Evidence of meeting #97 for Industry, Science and Technology in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was contract.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Liberal
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to my colleagues for their interventions.
I do want to say to the member for Windsor West—I think that is Mr. Masse's riding—that you mentioned that you were in the tool and die industry. I think my respect for you has risen even higher. As we know, all over Ontario, a lot of the shops that tool and die makers work in are mom-and-pop shops. It's a field that not many young people know about and not many people are going into. It's actually a great field to go into. You work in tiers of suppliers—tier one, two and three—and you can make a heck of a lot of money. It's very scaled.
Brian, hats off to you if you were in the tool and die business, because there are a lot of shops in Windsor, in the area you are from, and I have some family down there who are in that industry. It's something I applaud, and some of our firms' auto parts suppliers—whether it's Magna or Linamar—were founded on that basis, so kudos to you.
Chair, I want to speak to the main motion for a couple of reasons.
First off, as was noted previously, the Canadian auto industry has gone through many iterations and a very bumpy ride since the early 2000s. I do remember vividly the 2008-2009 period, which was the great financial crisis at that time, and what happened. I remember the intervention by the Obama administration, the removal of health care costs from the Detroit big three at the time, as they were called in the United States, and how full circle we've come today, with the intervention and, I would say, the collaboration between industry, labour and government to land the investments by Stellantis in Windsor, to land the investment by Volkswagen in St. Thomas, and to land a number of subsequent investments along the battery supply chain across Canada, from British Columbia to Ontario to Quebec to Nova Scotia and to many other places that will benefit.
With regard to foreign direct investment, I really hope we can focus this conversation on the foreign direct investment aspect, whether it's Toyota investing here—I just saw them outside—or folks from Ferrero Rocher, who have a plant in Brantford, Ontario, that employs 1,500 people in that community. That's because it's important to continue to attract foreign direct investment here in Canada. They're great jobs and they tend to be higher-paying jobs and to have higher benefits.
Many times when those plants are initially set up, there's obviously what I would call a transfer of knowledge, a transfer of technology, in which representatives from those firms will come to Canada. I see it in my riding in Vaughan. We have a huge manufacturing cluster, and folks will come in to install machines and train the local workforce on how to operate the machines and so forth.
I really fundamentally believe that on this frontier we are going along the same path. Canada does not have a footprint in the battery space currently. We are building that footprint with, frankly, foreign know-how. There's a thing called intellectual property that we're very well aware of, and we know that intellectual property transfers happen here in Canada via Stellantis and Volkswagen and Northvolt and others, and we're going to let that happen naturally. At the same time, I obviously share every member's concern that taxpayers' dollars will be utilized to encourage investment that is used almost completely for the benefit of Canadians. Whether it's members of the CBTU—the Canadian Building Trades Union—working to build the facility, whether it's the outside skeleton steel or the outside finishing, or whether it's the workforce that will be deemed to be the permanent workforce at the facility, which will as much as possible be made up of Canadian individuals, I think we all share that desire and that goal.
At the same time, I don't think it's healthy to get into a debate of any sort about whether or not we have foreigners from foreign companies coming here and taking jobs. I think that's a very unhealthy debate to get into. I don't think it's a debate that is healthy in any way. In terms of the number of companies operating for a year in Canada, whether they're from the U.S. or other domiciled areas that invest in Canadians, I think it's a big net benefit to our economy.
I will say with regard to the number that was revealed of 1,600 jobs, I personally don't know whether that number is correct. My understanding is that it is not a correct number.
We all know the way trade agreements work. For example, under CUSMA, I had the privilege of working in the United States, in New York city, for a number of years. I worked under an H-1B, and then I went under the temporary national visa, which you can easily get and easily work under if you're in a certain designated profession, and vice versa for U.S. professionals coming to Canada. We have programs that bring in foreigners to work in Canada, a global tech-high stream program. In less than two weeks, folks can be here.
Obviously there is a huge benefit from foreign expertise. There's a huge benefit from folks coming here with very specialized skills, whether it's a specialist coming in to work in a certain hospital, in AI or in other segments.
I don't mean to digress and I'm trying to get back to relevance.
I do share the concern from the opposition, from the folks across the aisle, with regard to making sure that taxpayer dollars being invested in a facility are invested wisely, because the reason we are here at this moment in time is not only the headlines. We all know that we obviously need to verify whether headlines are accurate. The number of jobs listed, from what we understand, from what we gather, is not accurate.
We also need to understand that in response to the Inflation Reduction Act, we had to put subsidies in place as a government, supported by virtually everyone in industry, to maintain our manufacturing footprint specifically within the auto sector. To build that electric vehicle supply chain, we needed to respond to the Inflation Reduction Act, and we did so through a number of subsidies that were put in place. We responded with agreements with a number of operators, and we will have a production footprint.
With regard to the motion itself, even the language of “structured a deal that prioritizes foreign workers over Canadian jobs”.... Anybody coming to work here in Canada has a Canadian job. Yes, we need to ensure that a majority of these jobs, if not all, are filled by Canadians. At the same time, be very cognizant of the fact that when the official opposition uses that type of language....
When Toyota set up its two plants in Cambridge and when Honda set up its plant in Alliston or companies that are foreign-domiciled invest in British Columbia, they create Canadian jobs. They will bring their workers over for a period of time and continually, because their head office is located overseas, to help make sure that the plant runs efficiently.
Perhaps I can give another example, Mr. Chair. On our break week, I visited downtown Toronto. I went to a foreign investment vehicle with a partnership here in Canada. It's called Eataly, an Italian food operator with stores throughout the world. They employ 500 workers, Canadians for the most part, at their location at Yonge and Bloor in downtown Toronto.
Yes, there are a number of individuals with Italian citizenship who work there from the parent company. Again, the investment that was made in partnership with Canadian investors—a significant one—has opened up 500 jobs in downtown Toronto. They opened up a new location in Sherway Gardens, again creating another 200 or 300 jobs for Canadians. This, to me, is about jobs, jobs, jobs. This is ensuring that Canadians get those jobs and work towards that.
When federal dollars are involved in an investment to attract investment here to Canada, I do share MP Masse's concerns and MP Perkins' concerns and those of any Canadian citizen that those jobs go to Canadians, but we must recognize that foreign multinationals or foreign companies will need to bring their expertise over to help get the facility up and running, especially and particularly when completely new technology is being put to use.
With that, Chair, I'm going to stop there. If I need to continue making a statement with regard to....
To go back, for those of you who may or may not know, I've covered this sector for over 20 years. I was one of the lead analysts at a rating agency covering the auto parts sector. I initiated coverage in all of the auto parts sector, folks. I was an analyst covering the OEMs for three years. I covered it on the bond desk for Scotia and all of the Canadian dollar debt issuers on the auto sector.
I've been to the Detroit auto show many times. I've travelled both in Europe and Asia to meet with the executives of BMW, Mercedes, Peugeot, and at the time Fiat in Torino. I do know the sector extremely well.
As a result, today I'm quite proud and I applaud what the government has done to create an entire sector. In it you see a continuum of everything in the supply chain from the auto parts suppliers to how we need to get the mines and those critical minerals away from China and delivered to our battery manufacturers and assembly plants here in Canada. I dislike using the cliché words of “transformation”, “transitional” and all of that stuff, but it's a really big development of an industry here in Canada for many generations. Let's hope it's for as long as possible. There are always these Schumpeterian creative destruction forces alive in the economy, which I love, but for many years and decades to come, it will provide great jobs.
Mr. Généreux, I think you're from the province of Quebec. Quebec is benefiting from this. I remember when we had the Sainte-Thérèse auto plant in Quebec. Hyundai was there for a while, and GM was there. Now we're seeing investment return to the province of Quebec within the auto sector, which I think is just phenomenal and fabulous news.
I think when we speak about that sentence of “prioritizes foreign workers over Canadian jobs”, I get a little dicey about that. I think these are Canadian jobs. They're for Canadians and we need to make sure that they have the opportunity to fill them, but when we need to bring in the foreign expertise to these plants, we all understand that this is the way the business world works. That's the way labour works. Canadians can be trained up to understand how this technology works so they can do the job that these individuals have been doing for literally many years back home. That intellectual property exists within the human capital of these individuals, and they can continue on that march.
Chair, I want to turn it over. Others may want to chime in on the notice of the motion. I do have much more to say, but at the same time we'll stop right there.
Liberal
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
As you know, we're missing the economic statement. I'm dying to hear if we're finally going to invest near the mines. If that had been done, we could have avoided a whole debate.
In the context of the contracts awarded to Stellantis‑LG and Volkswagen, if public money had been used close to the mines to develop the entire value chain, we could have avoided major debates today. However, legitimate questions are being asked, particularly where workers are concerned. A study must therefore be carried out.
As a result, I move an amendment to the effect that the proposed study should last six hours, maximum, instead of six meetings and that, at the end, documents should be produced in both official languages. This is fundamental. I think this amendment is a good complement to the motion modified by Mr. Masse's amendment and that we will find a consensus.
The presence of ministers will be particularly important. Very legitimate questions may be asked about the structure of the agreement and the investments that will be made, as well as their spinoffs for the Canadian and Quebec economies.
I support efforts to keep Canada and Quebec attractive to foreign investors. I'm afraid of the impact of this kind of motion that calls things into question. However, there are legitimate questions worth asking. It is for this reason that I will support the motion and propose that it be amended, firstly, so that the study lasts six hours and, secondly, so that the documents are translated into both official languages.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
Thank you very much, Mr. Lemire.
An amendment has been moved. I just want to make sure everyone understands the amendment. It proposes that the study last a maximum of six hours rather than six meetings, and that at the very end it be specified that the documents requested be produced in both official languages.
Mr. Lemire, do you want to keep the words “within seven days of this motion being adopted?” I'm asking because I'm familiar with the demand for translation and I know that it can sometimes take a little time.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
Yes, this does raise the question of resources. I'm not an expert on translation resources and I don't know how long it will take to translate these documents, but we need to make sure we receive them in both languages as soon as they've been translated.
Bloc
Sébastien Lemire Bloc Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC
I would say “as soon as possible following the adoption of this motion.”
You're right, Mr. Chair. It might not be realistic to allow seven days for translation, without knowing how many documents we'll receive.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
This would then read “that these documents be produced in both official languages as soon as possible following the adoption of this motion.”
Did everyone hear the amendment being proposed?
There are still people who want to talk about the main motion, but, as you know, we have to discuss the amendment first.
Are there any comments on the amendment proposed by Mr. Lemire?
Mr. Turnbull, you have the floor.
Liberal
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
I would like to ask for clarification about whether it's a realistic time frame for seven days.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
We just had this discussion, Mr. Turnbull, which might have been lost in translation.
I'll repeat the sentence. I'll say it in French, because I have my notes in French, and I'll speak slowly for the translators:
“that these documents be produced in both official languages as soon as possible following the adoption of this motion.”
Liberal
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
Okay, maybe it was lost in translation after all.
I agree to that. It makes sense.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
Are there any comments? I see there are none.
(Amendment agreed to)
November 21st, 2023 / 5:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Joël Lightbound
So we move on to the amended motion.
Do Mr. Perkins, Mr. Généreux, Mr. Sorbara and Mr. Van Bynen still wish to speak to the motion, now that there has been an amendment?
I'll get back to my list that I had.
Go ahead, Mr. Perkins.
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm not going to repeat everything that everyone else has said. I want to add to it, since there seems to be some concern about whether this issue is actually real.
Beside the numbers that the Korean ambassador quoted, I'll just go through a few of the jobs that are posted. NextStar Energy has posted a number of jobs. This one, for a general affairs specialist, says fluency in Korean is required. Another one says that fluency in Korean is required. Another one for material handler says asset languages are Korean.
A summary of the list of some of the jobs includes general affairs specialist, fluency in Korean; electrode quality engineer, bilingual English-Korean; module production planner, English and Korean proficiency; cell/electrode quality engineer, bilingual in English and Korean; and process quality engineer, bilingual and Korean.
Just so you don't think this is made up from NextStar, this is the Canadian job bank, the Government of Canada, where there are a number of NextStar jobs listed, and it says Korean language is an asset.
To eliminate confusion around LMIAs on the Government of Canada website and the Korean free trade agreement, it actually says on the Government of Canada's website for this job, “Other candidates with or without a valid Canadian work permit.” That is the term that allows you to come in and work at the plant without an LMIA. You just need a process through the Canada-Korea thing.
There are more than 22 permanent jobs already listed this way by NextStar. This is not made up. This is real. This is not some tweet by somebody. These are job postings that are included on the Government of Canada website.
Thank you.
Conservative
Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
If the Government of Canada is satisfied with the agreement it has signed with the various companies that are setting up in Canada, and is respectful of that agreement, I see no problem with the fact that the contracts that have been signed include provisions on jobs created, on the proportion of jobs held by Canadians. However, all the information contained in these contracts must be revealed in a very transparent way to the committee and to the Canadian public as a whole, so that everyone can verify whether these jobs are indeed jobs for Canadians. As my colleague just asked, are these jobs for Canadians or jobs subsidized by Canadians but going to North Koreans or other foreigners?
I'm in business. My riding, like Mr. Sorbara's, has several manufacturing companies. When we buy equipment, it's perfectly normal for foreign workers to come and install it or provide training. However, we're talking about a company that will employ 2,500 people, and it seems possible that 1,600 people will come from abroad to install equipment and provide training in this plant. If this is the case, we need to hear from the minister, the company's management and representatives of all the stakeholders as to how long these employees will be based in Windsor. What we understood from the beginning was that the government's goal was to create jobs for Canadians in Canada.
A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian.
The situation will eventually be the same in Quebec. As the saying goes, “What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.”
Mr. Sorbara, you're right. Since Northvolt is a Swedish company, there are bound to be Swedes coming to work in Canada for a while. Will they require employees to speak French, English and even Swedish when they open positions? Will these positions be permanent or temporary? Will these people coming to install equipment be on the job for six months or some other period?
The company has 30 years' experience in battery manufacturing plants in South Korea. I imagine it won't take 30 years to get this equipment up and running in Canada, and for production and productivity to be optimal. I imagine it will take some time for this equipment to be installed and operational, and for staff to be trained. If that's the case, let's hear it. That's what transparency is all about.
In 2015, the Prime Minister said very clearly that he was going to form the most transparent government in Canadian history. I'm sorry to say that the complete opposite is happening.
The parliamentary secretary comes here and says that the Conservatives don't have a plan for the environment and that they're afraid of these investments. It's completely stupid to say things like that. In the history of Canada, the Conservative government has created the most free trade agreements. It has developed the Canada we live in today. What we've had for the past eight years is debt. I'm reading what's happening in the House of Commons. They've just said that this Liberal government has no objective for balancing the budget over the next ten years. There's something that isn't working and never will.
To get back to the motion and the contracts we're looking at, we need to make sure we get the information the government has relied on. We need to have access to it in a transparent way. If it's true that 1,600 South Korean workers will be coming to work in Canada, we need to make sure that these are temporary jobs to avoid subsidizing permanent jobs for foreign workers in Canada.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Liberal
Liberal
Tony Van Bynen Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll be very brief.
When I look at this situation where we're trying to encourage foreign investment into the Canadian economy, I reflect back on a situation that I was directly involved in, the global enterprise at Celestica. There was an opportunity there for us to compete with a number of other municipalities and jurisdictions.
We were successful. We created hundreds of jobs in our small community, and we were able to do that on the basis of collaboration. We engaged the federal, the provincial, the regional and the municipal authorities to work together to let Celestica know that it was important for us to have the jobs that their investment would create for our community.
Those jobs were important in terms of creating additional employment for our community, but one of the things that I keep hearing now is that these jobs are going to foreign workers. Well, the foreign workers pay rent and they buy groceries. They support retail industries, and that money is being spent locally. I think we sometimes find it all too easy to overlook those things.
What's disappointing for me is the tone in which all of this happens. How does this portray Canada? Does it portray Canada as a country that welcomes investment, wants to collaborate and work with people, as opposed to kicking around every project like a football and vilifying the investments? If I were an investor, I certainly wouldn't be interested in dealing with those kinds of circumstances.
I think we should overlook this oppositional method and start putting before us the importance that this has to our country, to the jobs that it creates for Windsor and to the secondary jobs that it supports in that area.
I would hope that we would develop an attitude of welcoming, an attitude of collaboration, an attitude of working together, so that Canada not only becomes that but strengthens its profile as a place to invest.
Liberal
Liberal
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
Thanks, Chair.
I appreciate Mr. Van Bynen's comments. I appreciate the comment about tone and how we want to be welcoming of investment.
Also, it strikes me that there could be a chord of xenophobia through this a little bit too. It's in there in terms of—
Conservative
Rick Perkins Conservative South Shore—St. Margarets, NS
Oh, come on. [Inaudible—Editor] of the desperate.
Liberal
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
Thank you, Mr. Perkins, for interrupting me once again and speaking out of turn, which is....
Liberal
Ryan Turnbull Liberal Whitby, ON
You shouldn't, actually, because it's against the rules of committee.