Government Operations Committee on May 1st, 2024

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

You can continue, Mr. Kusmierczyk.

[Irek Kusmierczyk, Liberal, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

I do want to speak on this issue, and I will take this opportunity to speak on this issue, as it impacts my community greatly because we do have a battery plant in my community. We have a battery plant that has created 2,000 jobs for local workers in my community and will create an additional 2,500 permanent jobs for local Canadian workers in my community.

It is important for me to talk about this. Again, Mr. Perkins is persistent in bringing back this motion that has been voted down in the past, so I will be persistent in what I want to say as well.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

We have Mr. Perkins on a point of order.

Go ahead.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Regarding the rules around filibustering, MP Kusmierczyk doesn't seem to understand that there's no repetition.

It takes quite a talent to do that, which clearly this MP doesn't have, because that's about the fifth time today and twice already in 15 minutes that he's said that.

I'd ask the chair to keep him on relevance and to stop him from repeating himself.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Mr. Kusmierczyk, Mr. Perkins is right on the repetition part. If you are going to continue, we do have to follow that. We do give, obviously, very wide breadth for the debate, but repetition is something we're trying to avoid.

I think that Mrs. Atwin had a point of order.

Go ahead, please.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Yes, Mr. Chair, I think it's inappropriate to have made the comment that Mr. Perkins did regarding a lack of talent of the member. I don't think we need to delve into personal attacks like that, so if we could get back to work and what we're trying to achieve, that would be great.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

On the same point of order, Chair—

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Mr. Genuis, are you serious?

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

I don't think it's unparliamentary to say that a person lacks a specific talent.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

We're in debate.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

If Mr. Perkins said I lacked talent in baking or singing, I wouldn't consider that an attack. I would consider that accurate.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks very much. Everyone's point is taken.

Mr. Kusmierczyk, you have the floor, but watch the repetition, please.

[Irek Kusmierczyk, Liberal, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

I appreciate your words, and I want to reassure you that I am just about to conclude here. In the next moment or two, I will be more than happy to yield the floor.

I did want to say that I would never impugn or disrespect someone by commenting or making a snide remark about a committee member's character, talent or skills. I think that is below the belt.

Of course, I am happy to talk about the Conservatives' inability to create jobs when they were in power eight years ago. That's not me saying that; it's their track record that speaks volumes. I'd rather let their track record speak, and I'm going to refrain from making comments about their skill level, talent level or their character.

What I do want to say is that, again, going back to my original point, Mr. Perkins keeps bringing this motion forward, and it keeps getting defeated here. It's a motion that Mr. Perkins wants us to listen to, but I'd rather listen to the CBTU, which sent a letter to this committee last week stating that they do not want to see this motion move forward.

They were explicitly clear about that. I'd rather listen to Mr. Sean Strickland. I'd rather listen to the CBTU that said they don't want this to proceed. I'd rather listen to the APMA, Automotive Parts Manufacturers' Association, that says they do not want to see this motion move forward because they see it as a risk to the investments that were already made.

I'd prefer to listen to the Canadian Chamber of Commerce that signed a letter stating very clearly that this will do irreparable harm to Canada's ability to attract additional investments. This is the letter that they had circulated to the entire committee.

I'd rather listen to, not only the APMA and the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, but also the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters that said that the committee risks doing irreparable harm to Canada's investment attraction negotiating position.

I'd rather listen to the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers' Association, which includes companies like Stellantis in my neighbourhood, and the Global Automakers of Canada. These are the folks saying that they don't want to see this motion move forward.

Lana Payne, the president of Unifor, the largest union in Canada, says that she doesn't want to see this motion go forward. The president at the time of Unifor local 444 was Dave Cassidy. This is the union that represents thousands of auto workers in my community, and they will be representing the battery folks who will be building the batteries in my community. Mr. Cassidy was absolutely clear and explicit in saying that he doesn't want to see this motion move forward.

This is what he said when he was up in Ottawa meeting with Prime Minister Trudeau.

President Cassidy said—

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Sorry, Mr. Kusmierczyk. We have a point of order.

Go ahead, Mr. Perkins.

[Rick Perkins, Conservative, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

This motion was moved long after the union leader he's referencing actually left his job, so he didn't comment on this. I would ask that the member at least speak to accuracy when he's doing this.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Continue, Mr. Kusmierczyk.

[Irek Kusmierczyk, Liberal, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

I just want to state this is what Dave Cassidy, the president of Unifor Local 444, representing auto workers in my community, said when he met the Prime Minister of Canada in Ottawa:

My message is simple, this has turned into nothing but political hay.

He was talking about the Conservatives' motion trying to undermine the investment in the Stellantis battery plant, trying to create hay about this. He went on to say:

We have to make sure all the theatrics and all the political stuff is gone.

He was very clear about that. He was also very clear when he said:

If it was up to the Conservatives, we would not have this investment in Windsor today. They look at it as corporate welfare instead of a return on an investment for all the workers that will be there.

This is straight from the president representing the workers in Windsor.

It is absolutely clear why we need to vote on this motion and send it back. This is really important, and as I said, I'd rather listen to the CBTU and the APMA. I'd rather listen to the Chamber of Commerce. I'd rather listen to Unifor, and I certainly would rather listen to Unifor Local 444 that represents all the auto workers in my community.

That's all I have to say at this time. I'm looking forward to listening to the opinions and insights of committee members from both sides.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thank you, Mr. Kusmierczyk.

Is there no one else? Can we move to a vote on this?

Go ahead, Mr. Bachrach.

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

If we go back to the message that was shared with the committee from the building trades unions, I believe the sense in that statement was that there are negotiations that are ongoing. There's a concern that the committee's deliberations will compromise those negotiations. The desire from the building trades was that the committee put this on ice for a month and potentially return to it down the road, pending the outcome of those conversations that are going on.

With that, I think it's more prudent to vote to adjourn debate on this motion before us and pick it up at a later date than to have a vote on it and risk having that vote compromise the negotiations.

I'll move that we adjourn debate.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

You can't put a condition on a motion to adjourn, but I understand, so is it just a motion to adjourn?

[Taylor Bachrach, NDP, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

You can, but then it's debatable.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Exactly.