecting individuals and organizations to make submissions in a very short time period which includes the summer.

It would be irresponsible and unaccountable for the government to conduct a review of Canada Post without doing everything possible to consult with the real owners of the post office – the public.  A public service such as Canada Post should have public hearings. Any review of our public post that does not reach out to the public is not a review at all. It is either a public relations exercise or a way to ensure that business interests that have the resources to turn in a quick submission prevail during the review. Neither is acceptable. Lost in all of it will be the millions of people who use the post office.

CUPW is also concerned that the review’s advisory panel will be relying on information from Canada Post. Previous reviewers of the post office have complained about the inadequacy of the corporation’s information. It is not clear how transparent the review process will be and whether the union and others will get to see all this information and rebut it if necessary.

Finally, while the union is pleased that the government’s review will not look at privatization, we are concerned that the review has not ruled out deregulation.  I would like to reiterate the need for public hearings and an extension for submissions so that the public has enough time to provide input on fundamental issues such as deregulation.

CUPW would like to meet to discuss its concerns and obtain additional information, including answers to the following questions:

• Is the government willing to hold public hearings?
  
  
• Is the government willing to extend the timeline for submissions to November 30, 2008 so that ordinary people and public interest groups have time to examine the issues and provide their input?
  
  
• How will people even know about the review? Will the government or advisory panel be publicizing the review?
  
  
• Will the union and other groups be able to see the information that Canada Post provides and rebut the information?
  
  
• The backgrounder that accompanied the strategic review announcement mentioned that the review is similar in approach to the strategic reviews being conducted for all federal departments in the next few years. Are these reviews and Canada Post’s review part of the Treasury Board’s Expenditure Management System (EMS)?
  
  
• If so, will Treasury Board proceed with the review if there is an election?
  
  
• If the review is not part of Treasury Board’s EMS, which department or departments will consider the final recommendations of the review?
  
  
• How will the strategic review be evaluated? Is it designed to meet departmental or governmental objectives?
  
  
• What role does the interim report play? Will the interim report be made public? Will the government be responding to the interim report?
  
  
• Is the government willing to wait for the recommendationsof the review’s advisory panel before fundamentally altering rural service and Canada Post’s exclusive privilege. In other words, will the government put its bill to erode Canada Post’s exclusive privilege (Bill C-14) on hold and also place a moratorium on the Crown corporation’s review of rural mail boxes, which has resulted in many rural residents losing roadside delivery?

CUPW would like to point out that the review’s terms of reference indicate that the advisory panel will be reviewing issues like the exclusive privilege and public policy objectives like rural mail delivery. For example:

• Which activities or services currently provided should be preserved as exclusive privileges and which ones should be provided in a more competitive environment?
  
  
• To what extent do all of the public policy obligations imposed on Canada Post meet the needs of Canadians?

We do not understand why the government would press forward with Bill C-14 or allow Canada Post to continue its rural mailbox review while simultaneously conducting a review that will undoubtedly look at these issues.

We hope, given current review timeframes, that you will give our letter your immediate attention. Thank you.

Yours truly,

Denis Lemelin
National President

 

cc     All CUPW locals, NEC, REC, National URs, Regional URs, Specialists, Robert Campbell, Nicole Beaudoin, Daniel H. Bader, David Christopherson MP, Mario Laframboise MP, Mark Holland MP