International Trade Committee on Feb. 20th, 2020

[Michael Kram, Conservative, Regina—Wascana, SK]

You mentioned that because northern Saskatchewan is landlocked, there is little opportunity for you to export offshore.

Is there anything that can be done with improved infrastructure, such as rail or highways, that would be beneficial to you in getting your products to international markets?

[Tracey Gorski, Manager, Sales and Marketing, NorSask Forest Products LP]

Hi. Thank you for that question. I'll try to answer that.

Our rail line was abandoned many years ago here in Meadow Lake, Saskatchewan. We had a rail line that served this community for many years under CN, and then it was sold to OmniTRAX, which was Carlton Trail Railway.

There are three big manufacturers in Meadow Lake, one is the pulp mill, the OSB manufacturer and then us. At that time, we all used the rail line to get our products to market. At this time, we do not have the capacity. With the rail line abandoned, all of our equipment goes by truck.

When you're looking to hit the offshore markets, say, trucking from Meadow Lake to B.C. and then loading and getting over to the Asian market, it's very costly. Because we're one sawmill, we are limited in regard to being competitive.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you.

[Tracey Gorski]

Our market per se may not be as big as, let's say, a B.C. or Alberta producer.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

We will go on to Mr. Badawey.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I appreciate the opportunity to sit on this committee today. As many know, I chair the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities. The reason I'm here today is the crossover that this issue and all the trade issues have for both committees. It's a pleasure to be here and to bring forward some thoughts on behalf of that committee.

First off, Madam Chair, I want to preface my comments by stating that I do anticipate the passing of CUSMA, which will in fact align with CETA and, of course, the CPTPP. That's what I'm going to premise my comments on today with the witnesses we have before us.

There was a mention earlier by Mr. Robertson of the trillion-dollar procurement program that we must embark on. In fact, if Canada wants to and needs to invest in strategic infrastructure investments to strengthen our overall international trade performance, it's imminent that we begin to work with our different committees here in Parliament, but more importantly with our partners, both in the public sector—municipal in particular—and in the private sector.

I will be bringing forward today to committee a few motions that will align with some of that direction, including a study focusing on current and anticipated labour shortages throughout the country, in particular as it relates to the transportation sector; undertaking a study on Canada's rural digital infrastructure and prospective solutions to the gaps in wireless infrastructure deployment throughout rural Canada; looking at the gas tax; and, of course, once again, the need to work with our municipal and private sector partners, as well as our indigenous communities, to put in place strategic investments that align with our trade agreements such as CUSMA, CETA and the CPTPP.

I want to ask a question that is primarily for Mr. Robertson of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute.

With respect to your comment on the trillion-dollar procurement program, I'll throw a question out there for you. I'm going to stop talking and allow you to comment on what I've just talked about and the importance of same. How important is it for Canada, as a nation, to work binationally in establishing our procurement and, of course, the strategic infrastructure investments that will align with and complement the trade agreements we have in place?

[Colin Robertson]

I think it's vitally important. When we export, [Technical difficulty—Editor] which port it's going to go to. Sometimes from Saskatchewan it goes through the United States and out through Portland and Seattle, whereas American goods sometimes will come up to Canada. Integrating those, that infrastructure, as I said in my remarks, is vital, especially as the United States appears to be, probably in the next administration—whether Democrat or Republican and working with Congress—prepared to put in really big money. I mentioned trillions of dollars. In fact, it could come to a couple of trillion dollars.

We need to be a piece of that, both in the access to it in terms of procurement but also in linking up rail, road and air. Again, it's that North American capacity we have to become the truly competitive platform for the world. We now have the pieces in place, but we need the infrastructure. I would applaud what you and your committee are doing and your suggestions on how we can move forward, and I encourage you to talk with your American counterparts, because what really will make this happen is legislator talking to legislator.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

If I may, Madam Chair, I think that discussion has to continue, not only across standing committees here in Parliament but also across borders. Once again, I would be very interested to hear, in moving the yardsticks down the field to get ourselves to that goal line, what thoughts you and many witnesses have on those issues and also on what those strategic investments should be.

I'll ask a question. With respect to, as you mentioned, rail, road, air and water, of course in my riding in Niagara we have the Great Lakes, which are binational. With the trade that's going to be coming in from and out of the Midwest—a lot of it—especially in regard to going over to the EU and other diversified areas versus just the United States, we're recognizing that the Great Lakes, and of course the St. Lawrence Seaway and the Welland Canal, will be used a lot.

What investments do you see with respect to binational investments, infrastructure investments among the rail, the water, the air and the roads, between both Canada and the U.S., as well as internationally?

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

I'm sorry, but I have to interrupt.

Mr. Robertson, could you give us a short answer? My apologies, but just a short answer, please, because you have 20 seconds remaining.

[Colin Robertson]

Okay. I'll just say that NASCO, which is tri-country, has come up with a whole series of excellent recommendations, which I would refer to your committee.

[Vance Badawey, Liberal, Niagara Centre, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much.

We go now to Mr. Savard-Tremblay for two minutes.

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

How can I say something intelligent in two minutes? When I was teaching and improvising, three hours was often not enough.

I'll come back to the representatives of the Réseau québécois sur l'intégration continentale.

Mr. Pépin, you said that there are provisions on working conditions in the automobile industry, but that for the rest there are few or no provisions, apart from intentions. Have I summarized your statement correctly?

[Normand Pépin]

Yes, that sums it up very well. In addition, intentions regarding protection against discrimination in the workplace were watered down at the last minute.

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

With jobs comes industry. What do you think of the rules of origin provisions in this agreement, if you've studied them, of course?

[Normand Pépin]

There are the rules of origin and the problem related to the aluminum industry, which you have raised here several times. That industry does not have the same protection as the steel industry, no matter what the government says. There is no protection for cast aluminum. It only has to have been processed to some degree in North America for it to pass the test, which is very insufficient to protect jobs and future investments in this industry, particularly in the Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean region.

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

You assess that this may be problematic for jobs and the expansion of aluminum smelters. Is that correct?

[Normand Pépin]

That's what the unions in this sector are saying, and I have complete confidence in their assessment.

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

Beyond your involvement in the network, you work in the union environment, if I'm not mistaken.

[Normand Pépin]

That's right. I work at the Centrale des syndicats démocratiques. We don't have aluminum workers, but we know them.

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

It's a small community, after all.

[Normand Pépin]

Yes, that's it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Judy Sgro]

Thank you very much. That's it.

Mr. Blaikie.

[Daniel Blaikie, NDP, Elmwood—Transcona, MB]

Thank you.

Mr. Vanderpol, I have two questions in two minutes. First, given the issue around August 1 and the dairy year, do you think that if the ratification is completed prior to August 1 or the agreement is implemented prior to August 1, it will have enough impact on your industry to justify an additional compensation package based on the impact of the time that the deal is ratified?

[Philip Vanderpol]

Definitely, we have, in fact, calculated what we think that cost will be.