Good afternoon, and thank you very much for receiving our organization, which represents 315,000 workers from coast to coast. Thank you very much for this opportunity.
My remarks will focus on two key aspects of our submission: the urgent need for infrastructure spending, and investment support for key strategic industries.
Public sector spending is a vital part of both Canadian prosperity and, through our social programs and safety net, our Canadian identity. Canada's social and physical infrastructure has suffered years of neglect and needs strengthening. Public investment in everything from child care and education to social housing and retirement security has a proven track record of alleviating poverty and widening opportunity.
Some estimates put Canada's physical infrastructure deficit in the tens of billions of dollars, while others estimate it running into the hundreds of billions of dollars. Either way, if Canada's going to make a transition to a green economy and if the growth process is to resume, the federal government must play an active role in encouraging innovation, sustainable investment, and clean technology.
Annual budgetary deficits of $25 billion over four years would leave Canada's debt-to-GDP ratio unchanged at roughly 31%. The debt-to-GDP ratio among the G7 is more than double that of Canada, which is why Unifor believes that even more federal government spending on social and physical infrastructure is fiscally justified.
Unifor recommends that the federal government significantly increase its infrastructure spending program. The timeline for infrastructure spending should be expedited in order to provide much-needed stimulus. Aspects of that program should include provisions for made-in-Canada materials and inputs, including sustainable building materials; local hiring requirements, especially among vulnerable communities such as minorities, young workers, women in skilled trades, and aboriginal workers; the removal of any prerequisite for private sector involvement as a condition for federal funding support; and steps to improve accessible transportation for Canadians with disabilities.
A common thread among Canada's diverse advanced manufacturing industries over the past decade has been the nearly complete absence of federal leadership. This was at a time when more than 450,000 manufacturing jobs were lost, nearly one-quarter of Canada's industrial base. Unifor calls for a national strategy in key areas of advanced manufacturing that would nurture Canadian production, foster international competitiveness, and secure future prosperity.
With regard to auto assembly and parts, Unifor recommends better integrating the federal and provincial investment attraction efforts, including the development of a one-stop system to win new investment in Canadian assembly and parts plants. Canada's investment incentives must be competitive and efficient, with flexible rules and procedures and sensible fiscal and tax features.
Export Development Canada's top priority must be attracting and supporting investments in Canadian-based factories rather than foreign ones. The fact that Export Development loaned Volkswagen $526 million to invest in their Mexican facilities in no way enhances Canadian jobs.
The federal government should take a cautious approach to the Trans-Pacific Partnership, with the understanding that major defects in the agreement will need to be renegotiated. The fact that the tariffs come off Japanese cars in five years, yet don't come off in the United States for 25 to 30 years, is a disaster for the industry. When the presidents of Ford, General Motors, and Chrysler here in Canada say to Minister Freeland that it is a bad deal for the auto industry, I would suggest this isn't scaremongering on behalf of Unifor. If you look at the direct and indirect jobs in Ontario, you see that these are people who create almost half a million jobs.
In aerospace, Unifor recommends using government research and development support, as well as investment support, to ensure that production and key product development programs are undertaken in Canada.
The Canadian content spinoff benefits in production offsets arising from the procurement of military and civilian aircraft should be maximized. Under the F-35 deal, we really got away from the way that we've done business historically, as we deal with regional offsets. I would suggest to you that the premise of regional offsets and their history is why we have such a strong sector here in Canada, everywhere from IMP on the east coast to Cascade on the west coast.
Unifor also recommends providing support to anchor firms such as Bombardier to ensure stability while major programs are successfully brought to market.
I'm listening to those who say the government should not invest in Bombardier. The argument is that somehow we have invested $2 billion in Bombardier over the last 50 years and they've only paid back $500 million in royalties. Nobody talks about the fact that last year alone Bombardier paid $700 million in income tax and that the workers paid $600 million. Nobody talks about the fact that in 30 years Bombardier alone has paid $17 billion in taxes, not to mention the billions more paid by the employees. I would suggest that if we are going to talk about an economy that includes strong manufacturing jobs, you have to invest as a nation.