Industry Committee on May 31st, 2018

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

We are back.

Mr. Masse, I'll let you go.

I just want to say that we do have some committee business that we need to get to, not that I want to limit any of this. We were supposed to be in camera. If we can leave about 20 minutes, is that enough?

All right.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have a motion that I gave notice for at the last meeting. I'd like to read the motion and bring it to a vote for the committee. It's a small motion. I'm just going to read it and then I'll speak briefly to it. I know there are potentially other motions here today. I think it speaks for itself:

That the Standing Committee on Industry hold hearings to study the proposed purchase by this government of the Trans Mountain Expansion Project pipeline and infrastructure, including: a) the terms of the purchase including the costs to taxpayers and long-term impacts of purchasing and completing this project, b) the direct and indirect impacts on Canadian businesses directly in competition with pipeline products and the use of those products in respective markets, and, c) the plan for the sale of this project once completed.

Could I speak to the motion?

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Go ahead.

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I won't get into the full (a), (b), and (c) of the motion, but I will get into the general spirit of it. Why I think it belongs here at the industry committee is that the pipeline purchase and the potential expansion of the pipeline will have direct competitive implications not only on the industry itself, that being oil and natural resources, but also on the subsequent markets the products then go to, especially given the fact that we now have public participation in the distribution of the product. That subsidization potentially could affect Canadian businesses.

For example, if in the expansion of the project and the diversion, the products going through the pipeline go to China and are used to produce steel that competes against Canadian industries, or if they're actually fuelling components, it's something that we at least need to have a discussion about and hear some witnesses on.

There are significant consequences with regard to the supply chain, the cost for consumers, and the viability of different products in the market. You have the outright industry itself in terms of how consumable oil and other energy products are used for the production of goods and services, and then, if they are publicly subsidized, you have the actual use and the competition with similar ones that you have to compete against. That's why I believe it would be appropriate to have hearings on this motion.

I will conclude by saying that I will be keeping an open mind in regard to our current studies, but if we can't get this done by the end of this session, I'm hoping that perhaps some meetings in the fall would be appropriate, so that we can provide at least a bit of a lens on the positive, potentially negative, or challenging consequences. Again, it's about amelioration for markets, consumers, and competitors when there is government intervention in this respect.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Mr. Jeneroux.

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

Mr. Chair, we on this side fully support the motion put forward by Mr. Masse. I think what you're seeing right now is that there are two parties here that are certainly willing to debate the Trans Mountain pipeline and the impact it will have on the taxpayer, and certainly now that we all own it. I think it's also important to note that there is a $4.5-billion commitment by the government to this pipeline, but that does nothing to actually get the pipeline built.

I think it would be very informative for and also helpful to the government if we undertook a study here at the committee to look at the three things that Mr. Masse put forward in his motion. Certainly we would be supportive of this coming about urgently; I'd even suggest that there would be some appetite on this side of the table to do it over the summer months too. I think that's how important this motion is.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Mr. Baylis.

[Frank Baylis, Liberal, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Well, if I were going to support a motion, I'd have to support Mr. Masse's motion. It's not that Mr. Jeneroux's motion isn't very well written too. They're both excellent motions.

In reality, this pipeline purchase falls under two ministers who are not the ISED minister. They fall under Mr. Carr, at Natural Resources, and Minister Morneau, at Finance. That's not to belittle this or to say that it's not an important issue, but it's not our issue any more than it's our issue to study agricultural issues and matters.

In that sense, I would say that we would be against it. We're coming at it with regard to the fact that we're against it strictly because it's not our minister who is involved. He hasn't been involved in any of the discussions or announcements on it.

It really sits with the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Natural Resources. Their committees are unto themselves in terms of what they choose to do or not, but that's where this should be done. I would encourage you to speak to your colleagues on those two committees to push it forward.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Mr. Jeneroux.

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Baylis, for allowing us to go back and forth a little bit here, at least, I imagine, before debate is adjourned at...or voted against.

I do respectfully disagree with the comments saying that this isn't our issue. I think it's every committee's issue, to be honest with you. I think there is a lot at stake, particularly in the industry committee. We're a very integral and important committee, if not one of the most important, in this Parliament. I think the industries that would be affected by this certainly fall within the purview of both the ISED minister and the tourism and small business minister.

I think all of those are reasons why this is something that we as a committee should come together and look at collectively. The timing is I think urgent right now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

Do we have any other speakers?

Then we shall call the vote.

[An hon. member]

I'd like a recorded vote.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

(Motion negatived: nays 5; yeas 4)

Mr. Lloyd.

[Dane Lloyd, Conservative, Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB]

If I may, Mr. Chair, I'd like to put a new motion on notice for consideration. I'd like to read it into the record:

That the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology undertake a study of four meetings to review, among other things: the impacts of US imposed tariffs on Canadian Steel and Aluminum producers and the related supply chains; and that the Committee reports the findings back to the House and make recommendations on measures that could be taken to protect the Canadian industry and its competitiveness.

I'll bring that up at the next meeting.

[The Chair, Liberal, Dan Ruimy]

The notice of motion has been received. Thank you very much.

We will suspend and then go in camera.

[Proceedings continue in camera]