Debates of Feb. 8th, 2005

Supply

[Brian Masse, NDP, Windsor West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to ask my colleague from the industry committee a question on this important debate. In his speech he referenced the sad closure of Gildan. I know, in the context of that closing, that there was a big CEO payout, which was interesting to see at the same time. What is interesting, and people should know, is that the company was profitable in Canada. It was very viable but is now closed.

I would like the member to expand on his comments in terms of the repercussions to people in that area, of losing this manufacturing facility, and whether or not he feels that could have been avoided had we been more progressive on this file?

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Rivière-Du-Loup—Montmagny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his question.

The first thing we observe is that the closures occur mainly in Quebec and Ontario. The Gildan announcement was a very sad one, and others may follow elsewhere.

Another important aspect is the fact that the people who work for these companies are often long-standing employees, with 20, 25 or 30 years of service. In 1995, the federal government abolished a program designed to province financial assistance to older workers as they moved toward retirement. We have been trying ever since to reintroduce this program in the employment insurance plan. Today, this is even more important.

The textile and apparel industries need a sound assistance program, but we have to expect job losses as the ones we see right now. These people who contributed to our society for 20, 25, 30 or 35 years have earned the right to be acknowledged. This program should be reinstated as soon as possible. Not only is there a need for it in the short term, but also more and more workers will be impacted by the new realities of market globalization and international competition.

In Montmagny, over one hundred workers aged 55 or over are in a difficult situation right now. They need as much opportunity as possible to get back into the work force, through active measures, but the reality is that a good number of them will not get other jobs. They deserve, not passive measures, but a program that would get them through to retirement age.

If a decent reserve had been maintained in the EI fund in the past few years, the federal government would be the first to come up with such a program. But that money has been used for purposes other than those for which employees and employers paid into the fund.

These workers, most of whom are women, absolutely need some help to overcome this obstacle. Active measures are needed, but so is a program of passive measures that will enable people to earn an income until they retire. Such is their reality. Efforts must be made to ensure that lay-offs are kept to a minimum. When people are laid off, every effort must be made to ensure that workers who have devoted their lives to the company can benefit from the appropriate measures. This is a very important goal.

Department officials who came before the Standing Committee on Industry, Natural Resources, Science and Technology told us that the total economic activity would not be so seriously affected. But the reality is that whole communities are being hit very hard, Huntingdon in particular, which my colleague will be speaking about shortly. Similar jobs have been lost in my area, in Montmagny, as well as elsewhere. In Cowansville, Consoltex is about to experience job losses if steps are not taken promptly. If this does come to pass, those communities will be hard hit.

This is the reason the federal government must take steps to complete its intervention plan as recommended. I hope that the House will support that recommendation unanimously this evening. It is essential for the clothing and textile industries.

[Marcel Gagnon, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague has hit the nail on the head with regard to job losses and factory closings. Behind this phenomenon there are human beings. He has been talking about human beings, but I would like him to elaborate some more.

I know people in this situation. In Trois-Rivières, after a large factory was closed, I knew a couple who had worked in the factory and had not quite enough income to use RRSPs to save for the future. At 57 and 58 years old, these two found themselves with the same responsibilities but almost no income, and a bit too late to start their education over again and find new jobs.

I find it painful to see such situations, when the government could be doing something to fix them. We need only think, for example, about the $800 million invested in the sponsorship program, of which at least $110 million is being investigated by Justice Gomery's commission. Moreover, in the last five years the number of public servants has risen by 49,000, which costs $7.2 billion in salaries.

Would it not have been possible to have more foresight and to help people who dedicated their lives to a company and then lost their jobs despite their good work?

[Paul Crête, Bloc, Rivière-Du-Loup—Montmagny, QC]

Mr. Speaker, obviously the words of the hon. member for Saint-Maurice—Champlain are very eloquent. Here we have more than 50 people from the FTQ who have come from Montreal to bear witness to the situations they have faced or are now facing.

If the federal government wants to do something practical in the short term, quickly, to show that it is ready to treat these people fairly, in the coming budget there must be a program to help older workers.

When there is a surplus of $45 billion in the employment insurance fund, there must be a way to find a few hundred million dollars using the premiums these people have paid. It is not the federal government's money; it is money that was taken from the pockets of these workers in order to pay for something other than what they were paying premiums for. Now it is time to treat them with justice.

[Alain Boire, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today that the Bloc Québécois proposed this motion relating to the closure of clothing and textile plants. This is a very alarming situation, and many more closures are to be expected.

As we know, the federal government was slow to react to that situation. Its assistance package is inadequate, especially for the plant workers in Huntingdon, in my riding, who have lost their jobs.

The Bloc Québécois is concerned about this situation and has worked together with local stakeholders to resolve it for the workers who have seen their plants shut down. Today, I urge the federal government to act, as I did a few weeks ago in this House.

Many textile and apparel plants have closed, and closures will continue over the next few weeks and months.

Like many ridings in Quebec, my riding of Beauharnois—Salaberry was hard hit. On December 13, two plant closures were announced in Huntingdon, with 800 jobs lost. That represents 40% of all manufacturing jobs in the area. That is a huge percentage.

In Huntingdon, 30% of the population in general is living under the poverty line, and 70% of the working population is employed in plants which will be closing. These two plants were spending $25 million on wages and accounted for $600,000 annually in municipal taxes.

On February 1, the Gildan clothing company announced it was closing two plants, whose operations will be transferred to the United States. This meant the loss of 285 jobs, including 115 in Quebec. In these two cases, the workers that were laid off will have a hard time finding new jobs. Nearly half of them never graduated from high school. The 800 jobs lost in Huntingdon and the 285 at Gildan's are in addition to the disastrous 1,340 previous layoffs.

The federal government was slow to react and the measures it proposed are inadequate. The CATIP and CANtex programs have failed to prevent major closures.

All the assistance available under the CATIP has been used up. These programs are but a drop in the ocean. They do not provide enough funding to significantly improve the situation of businesses in difficulty.

On December 9, I tabled in this House a petition signed by 2,845 workers from Huntingdon, to make the federal government aware of the growing problems in our textile industry. In response to this cry of alarm from workers in my riding, no assistance was forthcoming.

On December 14, 2004, in response to pressure from the Bloc, the government announced in a hurried fashion, hastily, three measures to help the textile industry.

The most galling thing about it is that the federal government had been aware for a long time that something was afoot and it did not do anything. The Bloc Québécois had been mentioning for several months the serious threat of massive job losses in the area of textile and had been calling for the implementation of transition measures. Ottawa always turned a deaf ear to those entreaties.

The federal government slashed the employment insurance system to pieces. It terminated POWA in 1997. It accumulated huge budget surpluses, up to $9.1 billion dollars, at the expense of workers and the provinces.

It must set quotas on Chinese imports under the protocol regarding China's entry into the WTO and prevent the Canadian market from being flooded with highly competitive Chinese products.

We also need to put in place measures to encourage the use of textiles from Quebec and Canada by allowing the duty-free entry of clothes made abroad, from textiles of Canadian origin, and guarantee to local textile producers an additional market outlet for their products.

When that is consistent with international agreements, we could also adopt a buy local policy for uniforms and clothes for the government. By so doing, we would ensure stable orders to part of the industry. An international policy capable of averting low-cost offshoring should also be adopted.

Canada should enhance its negotiating position by setting an example and by signing the three core ILO agreements, ILO being the International Labour Organization, which have yet to be signed, namely Convention 29 on Forced Labour, Convention 98 on the Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining and Convention 138 on Minimum Age.

We are also asking the government to impose labelling indicating where the products came from, that is the exact place of manufacturing. This measure will have the effect of informing consumers on what they are buying. If they are better informed, they will be in a better position to make informed choices on the production methods that they find acceptable.

Assistance to textile workers who will lose their jobs must also be provided. This will be totally necessary, because some businesses will inevitably close their doors. Given the low education and the older age of workers in this sector, many of them will not be able to re-enter the workforce. They will thus need a program such as POWA, which will allow older workers to make the transition between employment insurance benefits and retirement.

The Bloc Québécois believes that Ottawa should pay the maximum amount provided by the Employment Insurance Act with respect to training and should transfer to Quebec the share to which it is entitled. The yearly shortfall for the Government of Quebec is over $200 million.

The government must put in place a program to help modernize the clothing and textile industries that will stimulate both research and development as well as creation.

The amounts that were added to CANtex last December, that is $50 million over five years, are totally inadequate. Furthermore, the money is needed now, not in five years. Thus, the government must invest more money in the short term in this program and expand its scope.

It is not too late for industries that survived NAFTA, and which will survive the WTO, to recover, provided that the government wakes up and gives them a little help now.

[Réal Lapierre, Bloc, Lévis—Bellechasse, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask a question to my colleague whose riding has recently been devastated by the closing of plants, particularly in the clothing industry.

First of all, can he tell us whether he thinks the transition measures taken by the government are satisfactory? Can he also tell us if those measures have been really effective and if they will have an impact on the future of the industry in his own riding?

[Alain Boire, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Mr. Speaker, given that situation, if we refer to the programs that have been announced hastily, the measures taken by the government are far from satisfactory. As a matter of fact, they do not help at all the workers in those industries, since 800 jobs will be lost and a portion of them have been lost already.

At this point, we must think of the workers who have been hit by that cataclysm, so to speak, and put programs in place to help them. POWA is being mentioned. It used to be in place. However, it was cancelled in 1997. Therefore, it could be easily reinstated to help those older workers, 53% of which in my riding have not even completed a secondary 5 education. How can they find a new job at the age of 55? Of course, I am not saying that going back to school at that age is not feasible, but it is very difficult, even more so since they have not reached the secondary 5 level.

Therefore, we must find effective ways to help those people on the ground. Some of them will be able to find another job. Others will go back to school, but we must also help them to get back into the labour force. We are in a situation where the government must put in place good programs to help people on the ground.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague for his work on this matter. Long before his region was affected as it was in December, he was very active not only within the Bloc Québécois caucus, but also in the House to alert us to this issue. He tabled a petition with more than 2,500 signatures from people in the Huntingdon area calling on the federal government to intervene quickly. He did this several weeks before the Huntingdon tragedy.

I want him to say a few words about what the industry had to do to try to avoid the closures it unfortunately had to go through with because of the Liberal government's inaction.

[Alain Boire, Bloc, Beauharnois—Salaberry, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

The industry is very active at present. What did it do? Seeing as the textile industry had been affected for a long time, a petition went around that was tabled in the House on December 9. The purpose of the petition was to inform the government of a problem that needed to be resolved before it was too late.

My colleague was repeatedly told in the House that the Bloc was crying wolf and that it was getting ahead of itself. However, the Bloc never got too far ahead. It took the bull by the horns and wanted to wake up the government by telling it about a problem that absolutely needed to be resolved before everything collapsed. That is the point the people of Huntingdon were trying to make with their petition.

The region is currently working on finding other projects and employment for the workers who are going to lose their jobs in other industries. Most of these people are manual labourers. We are working on this right now in cooperation with the local CLD and the mayor of Huntingdon. In an effort to encourage the regional economy, we are trying to find new jobs in other industries, not for all of these people, but most of them.

Many workers in these industries are often members of the same family. A father and mother of a family might work in these industries. Many families will be without work. In these regions, people work in the textile industry from generation to generation. It is important to help these people have a better local economy and to find new work elsewhere.

[Roy Cullen, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness]

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Ahuntsic.

I would like to thank the House for the chance to add to today's debate on federal assistance for the clothing and textile industry. It allows me to speak out strongly against the implication in the opposition's motion that our government has been lackadaisical in its support of this sector.

Last December the federal finance and Industry ministers introduced substantial new measures to help the textile and apparel industry to better compete in fast changing world markets. Members on this side, members like the member for Ahuntsic, Beauce, Brome—Missisquoi, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, St. Boniface and many others, worked with the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Industry to ensure that we put out a helping hand.

What I want to add is some important perspective--focusing on the fact that these new initiatives build upon an established record of federal partnership with, and support for, these industries.

Our government has long understood that the Canadian textile and apparel industries face evolving challenges in today's fiercely competitive international environment. They have had to transform themselves over the past decade through focusing on higher value-added activity, on innovative and attractive new products, and through identifying and winning niche markets for their products. And the federal government has been part of that transformation.

To assist these cousin industries with their preparations for the future, the Government of Canada established a joint government-industry working group on textiles and apparel. The industry and labour members of the working group were comprised of representatives from the Canadian Apparel Federation; the Canadian Textiles Institute; the Union of Needletrades, Industrial and Textile Employees; Industry Canada; Finance; International Trade; Statistics Canada; Human Resources Canada; Skills Development Canada; and the Canada Border Services Agency.

The industries submitted recommendations for government action to address the issues related to the long term competitiveness of the apparel and textile industries. In response to these recommendations, the Government of Canada has committed to the following: first, continuing to work toward an integrated North American market for Canadian apparel and textile products and to consider any proposals made jointly by the apparel and textile industries for new market development through an outward processing initiative; second, continuing to protect against illegal trans-shipment of imported apparel and textile products and to use existing tools, as appropriate, to respond to industry complaints regarding injurious import surges; third, working through the employment insurance program to continue to meet the needs of workers adjusting to changes in the industry and to ensure, through ongoing support for human resource sector councils, that employees obtain the skills they need to respond to the challenges of a rapidly changing labour market; fourth, identifying and reducing tariffs on imported textile inputs used by the Canadian apparel industry so as to improve the industry's cost competitiveness; and, fifth, continuing to work through the national initiatives component of the Canadian apparel and textile industries program to address the technology support, branding, trade development and e-commerce needs of the apparel and textile industries.

Let me outline some of the specific initiatives the government has undertaken to assist the Canadian apparel and textile industries to compete globally.

Even before the additional assistance package announced last December, the government had announced nearly $100 million worth of support. In June 2002 a $33 million program was announced to help them improve their competitiveness. At the same time, $11 million was provided to the Canada Border Services Agency to counter illegal trans-shipments of textile and apparel products.

Then just a year ago, in February 2004 the government announced additional assistance: $26.7 million would be directed toward the textile industry and another $26.7 million in the form of duty reductions on textile inputs. The measures were part of CANtex, the textiles production efficiency initiative. CANtex itself is building on the success of the earlier Canadian apparel and textile industries program, which has funded 394 projects to assist apparel and textile companies enhance their productivity, lower costs, improve efficiency and find new markets for their products.

I think that hon. members should be reminded of some of the success stories for this program.

Canada's apparel and textile industries, their products and the people who created them have a long and proven history of innovation, creativity and business success. In fact, Canadian companies are recognized around the world for the quality of their products, their leading-edge manufacturing capabilities and, most importantly, their high standards of service.

Canadian companies manufacture a broad range of apparel and textiles, including innovative geo-textiles. Established brand names, such as Roots, Far West and French Dressing, together with niche providers such as Régitex, Barrday and Peerless, are proving that Canada's apparel and textile industries are alive and well, and globally competitive.

To face the challenges of the 21st century, Canada's apparel and textile industries are actively transforming themselves. As trade barriers disappear, global competition is forcing companies to think outside the box, explore new ways of doing business and market themselves and their products more effectively.

Through Industry Canada, the Canadian apparel and textile industries program works in partnership with apparel and textile companies and associations to maintain and improve the strength and vitality of these industries in Canada. With financial assistance from the Canadian apparel and textile industries program, many Canadian apparel and textile companies have acquired the leading edge tools that they need to build and sustain competitive advantage, helping them to become more innovative and able to pursue new market opportunities around the world.

Now, with the further support of CANtex, companies can extend their capabilities even further in a host of ways in eligible projects.

Let me step back for a second and make another important point. Since our government balanced its budget in 1997-98, the first time in 27 years, it has pursued a vigorous effort to fund research and innovation.

In fact, in February 2002, the federal government launched its 10-year innovation strategy which aimed to move Canada to the front ranks of the world's most innovative countries.

In its quest to achieve excellence, the Government of Canada is moving to build on the investments already made in research and innovation, to make essential research and technological expertise available to firms of all sizes, and to facilitate access to venture capital financing.

The Canadian textiles industry is leading the way in such innovation. Indeed, this industry has become one of the most innovative industries in Canada. Allow me to explain.

To begin, the industry invests over $300 million annually in state of the art textile equipment and facilities, $3.1 billion in total in the 10 year period from 1990 to 1999. These capital expenditures contributed to an increase in labour productivity in this sector in the 1990s.

While Canada is not a textile machinery manufacturing country, textile machinery embodying the latest technological improvements produced worldwide is readily available to domestic manufacturers, who must continuously reinvest to remain internationally competitive.

Hon. members can certainly appreciate that critical to the successful adoption of these advanced technologies is a continuous upgrading of the industry's workforce, knowledge and skills.

That is why with initial support from HRDC, a textiles human resources council was established in 1994. Guided by a union management board of directors, it has been cited as a model for other sectors and is dedicated to ensuring that employees of the textiles industry attain and maintain world class skills.

The textiles human resources council is providing a growing mix of innovative education and training programs, such as, on-the-job, hands-on and distance learning, ranging from CD-ROMs to fully interactive computer courses. Total intramural research and development expenditures in the textile industries have exhibited a steady increase throughout the 1990s, increasing from $41 million in 1990 to $67 million in 2000. This ranks the textile sector as 16th out of the 27 industries comprising the manufacturing sector. In fact, innovations proliferate at every phase of the textile supply chain, from upstream fibre production to final products.

Industry Canada, along with the Textiles Human Resources Council and the Canadian Textiles Institute, through the Canadian Apparel and Textile Industries Program, is leading the Canadian Delegation to Material World.

Let me conclude by asserting with real confidence that our government is very aware of the challenging situation facing the textile and apparel industries in Canada and we are responding.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Mr. Speaker, this member is the second person today who has stood up in this place and has said how wonderful everything is in the textile industry and has talked about all the wonderful things that the government is doing. However, the industry is not saying the same thing. It is saying something different. It is saying that it is in deep trouble.

Why would you stand in your place and say that the government is doing all these great things? One of the speakers this morning essentially said that we cannot do anything more. The speaker said that is why the government members are opposing the resolution. That member said, “We are not going to support it because we are taking adequate measures. The safeguards are adequate, all of these things that are critical of our government and the resolution are not true”.

Why is it that what you are saying is different? Why is everything you are saying different from what the industry is saying?

[The Acting Speaker (Mr. Marcel Proulx)]

May I remind members that their comments should be addressed through the Speaker.

[Roy Cullen, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I never said that there are not some challenges and some issues within the textile industry. I was trying to remind the House and Canadians that the government has taken very strong action, is completely understanding of some of the challenges, and has responded accordingly.

I know, for example, in the apparel industry, after members on this side worked with the finance minister and the industry minister very recently, I have had some good feedback in my part of Toronto.

I am surprised a Conservative member would sort of imply that every single plant closure in Canada should be looked at by the government. We are saddened by it. In fact, my family comes from the Huntingdon area. My dad grew up in a place called Howick near Ormstown. I know the Huntingdon area very well. It saddens me and it saddens all of us in this House when plants close. However, we need to understand that the government cannot be held accountable and responsible for every plant closing in Canada. I am sure the member was not trying to imply that.

There are some mills, some plants, that because of certain efficiencies and a whole host of issues, where they are strategically located, their labour-management relations, their cost positioning, and a number of other factors, they are on the top end of the cost curve. There is nothing really the government can do. In today's commodity markets, and even in some of the value added markets, one needs to be in the bottom half of the cost curve if one is to survive in this competitive environment. If we as a federal government were to respond to every single industry and plant that was under siege, we would surely blow the fiscal envelope.We need to have measured and strategic responses.

Our government has acted very forcefully and with a lot of vigour. I support completely what our government has done. I do not have many textiles, but I know that the apparel industry in my area was very pleased with the announcements of the minister. We will continue to work with the textile industries to see if we can help them in this very difficult world that we live in.

[Pierre Paquette, Bloc, Joliette, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I address myself to the hon. member as former chairman of the Standing Committee on Finance. He was there when we wrote the report presented in April 2004. This report went much further than the measures announced by the Minister of Finance in mid-December.

Could he explain why we had to wait for six textile plants to close down before the Minister of Finance acted on the report presented by the committee in April 2004? I know we had an election, but from June 28 to mid-December, he had plenty of time to implement these three measures contained in the unanimous report from the Standing Committee on Finance.

[Roy Cullen, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member from the Bloc. I clearly remember the discussions at the Standing Committee on Finance when I was chairman.

However, if we look at that report in terms of the apparel industry, the government responded almost verbatim to that report. In terms of the textile industry, the government responded even more aggressively than what was in that report. All of us on this side of the House will remember those conversations with the finance minister highlighting some of the particular challenges of some of the mills and some of these textile plants. I think that these textile plants must have known that the government was bringing in some kind of relief package.

At the end of the day, there are some plants that because of their unique positioning, their competitiveness, their cost structure, their access to markets or transportation, no matter what help they receive they may not survive. While we are very saddened by the loss of these mills, and I come back to point I made earlier, the government cannot solve every problem of every single plant in Quebec or indeed in Canada.

[Eleni Bakopanos, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Social Development (Social Economy)]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to speak again on behalf of an industry that I and other colleagues in the House have over the years supported, and continue to support.

The hon. member for Etobicoke Centre made remarks about my colleagues in his speech. I would like again to remind hon. members from the Bloc that the members for Beauce, Brome—Missisquoi, Saint Boniface, Winnipeg South Centre, Etobicoke—Lakeshore and Scarborough Centre have been on the issue for the last few years, of course with different challenges in each mandate.

As a member of Parliament who represents a constituency that had a number of apparel and textile manufacturers, I have had the opportunity over the years to take part in these debates. Let me pick up on something that was said by another member across the aisle. The government does not support people losing their jobs.

I think that all of us in the House would like to ensure that Canadians remain employed, and our record on that issue speaks for itself, as far as I am concerned. Let me also start by saying that the industry, both the textile and apparel, have worked with the government through certain committees and measures that we have put in place to try to find ways of assisting them to continue to create jobs or to keep the jobs that have been created by those industries.

I would like to remind you of the facts. Textiles and apparel make up the sixth largest industry in Canada. It is an industry that employs over 54,000 Canadians and generates more than $6.6 billion per year, a very significant figure.

To support this major industry, the Canadian government has participated in various programs over the years. I would also like to remind you of these programs, since there is a tendency on the other side of the House to forget the past and to simply make demands.

In 1974, the World Trade Organization implemented the Multifibre Arrangement, the MFA, as a temporary measure to protect the national textile sectors. Quotas were imposed on imports from poor countries that can produce apparel and textiles at far less cost than the developed countries.

The MFA was extended four times after 1974 and finally ended on December 31, 1994. I would like to publicly say that, at that time, I, along with other colleagues, was opposed to this agreement. I am still convinced that it is one of the measures that played a large part in the closure of a few textile mills, something that I also regret.

So that the quotas imposed by the MFA could be gradually lifted until they were fully phased out in 1995, the MFA was replaced by the Agreement on Textiles and Clothing, the ATC. This agreement was designed to achieve progress in free trade in the world textile industry from 1995 to 2005. The ATC aimed to increase import quotas so that Canada and other countries could progressively profit from the liberalization of trade. More specifically, the ATC obliged countries to eliminate all quotas on textile-related imports, thus exposing Canadian textile and apparel firms to all-out competition from countries with low production costs. So I repeat that I was personally opposed to this measure. I would also like to quote from the Bloc Québécois election platform, where that party proposes to “liberalize trade in all types of textiles except those manufactured by Quebec companies”.

So is the Bloc Québécois in favour of total liberalization of international trade or of adding certain tariffs? You see, the Bloc supports free trade, but not when it does not suit its interests. However, it should decide if it wants to be part of the big bad world or to play both sides against each other.

In 1989, under the Multifibre Arrangement then in force, the Canadian government paid $40 million a year to Canadian textile manufacturers in compensation for tariffs paid by them on imported textiles. Those payments were called duty remissions, and according to 1989 import data they were divided among various sectors of the industry. Basically, if you imported textiles into Canada in 1989, the higher your import volumes, the higher the duty remissions you were paid.

This system of federal payments has not changed since 1989. In other words, the same manufacturers have been receiving the same share of Ottawa's $40 million since 1989. So when we hear from across the aisle that we have done nothing, that is not true. Although some of those manufacturers have completely stopped importing and thus stopped paying high import duties, they are still receiving their share of duty remission payments, as in 1989.

On December 14, 2004, the government announced certain measures designed to make Canadian textile manufacturers more competitive in anticipation of the cancellation of all textile import quotas worldwide. The measures announced were intended to act upon the conclusions of the report that was tabled, as we said earlier, by the Standing Committee on Finance, whose chair at the time was the hon. member for Etobicoke. Specifically, those measures called for the phasing out of customs duty remissions by the end of 2009.

The government has also committed itself to the following allocations: $90 million per year to eliminate customs duties on imported textiles; an additional $50 million over five years for the textile production efficiency component, CANtex, which will help Canadian textile firms become more competitive and take advantage of new market prospects; and $10.9 million for the Canada Border Services Agency so that it can combat the illegal transshipment of textiles and apparel.

Once again, these measures will be over and above the federal allocation of more than $70 million over the past two years in support of the textile and apparel industries. It is absolutely untrue for the other side to say we have done nothing. I have now repeated all of the highlights. Thanks to these measures, annual assistance to these industries will more than triple.

Over the course of the last few years the government has progressively brought in other measures. The importance of improving our competitiveness of the tax system has been underscored in recent years by reductions in corporate tax rates in many of our major trading partners.

Establishing a Canadian tax advantage for investment, jobs and growth was one element of the government's five year tax reduction plan. As of 2004, the general rate of corporate income tax was lowered to 21% from its 2000 level of 28%. In the 2003 budget it was lowered to 21%. We have eliminated for these firms over $50 million of taxable capital.

One area where the tax system has had an important impact on new investment, particularly in capital intensive sectors like the textile and apparel industry, is the treatment of capital assets. I have spoken to businessmen in my riding and also surrounding ridings in Montreal, and this was a very important component of the type of aid that they had asked the government to implement.

The capital cost allowance, or the CCA system, determines how much of the cost of a capital asset a business may deduct in a particular year. As a general principle, CCA rates should reflect the useful life of assets and thus provide adequate recognition of capital costs over time. The alignment of the CCA rates with the useful life of assets can enhance productivity. I will not go into the details, but I want to repeat that in the 2004 budget we increased the CCA rate that applies to computer equipment.

As we all know, the industry has become more high tech than it ever was. We do not walk into a factory anymore without seeing mostly knitting machines. For those who have not done so recently, I urge them to go. It is a high tech type of industry and we have given assistance for that industry to continue to become competitive.

Since my time has run out, I would like to sum up.

Our government recognizes that enhancing competitiveness is a serious obstacle for the Canadian textile and apparel industries. The hon. member opposite and all the hon. members can be assured that this government will continue to work with these industries. My colleagues and I on this side of the House will ensure that these industries are sustainable and that they will succeed on both the national and international stages.

[Robert Vincent, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite said that members on this side have a tendency to forget the past. I can tell you that the past is an indication of what the future holds in store and that we have not forgotten the past. We used to hear a lot about the POWA, but today we do not hear about it anymore.

In the member's speech, which looked back on the past, I did not hear of any assistance for workers who lost their job or who are about to lose their job due to this problem in the textile industry. My question is clear and simple. In view of these jobs being lost, what measures will the government put in place to help these workers, especially those who are 55 and older?

[Eleni Bakopanos, Liberal, Ahuntsic, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to clarify what I said earlier because the hon. member forgets the good parts. I never said that he forgets the past. However, we did things. They cannot say that we did nothing.

And that takes me back to the issue of older workers. I was among the government members who spoke to the minister at the time about the need for such a program. I can assure you that I still believe that older workers need that program. We will see what measures will be in the next budget. However, I recognize that there must be measures for workers. Indeed, on a personal note, since some members of my family are illiterate, I recognize that they may need some kind of support when their plant is shut down.

I will repeat that I believe that we, on this side of the House, have credibility in the area of job creation, because nobody wishes to depend on employment insurance. Everybody wants to work. Of course people over 50 years of age have greater challenges to face. I am aware of that and I am very sensitive to that. That is why I continue to support the implementation of measures for older workers. Maybe there will be such measures in the government's next budget.

[Raymond Simard, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for the extraordinary work she has done on this file since day one. I have been a member of Parliament for just over two years now and I remember at caucus she was bringing this up almost on a weekly basis.

I have been following this file very closely. I am from Winnipeg which has a very strong textile and apparel industry. I find it absurd when I hear from members opposite that the industry is not at all happy with this package. What I am hearing in Winnipeg from the people who are leaders in this industry is that it has been a very successful package.

Obviously, the government cannot resolve all the problems because we are dealing with an international issue and it is very complex, but the information that I have been getting is that it is a very good package.

I wonder if my hon. colleague could comment on that.

[Eleni Bakopanos, Liberal, Ahuntsic, QC]

Mr. Speaker, since we are commending people, I also thank my colleague for his good offices. He too worked very hard and impressed upon the Minister of Finance that such a program was needed. As he indicated, we were in direct contact with the representatives of both industries. I have been working with them for ten years and was criticized for doing so by the members across the way. However, people do not remember that, they only remember what suits them.

This being said, I think that the apparel industry is quite satisfied. As for the textile industry, the challenges are greater. I get back once again to what I said in my speech. Various international factors have negative repercussions on this industry. I reiterate that, in its platform, the Bloc Québécois supports free trade. Today, the Bloc members must decide what side they are taking: are they in favour of opening our borders provided certain steps are taken to protect older workers? Personally, I would fully support such a measure.

A choice has to be made whether we open or close our borders. However, I do not believe that on this side of the House, we have ever advocated protectionism in free trade. Since we took power, this is the position that we have shown in all our programs and decisions.

[France Bonsant, Bloc, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am going to share my time with my colleague from Laurentides—Labelle.

I must confess that it is with a certain sadness that I begin my speech on the textile industry in Quebec and Canada. For a very long time, textiles and apparel were by far the largest manufacturing sector in Quebec. Insofar as employment is concerned, these sectors fostered and gave structure to an industrial base throughout the regions as well as in the big cities. Thousands of textile mills were built in all our regions, and the jobs numbered in the hundreds of thousands.

This heritage industrial empire is now collapsing through the good care of the Liberal government, which has known for at least 10 years that the import quotas would decline and in fact disappear completely by January 2005. For a good 15 or 20 years now, we have been sounding the alarm, and the labour unions, and especially women—and for that matter the employers too—have been denouncing the Canadian government's inaction in the face of this great “unwinding”.

During the session last fall, I witnessed dozens of interventions by colleagues pleading with the government to do something to protect our industry. On many occasions, they suggested ways of slowing the decline and stopping the spiralling loss of jobs. There are still about 15,000 to 20,000 jobs in this sector in Quebec, and it is worth fighting relentlessly to protect those that remain.

How did textiles and apparel become so important to Quebec? There was the proximity of the American market, of course, but in the final analysis, looking back, historical and political factors were much more influential.

We need to go back to the economic development model that was adopted at the time of Canada's founding. It was decided from the outset that Upper Canada would have the heavy industries, the more technological ones, while Lower Canada would have the light industries, which required a less skilled work force and had less growth potential, for example hosiery, apparel and shoes. As we can see, even Upper Canada did what it could to make us a distinct society.

I would like to draw your attention to the effects of the choices that were imposed. You know as well as I that the jobs in textile and apparel plants are often held by female personnel. We consider this an aggravating factor, because it is easy to imagine the impact on the social fabric of a city or region of several hundred women being laid off—women who very often had been working in the same plant for 25 or 30 years. Consequently, at 50, 55 or even 60 years of age, they have no other training. Tragic situations are created, and many of these women are condemned to lives of poverty and misery. It is easy to see that dropping support for the textile industry penalizes women above all.

In addition, textile mills are often the main if not the only companies of any size in many communities in the eastern townships, Beauce and Montérégie. They have often been there for 50, 75 or even 100 years, and every time, their closing has a considerable impact on the entire local economy.

When I walk around my riding of Compton—Stanstead, I see industrial cadavers on all sides. My district has 44 municipalities, and very few of them have not had to mourn the closure of textile plant closings in recent years or are not worried about seeing the last vestiges of their industrial heritage disappear in the next few years.

Over the last few months, I have had an opportunity to go with a former foreman and visit some of these plants that are now closed. They are amazingly big, and in the cold darkness, you see millions and millions of dollars worth of equipment standing rigid in death like ghosts that want to tell us about a bygone era.

In an expressionless voice, the foreman told us that the three machines in front of us had been sold to India and would be loaded on the boat the next week, while the rest would be sold for scrap. When everything has been taken out, maybe you can bring in some loads of muck soil and grow mushrooms, which like dark, cold, dead places. If you come out our way any time soon, Mr. Speaker, I would like to give you this experience. I invite you to come to Sherbrooke, Coaticook, Cookshire, Weedon or Ascot; there is no shortage of places.

It was a good ten years ago that we signed agreements at the World Trade Organization in which this government announced to the whole world that Canada would abolish all forms of tariff barriers and quotas on foreign products and its market would be turned over to them lock, stock and barrel.

I would like to say that what has not been abandoned is not just a few beaneries found here and there. Despite the closing of hundreds of plants and the loss of thousands of jobs, the annual sales of the Canadian textile and apparel sectors were still about $7 billion a year for both, or more combined than the aerospace, steel or pharmaceutical industries?

It is therefore a major event, still today, and this is why there is no way that we will give up. Someone has to defend Quebec's interests in this regard, as in many others. It is surprising to find the Bloc Québécois alone in the arena. Where are the Liberal ministers who come to Quebec to get elected, while in fact it is just Ottawa's interests that they defend in Quebec.

But we, in the Bloc, we will not quit. With some 15,000 employees, the textile sector accounts for nearly 5% of all the manufacturing jobs in Quebec. It is this industrial heritage and the tremendous expertise that goes along with it that the Liberal government of Canada is busy destroying without even blinking.

Let me include a quote at this point to show that the Bloc Québécois is not alone in feeling sad. I quote:

Governments have known for ten years that the quotas would end, that the special tariffs protecting our industry against the Asian threat or other cheap labour markets would end. So, they had ten years to promote business transformation, support the buying of new equipment, consider drafting a new agreement or, otherwise, to prepare for the retraining of workers. Instead, they let everyone to fend for themselves.

That is not all. Here is more:

Tens of mills are preparing to shut down in the short or medium term, for reasons that anyone who has some basic notions in social economy knew about. Except, it seems, the governments. Today, we have no choice but to recognize that their apathy and lack of foresight are responsible for the textile scandal. This is a scandal that is not settled and that could be around for quite some time.

This text was written by the editor of our local daily La Tribune , in December 2004.

Quebeckers know that the world is changing, that the global economy is undergoing major mutations. We accept the globalization game and we are pleased to see the emergence of those countries that are gradually moving toward the market economy. We agree to do our share so that low-wage countries can sell their products on our markets. However, adequate solutions must be found so that our mills can remain competitive and keep a major share of our markets.

There are 30,000 textile mills currently operating in China, with hundreds of others under construction, and nearly 20 million workers working there for 55¢ per hour. The hourly rate for workers in India is even lower, around 23¢ per hour. Obviously, we cannot compete with these production costs because there is too big a gap between our respective investments. This in no way means that we should give up, as the current government is doing by completely opening up our borders without restrictions.

On January 9, Henry Massé, the president of the FTQ, said he feared 30,000 to 40,000 jobs in the textile and apparel industry would be cut. Right away, he asked Ottawa to renew for another three years, as per WTO rules, certain quotas that have just been abolished but that would have set limitations on Chinese imports, long enough for us to find a long-term solution. The Americans take advantage of such clauses, as do the British and the Germans. But here, when the Liberals crash, they crash and burn.

These past few months, I have seen the member for Brome—Missisquoi go around the region saying that international treaties should be respected and that we had no choice but to completely open up our borders.

If this government had any respect for this industry and for the tens of thousands of workers who could lose their jobs in the near future, it would have the humility and the courage to do its homework again so as to better save some specific areas of this industry in order to protect our expertise and our jobs.

[Guy Lauzon, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

Mr. Speaker, in my riding of Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry about 170 people will lose their jobs next month because a textile plant in the town of Long Sault is moving to the U.S. I should also mention that over 100 people in Montreal will lose their jobs because the same company, Gildan Activewear, is closing its operations there too.

I asked those in management at Gildan what the main reasons were for the plant closure. They told me that under the new Central American free trade agreement, textiles produced in Central American countries have duty free access to the U.S. as long as they use yarn that is spun in either the U.S. or Central America. However, if the yarn is spun here in Canada, the United States charges a 16% import duty. Gildan Activewear, in order to stay competitive, has moved to North Carolina in the United States of America.

That is what happens when our biggest trading partner negotiates freer trade with other countries than it allows with Canada. I would urge the Liberal government to develop a good relationship with the United States of America so these kinds of things do not happen.

The management of Gildan Activewear cannot be blamed for leaving. The company had been appealing to the federal government for help for over two years so the company would not have to move and it could stay competitive here in Canada but it was unable to.

I would like the member's opinions on what the government could have done to make sure that our relationship with our trading partner would be such that this country would not lose over 270 jobs, especially 175 jobs in my riding.

[France Bonsant, Bloc, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. It is not easy.

I think that the solution would come from an agreement within the FTAA or from a hypothetical comprehensive free trade agreement at the WTO, which would make it possible to bypass regional agreements by making them obsolete. That being said, textile mills that would no longer have to move to the United States would probably choose to move to poorer countries, and we would not be better off.

I believe that we need to protect Canadian textiles the same way the Americans do. Yes, a little protectionism would be in order. We should also ensure that developing countries have the same ISO 9000 standards, that is no child labour and no slave labour. We would probably be more competitive compared to these countries.

[Marcel Gagnon, Bloc, Saint-Maurice—Champlain, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my colleague on her very interesting speech. She elaborated on some issues that had not been touched upon since the beginning of this debate this morning.

Among other things, she mentioned the fact that women make up most of the workforce in the textile industry. The word seamstress is generally used when referring to people employed in this industry because they usually are women.

I want to ask her a question about which I feel very strongly. I have worked on issues relating to the elderly and I have noticed that, again, those people that have been neglected by the government are mostly women. Since the textile industry is mostly made up of women, I am wondering whether the government, that has made it a habit of being negligent, is not even more negligent on issues affecting women in particular.

How does the member feel about that?

[France Bonsant, Bloc, Compton—Stanstead, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question. Indeed, I visited the Cookshire Tex company, before it closed; it was a textile company. The equipment was in excellent condition and very clean. Most workers in the textile industry are men, because it is hard work that requires physical strength. However, some women are able to do it.

As for clothing, it is made by women who are mostly immigrants and who do not speak French or English. For them, it is easier to come to live here and to work in factories. These women who come to this country are so used to work that they are not a drag on the public purse. They are still penalized. They have barriers. They are getting older. The POWA, which the Bloc Québécois wants to be re-introduced, should be used to teach these women another language, such as the official languages of Canada and Quebec, French and English, and to give them training, because the majority of these women are illiterate.

In doing so, we would really help these women to get out of the poverty trap.