International Trade Committee on Feb. 18th, 2020

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

In terms of the mitigation I talked about, in light of this situation, the scenario of these mills shutting down, have you presented a plan to this government that would mitigate some of the harm from the fact that we don't have a softwood lumber agreement included in NAFTA or in a side chapter? How would you like to see—

[Mark Rowlinson]

We have presented a number of plans to provincial governments and to federal governments. The first thing we need is to have those illegal softwood lumber duties lifted. That's the first thing we need.

It is an integrated North American market, but as Ken mentioned, it's essential that we have more value-added manufacturing in the forestry sector, in the wood sector, in this country, rather than just shipping raw logs offshore as we are currently doing. The plan needs to include fair trade, which we don't currently have, and more value-added manufacturing in Canada. That's how you're going to create jobs in the forestry sector.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

So as a committee, we could look at what we can do to help you get that value out of the forestry products utilized here in Canada.

Is that fair to say?

[Ken Neumann]

Just on the value added, that's an issue we have been raising for years and years. We've been ringing that bell. The fact is you continue to cut the logs. You float them up the river. You load them onto a ship. You send them over to Asia, and they come back maybe as this furniture that we're currently sitting at. It makes absolutely no sense.

We've been blowing that horn. We've seen mill after mill closed down.

The softwood issue has been around not just since yesterday or two years ago; it's been around for many years. We've been successful before the courts, and we're still struggling with it today.

We've lost thousands and thousands of jobs, and those jobs aren't going to be coming back.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Yes, that's really sad.

Am I done?

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

You have 40 seconds left.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Back to you, Mr. Lowe. I want to quickly talk about the beef sector again. You have a feedlot in southern Alberta. With the U.S.-China deal that's been rumoured, does the fact of our being part of NAFTA enhance our ability or detract from it? How do you see that impacting your operation?

[Bob Lowe]

I think it enhances our ability to trade with any place. If we're having trouble trading with our closest neighbour, how does any other country in the world think they can trade with us?

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

So you're not looking at it as threat at all.

[Bob Lowe]

It's not a threat at all, no.

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Okay.

I'll stop there, Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

All right, thank you very much.

Mr. Sheehan.

[Terry Sheehan, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Thank you very much.

Thank you very much for all your testimony today. It's very important as we undertake this tremendously important trade deal for Canada and for my riding of Sault Ste. Marie. We are a steel town but we're also a border town, and a lot of that trade comes right through my riding.

When we talk about the section 232 tariffs, we were on the front line of that battle. We've travelled down to Washington with the trade committee, the industry committee, the steel caucus. The steelworkers, both on the Canadian side and the American side, played a critical role. Our good friend Leo was referenced by many of our American friends down there about lobbying.

One of the things I wanted to ask about was the significant changes we've made to our trade regime over the last five years, including in 2016 the length of time a penalty would remain on a bad player and some consultation. Then were was anticircumvention, antiscoping, etc. The one piece was union participation. Having heard from the steelworkers who testified here at the CITT hearings—and the representations they made were significant—we won cases because of that particular testimony. I think that was critical.

In particular to your presentation, Ken, how could the steelworkers launch a case successfully, as they've done with union participation?

[Ken Neumann]

Obviously, we'd need a legislative change giving us that status. I'm sure you can attest to the fact we work hand in hand with the companies, the Canadian Steel Producers Association—which I understand will be testifying later. We recognize the importance of these particular jobs. Mark, my assistant, spends a lot of his time in Ottawa before the CITT. We've had people from Tenaris and Saskatchewan and Manitoba to come here to give testimony to protect us from unfair dumping, so that we can continue. Just recently we're getting favourable decisions.

Our union counterpart in the United States has access. We have access to file trade cases on rubber, tire. We have filed in excess of 80 cases, I think it's close to 90, and the fact is that we work hand in hand with the employers to protect those jobs and those communities.

Currently we had a step in the right direction when Minister Morneau made an amendment that we have the right to participate. That doesn't give us the right to file a complaint when we can see pipe coming by our facility in Calgary or Regina, whatever the case may be. We should have that right. That's something we're going to work towards and expedite, and we're going to be working with the CSPA because we've got that trust. We're with them hand in hand when we're here in Ottawa defending our interests to make sure that we're not getting pushed over by China or some of these other countries who are just basically looking for some place to dump their product.

To us it's very important. The fact is we've lost capacity in the steel industry. You know it from the area you come from. I'm sick and tired of bankruptcies and our companies going under and the devastation for our members who work in those communities and have spent their entire lives there. It means a lot to us and we have an opportunity. It can only be done by the government seeing the need of the trade unions to have the right to file complaints on behalf of their workers.

[Terry Sheehan, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Thank you very much.

I'll move to you, Mr. Yussuff.

[Hassan Yussuff]

Very briefly, I want to echo the point Ken is making. It seems quite absurd. The employers have the ability to file a complaint under the legislation, but the worker has no ability. Who speaks for the workers as to how these cases are viewed? Quite often I think most of the employers obviously have a self interest, but specifically in regard to the impact on workers, only the unions can do that in a very definitive way.

When the minister was looking at what else he could do in regard to the changes he was making, this was one of the points we supported for our colleagues and the steelworkers to see this amendment made. I think it would be good for this committee to recommend this, because there are no obvious reasons as to why unions don't have the ability to file a complaint, especially when their members are impacted by cheap imports coming into the country, or a surge from other countries who can get access to the States, and who are able to access Canada using that.

Some good work has been done to monitor that, but I think, more importantly, the right of the union should have to file a complaint is a fair one that's been demanded for quite some time.

[Terry Sheehan, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

You have 40 seconds.

[Terry Sheehan, Liberal, Sault Ste. Marie, ON]

Okay. I'll go with a question for the cattlemen's association. It's almost a statement. I know that they're interested in expanding. They've enjoyed some success with the TPP and a couple of tariff reductions. They've met with me about looking at areas in northern Ontario as well in order to expand and to grow. Again, we're very close to the border up there. I don't know if there are any plans to look at northern Ontario in a more fulsome way in the future.

[Fawn Jackson]

The access we have gained over the last number of years has seen an impressive demand signal sent to the Canadian beef industry. Last year, we saw an increase of just about 20% of our exports. We are looking to continue to grow, hopefully, for the contribution that we can make to the economy and to the environment here in Canada.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

I'll move on to Mr. Savard-Tremblay.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Good afternoon. Thank you all for being here today and making time for us in your busy schedules.

My question is for the United Steelworkers representatives.

As you know, the Bloc Québécois has been very active on the aluminum front. We have spoken out against the difference in the way steel and aluminum are treated, and your position today confirms that there is a difference. In your brief and your comments to the committee, you indicated that you would have wanted the same measures applied to both.

What are the potential consequences of both sectors not having access to the same protections?

[Ken Neumann]

I'm sorry, but I missed part of your question because I didn't get the translation. I think I get the gist of it. I'll let Mark answer some of it.

Look, on the aluminum sector, as I've said, I've had the opportunity to be in Quebec several times. I've been to Alma and the Rio Tinto facilities. I remember that prior to the tariffs being imposed, we had a commitment from Rio Tinto that they were going to expand. They had seen an opportunity, as the U.S. was using a lot of aluminum.

Like I say, we're very disappointed now that because of what's transpired that expansion is not going ahead. There's no reason why you shouldn't have the same for steel and aluminum. The fact is that when you look at the tripartite agreement with Mexico and at the number of vehicles Mexico has been building, you see that they're now building in excess of three million vehicles. They have surpassed Canada, which is at 2.3 million. The fact is, that's going to require some aluminum. To us, that is a very significant factor.

I'll let Mark deal with the rest of it.

[Mark Rowlinson]

I'll touch on the risk involved. As Mr. Neumann pointed out, the auto sector is growing in Mexico, but the country doesn't produce any aluminum, so the question is this: Where will Mexico get the aluminum it needs? It should get it from us, here in Canada, since we are by far North America's top aluminum producer. What we are seeing more and more, however, is that Mexico is turning to China, Russia and other countries for its aluminum supply. As you said, aluminum and steel don't enjoy the same protections in the auto sector. The Canadian market will likely continue to shrink. It's not adequately protected. That's our fear.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Mexico could keep buying from China, then.