Evidence of meeting #20 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was vehicles.
A recording is available from Parliament.
4:15 p.m.
Liberal
Lloyd Longfield Liberal Guelph, ON
Very briefly—I know I have only a minute and a half left; I have a clock in front of me—we visited the aerospace sector as a committee a few weeks ago and saw the importance to that sector of government working with industry and education. I'm really impressed with what's going on in the aerospace sector.
Is there some similar movement afoot within the automotive sector to have a cluster that's as dynamic and active as what we saw with the aerospace sector, including the government?
4:15 p.m.
National President, Unifor
I'm an aerospace person. Aerospace is what we've done well, historically, here in Canada. Canada is number four in aerospace manufacturing and has been for about two decades. About two decades ago, auto was number four in the world and today we're about number 12, heading to number 15. Why? It's because we have strong government policy in aerospace. We don't have any sort of strong policy here in auto, and herein lies what happens when you take your eye off the ball.
Those discussions are going on. GM just made a major announcement this week—700 new engineers building the type of technology we're going to need—but it's something that needs to be embraced and it's something that needs to be enhanced. That means all of us need to co-operate in that discussion.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
Lloyd Longfield Liberal Guelph, ON
In my few seconds left, the production-to-sales ratio would bear that out, that we need to have high-value production and high-value sales to be able to pay for the expensive market that we're operating within.
Thanks, everyone.
4:20 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy
That was exactly seven minutes. I like that.
Mr. Nuttall, you have seven minutes.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Alex Nuttall Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'd like to start with a question for Mr. Dias.
You mentioned a couple of times that you're excited about perhaps a new attitude toward manufacturing with the new government. Is that fair to say?
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Alex Nuttall Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON
Would you agree with the statement that we should be transitioning away from manufacturing jobs in southwestern Ontario?
4:20 p.m.
National President, Unifor
No, we definitely should not be getting away from manufacturing jobs in Ontario, but that's what's been happening in the last 10 years.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Alex Nuttall Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON
Also, if I could go to our friends at Ford here concerning the high cost of production, specifically in Ontario, yes, we hear labour, and yes, we hear all different kinds of stuff, but the biggest one I hear all the time is hydro rates and the cost of electricity. Is that still the case? Is it getting any better? We've talked about it for five, six, or seven years now.
June 14th, 2016 / 4:20 p.m.
President and Chief Executive Officer, Ford Motor Company of Canada Limited
Well, there are many ingredients that go into an investment decision, and I just talked about a few of them, certainly with how the investments are treated.
Electricity is definitely one of those ingredients, and it's getting worse, because cap and trade that's now being introduced in Ontario is going to make our challenges even more challenging, and it comes at a time when we're already having a tough time competing with my global colleagues around the world.
My challenge is this. I'm going to advocate for Canada every day for those auto investments, but at the end of the day, we're a global company and we make business decisions on business investments and what the right equation is.
With what's happened most recently with cap and trade, continued escalating electricity costs only make our job harder.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Alex Nuttall Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON
Right. Thank you.
Jerry, there are two companies in which Unifor has union representation that I'd like to ask you about. The first one is GM in Oshawa. I believe that's correct.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Alex Nuttall Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON
Where are we on those negotiations? I understand they're coming up this September. It's obviously something that a lot of people are paying attention to. Could you tell us at what stage that is? What do you see as the number one inhibitor to Oshawa's scaling up again?
4:20 p.m.
National President, Unifor
Okay, in contract negotiations, the deadline for whoever the target will be is mid-September, but we are absolutely in informal discussions. The number one priority in this set of negotiations is product, whether it's with Ford or with Chrysler, and certainly with General Motors. The number one inhibitor for years has been, to be candid with you, that the government's policy on the automotive innovation fund has been a disaster. Dianne is a lot more diplomatic in how she will explain it, but the fact is that you have other countries around the world—whether or not it's Germany, Europe, Mexico, southern United States, Japan, or Korea—that play a real leadership role because they know that the payback is within three years. If the government gives $1 billion to the industry, it's paid back in three years and then you have 22 years of gravy. The real problem has been our trying to attract that type of investment.
Also, there was a real bureaucracy between the federal and provincial governments. There was no one-stop shopping. You had to jump through all kinds of hoops all over the place, dealing with governments, dealing with this. By the time you had to make a decision, sometimes it was so tied up in the bureaucracy that you ended up just walking away from it. That happened with Ford with the Dragon program and Chrysler in Windsor. We need a one-stop program. We need some major coordination between the federal and provincial governments. We need the government to take a real active leadership role in understanding what it takes to attract the industry.
4:20 p.m.
Conservative
Alex Nuttall Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON
Perfect. I have heard that from the automakers and the unions, and quite frankly, suppliers too.
I'd like to ask you about another business very quickly if I could. You represent Bombardier in some, if not all, of its facilities. Where is Unifor on that in terms of support, investment, bailout, or whatever you like to call it, to Bombardier at the same time as we've seen outsourcing of some of the jobs? It's obviously a balance but if you could....
4:25 p.m.
National President, Unifor
No problem. Bombardier, between the company and its employees, pays over a $1 billion a year in taxes. It has received about $2 billion in the last 50 years. Do the math. It's very easy to figure this out. The question becomes, if we want a strong aerospace sector, I would suggest the federal government has to participate the way the Quebec government has.
Now, there's no question of the de Havilland facilities, which is my home. I'm clock number 28091. Am I thrilled with the idea of offloading work to China and Mexico? The answer is no. Do I realize that it has to lower the fixed costs of the Dash 8 program to compete with ATR? The answer is yes, but I would suggest that there was a smarter solution that would have kept the jobs in Canada.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Alex Nuttall Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON
Perfect. You killed it on the time. Thank you.
4:25 p.m.
National President, Unifor
Don't count on that, by the way. I know you're the chairperson, but we'll talk after.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Alex Nuttall Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON
In light of that, I'd like to move the following motion, Mr. Chair:
That, the Committee on Industry, Science, and Technology invite as part of the Study on the Manufacturing Sector, representatives of Bombardier Inc. to appear at Committee before the House adjourns, and that, should this not be possible on the part of Bombardier Inc., that the Committee convene a special meeting during the summer months at Bombardier Inc's. convenience.
Very quickly, as it's not a substantive new motion, but is regarding what's currently on the floor, we can proceed with it today.
4:25 p.m.
Conservative
Alex Nuttall Conservative Barrie—Springwater—Oro-Medonte, ON
It doesn't need to be sent to subcommittee.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Dan Ruimy
Thank you for telling me my job.
Is there any debate? We'll put the witnesses on hold for a moment.
Go ahead, Mr. Longfield.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Lloyd Longfield Liberal Guelph, ON
I think Bombardier was great to open its doors to us. We had a good tour of its facility. It opened up its financials to us. It showed us confidential information while we were there. At the end of the meeting, we asked whether it would be possible for representatives to come to the committee, and at the time they said that in June they are really tied up with the transitions of their business, so that wouldn't be possible, but they could look at things at a later time. So for us to try to strong-arm them, I would be totally against it.