Natural Resources Committee on Nov. 27th, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

You have two minutes and 20 seconds. Please proceed.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

We heard earlier that the Liberals don't want to cut down trees and build homes with them. They would rather treat the forestry sector with loans or subsidies. This is no way to build a country. The forestry sector has to cut down trees in order for us to build homes.

Do you believe that the forestry sector could continue if we don't cut down trees?

[Michel Lessard]

To continue to cut down trees...?

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

That's correct.

[Michel Lessard]

I hope so.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

I do, too. I wish more committee members would believe that we need to cut down trees in order to support the industry, versus loans and subsidies that we know will cost billions for taxpayers.

[Michel Lessard]

Yes. If there are no trees, then there's no industry. It's like blood for us.

During this period of time when the market is so difficult, as I said, without some government support, it's going to be very difficult to go through that.

Again, we would like to have other solutions. Increasing the housing in Canada will help. For sure, that's going to help, but that's not going to be enough.

That's why we need to be able to continue to get access to different markets, as I said, to export to Europe, as I mentioned, Africa or wherever, or have some support to be able to continue to export to the U.S.

[Corey Tochor, Conservative, Saskatoon—University, SK]

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, I would like to move a motion to continue our debate on the notice of motion, which Shannon Stubbs moved on October 17, 2025.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

That is in order. We will go straight to a vote.

(Motion negatived: nays 5; yeas 4)

Your time is up, Mr. Tochor.

We will go to Mr. Saini.

Mr. Saini, welcome to the committee.

[Gurbux Saini, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

Thank you.

Mr. Lessard, I lived most of my life in a forest community, in Williams Lake, and I feel your pain.

It's disturbing that my colleagues on the other side are saying this is a Liberal issue or our government's issue. This countervailing issue has been going on for the last 40 years, when we've had Liberal governments and Conservative governments. At the end of that time, the only way we settled it was through the World Trade Organization. We paid billions of dollars, and we got it back. Now, the U.S. government has refused to appoint judges on that committee, so we can't even go there.

I would like to hear your comments on that.

[Michel Lessard]

I'm not here to do politics, but the point—

[Gurbux Saini, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

I just want you to state the facts.

[Michel Lessard]

On the facts, the issues with the U.S. are something that have been there, as you mentioned, for decades. We were able to get an agreement, which ended in 2016. We've also been paying tax—or duties, I should say—since 2017. Since that time, we have paid around $10 billion Canadian. That's a huge amount. I'm talking about the entire industry, not just about our company. It's a huge amount. Again, that affects us.

The only way for sure, and what we hope is going to happen, is to have a settlement done soon. That's the only way to move forward.

There is another problem. When I watch the news, I see that the Trump government doesn't necessarily have much interest in a settlement. It's pretty tough to negotiate at a time when the other side doesn't want to.

If you go back to the agreement we had in 2006, first of all, there was one major issue at that time, and that was lumber. Today, we hear about lumber, yes, but we also hear about energy, cars, industry, aluminum and steel, etc. There's a lot of noise, I would say.

If we go back to 2006, there was only the lumber industry issue. After that, both governments wanted to have a settlement because they found that it was good for both countries to get that done. Again, we're not there, actually.

[Gurbux Saini, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

In the last three rounds, we won the cases at the World Trade Organization and got our money back. There is no such panel because the U.S. refuses to put people there. How can we win those cases? Why do we continue putting the blame on the government in existence today?

[Michel Lessard]

The only thing is that we need a settlement. Yes, at that time, in 2006, on the settlement, we were able to get around 80% of our money back. We're hoping that something like that will happen. At that time, we also didn't have as much at the border of the U.S. as we have today.

The only way, again, is a settlement, but we need to dance for that. We also don't yet know when a settlement could happen. That's why we're very pleased with the support the government is providing.

We have the opportunity to provide some ideas, like the ones I mentioned, for the federal government, which is what we're doing. For me, export is one of them. Matching funds is another one, and put in place the ones that have been announced as soon as possible to get the benefits of them.

[Gurbux Saini, Liberal, Fleetwood—Port Kells, BC]

The lumber business is based on supply and demand.

My friend on the other side has said that the last 10 years have been devastating. Could you tell us? In 2021, 2022 and 2023, the forest industry made the biggest profit in the history of this country.

[Michel Lessard]

Yes, during COVID times, I would say in 2020, 2021 and 2022, and mainly 2021. That was a very good year. We got prices that we never saw in the past. We're hoping to see that again eventually, but as I said, there are a lot of circumstances, just like the ones I've mentioned. Also, the high interest rate that we see in the U.S. is impacting the demand. It's certainly not helpful.

On the other side, when you're looking at the duties we're paying today with the tariffs at 45%, even though there's a demand in the U.S. market, how much would the customer absorb? Are they going to absorb 100% of the tariffs we're paying? It's something we don't know yet.

Today what I know is that there's no demand, and the tariffs have not been absorbed by the customers in the U.S. The price did not follow. The prices did not increase by 45%.

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

Thank you, Mr. Saini.

Monsieur Simard, you have six minutes to complete this second round.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

That’s generous, thank you.

Mr. Lessard, in your presentation, you talked about the development of new markets, such as southern Europe, the Middle East and North Africa.

Will that not cause a problem on your assembly line? Wouldn’t it require a shift from an imperial system to another system? Even if we were to develop new markets, wouldn’t that require some changes?

[Michel Lessard]

Yes, it would require changes, but we already made some when the market was tough during the great global crisis. It can be done. If there’s a good market and a good long‑term partnership, it’s easy to do.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

You seem to be saying that you’ve already done it. Is the cost‑benefit analysis positive despite the transportation costs?

[Michel Lessard]

No. That’s where it becomes extremely difficult and where we would need help.

Exports will require government assistance, particularly in terms of transportation. Indeed, if we were to look today at the transportation costs for Europe, the cost‑benefit analysis would certainly not be favourable. We would therefore need help with transportation, and with setting up warehouses and supporting exchanges.

There is an excellent opportunity there, but it would be difficult to achieve it without help.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

I am curious. You have clients in the United States. Someone from here, who is colourful and whom I won’t name, told us not long ago that when negotiations resume, we just need to strangle them by holding on to our wood for a while since the Americans don’t have the capacity to meet their needs.

That might be the radical way of doing things.

[Claude Guay, Liberal, LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, QC]

Can I ask the members to go outside if they want to talk?

[The Chair, Liberal, Terry Duguid]

I'm sorry. Is there a point of order?

What's the point of order?