Evidence of meeting #14 for Natural Resources in the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was businesses.
A video is available from Parliament.
2 p.m.
Conservative
Jeremy Patzer Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
Thank you very much, Minister, for coming here today. I really appreciate it.
Before we get going into the softwood issue, I have another quick question for you.
We heard from witnesses at our last meeting about another emerging problem. They said the environmental assessment can take at least three, and up to 10 years for new mineral projects. Under the CUSMA deal, we only have a three-year grace period before there's a requirement to regionally source 75% of lithium for our batteries. At this rate, with your government's plan for electric vehicles, how will Canada not get hit with more tariffs for another developing industry?
2 p.m.
Liberal
Mary Ng Liberal Markham—Thornhill, ON
I want to thank the honourable member for that very important question.
You've touched on something that is really important and, in fact, a key cornerstone of the renewed U.S.-Canada partnership, particularly around the environment and the importance of working on critical supply chains, the one for minerals being one of them. Certainly, those minerals are needed for the development of products that will power our new green industries.
This is absolutely a commitment, and I think you'll see that in the renewed road map between Canada and the United States. This is certainly an area where there is a real opportunity for the two countries, in building back better if you will, to work together, because there are opportunities for growth, economic growth and environmental leadership growth in those sectors.
2 p.m.
Conservative
Jeremy Patzer Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
What are you doing, then, within the government to make sure that we don't get hit with these tariffs at that three-year mark? The environmental approval process takes up to three years, so we're basically hooped. What are you doing to make sure that doesn't happen, that Canada isn't punished with more tariffs from our key trading partners?
2 p.m.
Liberal
2 p.m.
Liberal
Patrick Weiler Liberal West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC
As much as it would be very interesting to talk about critical minerals, our other study, we're here today to talk about the forestry sector and specifically the softwood lumber agreements. I was hoping we could stick to that today.
2 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Thanks, Mr. Weiler.
Mr. Patzer, I think that's a fair comment considering the minister is here for only you and one more person, and given Mr. Zimmer's concern, which he expressed earlier, that we need to ask her questions. I would hate to see us talking about something that's outside the scope of the reason she's here.
2:05 p.m.
Conservative
Jeremy Patzer Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
For sure. It's just that we have an emerging issue. I was hoping to pick her brain on that quickly while we have her here. I appreciate the comments.
Minister, yesterday your counterpart, the incoming U.S. trade representative, said we often fall into a pattern in which one sector of our economy and one segment of our workers feel as though their livelihoods and their opportunities are sacrificed for another part of our economy. She said trade policy should break this pattern. In similar terms, many Canadians would say your government's trade policy is sacrificing certain sectors of our economy, including softwood, along with all the rest of Canada's natural resources.
As trade minister, how will you break this pattern?
2:05 p.m.
Liberal
Mary Ng Liberal Markham—Thornhill, ON
Thank you so much for that question.
Let me just be clear about how important the forestry sector is to Canada's economy and to my work. As I said earlier, I certainly intend to be speaking to the new USTR once she is confirmed.
I think something we certainly would both agree on is that Canada's trade relationships and agreements, certainly with the United States, have a really strong provision around inclusive trade and ensuring that all people in our economy benefit from our agreement. That is an area that I intend to pursue as well. Coming out of the meeting with the President earlier this week, the renewed U.S.-Canada relationship includes the opportunity to implement and to work on CUSMA and particularly on benefits for small and medium-sized businesses.
I think there are certainly many areas on which both of our countries can work to ensure that we get on that road to economic recovery that will enable more job creation for people on both sides of the border.
2:05 p.m.
Conservative
Jeremy Patzer Conservative Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK
Quickly, the Senate hearing for the new U.S. trade representative made it very clear that Canada is on their radar in a few different areas, including softwood. What trade issues with the U.S. are specifically on your radar?
2:05 p.m.
Liberal
Mary Ng Liberal Markham—Thornhill, ON
I'm looking forward to my first meeting with the U.S. trade representative. The meeting that we had with President Biden and the Prime Minister earlier this week laid out a very robust road map for many areas of collaboration.
Critical supply chains are something that we are going to steadfastly work on. Solving COVID-19 and beating COVID-19 is an area that we must steadfastly must work on. That is connected to trade insofar as solving COVID-19 is directly connected to the health of our economic recovery. There are many areas on which we can work together. I'm looking forward to that working relationship and to my first conversation, during which I will certainly raise softwood lumber.
2:05 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Thank you, Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Patzer.
You are next, Mr. Lefebvre, and then the minister will have to be on her way following your questions.
February 26th, 2021 / 2:05 p.m.
Liberal
Paul Lefebvre Liberal Sudbury, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you Minister, for being here. I'm happy you were able to join us.
I'm the MP for Sudbury, which is in mining, obviously. I'm from Kapuskasing, a pulp and paper town. My dad was a welder there. I'm a bit like Mr. Cannings in that I grew up with trade disputes with the U.S. being something that affected us very often.
It's a challenging file. As we all know, we need a partner on the other side to sit down with. When they're not there it's hard to negotiate with an absent partner. I know that's what happened in the last four years. I know we were ready, willing and able to engage, but when there's no partner to engage with it's quite impossible.
I want to congratulate you and thank you for your trade diversification strategy. We understand that because of the challenges, certainly with the one major trading partner, we need to diversify. That's something I've been hearing for a long time.
The measures and the team you put in place are very promising. I think really good things will come from that for all of Canada.
I want you to touch on your views of the importance of this trade diversification strategy, the significant amount of funding and supports that you have put in, and why you believe this will give us the results we're looking for.
2:05 p.m.
Liberal
Mary Ng Liberal Markham—Thornhill, ON
Thank you so much for that important question.
This sector is really important to so many communities coast to coast to coast across Canada, including Kapuskasing and northern Ontario. We know this sector is also an incredible leader in responsible forest management and sustainable products.
Canadian businesses, particularly small and medium-sized businesses of which there are many in this sector, especially those that are emerging, make up 99% of all businesses in Canada. Today, 12% of those businesses are exporting. There is the opportunity not only to export more, but also to grow more into those markets we have access to. Canada is very enviable as the only G7 country with a free trade agreement with the other seven countries, and has access to a billion and a half customers around the globe.
We need to help our businesses and make the investments in them for this growth. Whether it's getting access to capital, or access to the supports and market research into where they may grow, is what team trade Canada is doing. Whether it is the trade commissioner service and the investments of $290 million, whether it's CanExport....
We have pivoted, by the way, as well, during the course of COVID-19 to make sure that businesses have access to that support to help them grow. This means attending virtual trade shows. It's dealing with some of the barriers that might have come up as a result of exporting in this COVID environment and helping them deal with those kinds of costs. It's for the innovative forestry sector with the IP they are developing, and paying for their IP and their patents.
There is a range of supports to help our businesses grow into those international markets.
2:10 p.m.
Liberal
Paul Lefebvre Liberal Sudbury, ON
You mentioned another very important aspect of the investment you made with respect to the trade commissioners and that growth. I've seen it first-hand from a mining perspective, having been at a PDAC round-up in Vancouver, and the importance of those individuals around the world. It really helps Canadian businesses.
Can you touch on the importance of those trade commissioners?
2:10 p.m.
Liberal
Mary Ng Liberal Markham—Thornhill, ON
I can do even better. I can share some examples.
There's a great New Brunswick company that is commercializing its wood biocomposite solutions in packaging. It's substituting plastic, so it's sustainable packaging. They use e-commerce platforms, and the trade commissioner service is helping them get into the U.S. and the European markets.
Another manufacturer of wood-sourced polymer from Alberta is benefiting from the trade commissioner service. They're helping them look for commercial partners in European companies so they can integrate some of those materials into car parts and interior finishing in manufacturing.
There are B.C. companies that are specializing in wood construction, like the ones in Richard's riding. They're innovating. The TCS is helping them get into markets not only in North America, but also in Taiwan, Japan, the Philippines and Australia.
Wood pellet manufacturers in Quebec are being helped to expand their distribution into Italy.
These are only a handful of opportunities. We know that markets in Japan, Vietnam, Germany, South Korea, Indonesia.... These investments are coming into Canada, but they're also opportunities for growth for exactly those companies that are going to create jobs anchored in Canada, and help to grow middle-class jobs.
This is the road to recovery, but it's actually long-term growth in this very important sector of our economy.
2:10 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Thank you, Mr. Lefebvre.
Minister, thank you very much. We're going to let you go now. On behalf of the committee, I want to thank you for coming out today, and thank you for indulging us with 15 more minutes than was scheduled. We appreciate it. It was good to have you back. We hope you'll be back soon.
2:10 p.m.
Liberal
Mary Ng Liberal Markham—Thornhill, ON
It's a pleasure, and it's terrific to be back at the committee. It feels like old times.
Happy weekend to everyone. I wish you all the very best, and I'll see you next week.
2:10 p.m.
Conservative
Dane Lloyd Conservative Sturgeon River—Parkland, AB
On a point of order, Mr. Chair, out of respect for the minister's time, I wanted to wait until the minister was gone to address this issue. I am a bit concerned about a decorum issue in relation to Mr. Weiler's intervention and interruption of Mr. Patzer's line of questioning.
I have been consulting O'Brien and Bosc on committee procedures on this matter. It says that it is the sole prerogative of the chair to interrupt members if their observations or their questions are off topic.
Mr. Chair, I would encourage you to state to the committee that it is not the job of other members to use points of order, and in this case, the inappropriate use of a point of order. The purpose of a point of order is to raise an issue regarding the violation of a standing order of a committee, or not usual practice of the committee.
However, it is the practice of a committee that if somebody is asking a question that's off topic or making an observation, that is the sole prerogative of the chair. I would not want to see any member of this committee usurping the role of the chair in making that decision. You can imagine a situation where any member of this committee could raise repetitive points of order about members stating things off topic. The Speaker of the House of Commons has granted a great deal of leeway in speeches on topics to get back to the point.
I would encourage you, Mr. Chair, to not allow your position to be usurped by members. Maybe in this case, it was an honest intervention, but it is your role, Mr. Chair, not the role of members, to interrupt our fellow members when they have very limited time to ask questions.
2:15 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Mr. Lloyd, thank you for that intervention. Had you gone on longer, I suspect you would have met the definition of a monologue, so I'm glad you stopped when you did.
If it makes you feel any better, if Mr. Weiler hadn't said it, I was about to. In the context of a meeting, relevance is always important, but when a witness is appearing before the committee, pursuant to the specific wording of a motion brought by one of your colleagues, I remind you that the context becomes even more important.
Thank you, and I will agree with you this much, in that I would hate to think anybody on this committee would try to usurp the functions of the chair. We all appreciate that reminder.
Mr. McLean, is this on the same issue?
2:15 p.m.
Conservative
Greg McLean Conservative Calgary Centre, AB
Yes, it is, Mr. Chair. As much as I appreciate your comments, I'd like to acknowledge that Mr. Lloyd's point is well taken, and you'll enforce that better next time, because the ability of other members to step in and usurp your role needs to be clearly defined as a non-starter.
Also, I noticed that if you're going to cut off members when they're asking questions off topic, I'd like you to also cut off witnesses when they're equally off topic.