House of Commons Hansard #27 of the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was seniors.

Topics

Animal CrueltyPetitionsRoutine Proceedings

10 a.m.

Liberal

Bryon Wilfert Liberal Richmond Hill, ON

Mr. Speaker, I have the pleasure to present a petition on behalf of my constituents and constituents throughout the country dealing with the Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare. The petitioners call upon the government to look at the issue of scientific consensus and public acknowledgement that animals can feel pain and suffer. All efforts should be made to prevent animal cruelty.

About a billion people around the world rely on animals for their livelihood and they acknowledge that. There are animals that are significantly affected by natural disasters, et cetera. They are asking that the government undertake to sign the Universal Declaration of Animal Welfare, support it and put it into effect as soon as possible for the sake of animals both here and around the world.

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10 a.m.

Regina—Lumsden—Lake Centre Saskatchewan

Conservative

Tom Lukiwski ConservativeParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I ask that all questions be allowed to stand.

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10 a.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Peter Milliken

Is that agreed?

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Opposition Motion—Forestry IndustryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:05 a.m.

Bloc

Robert Bouchard Bloc Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC

moved:

That, in the opinion of the House, by providing only $170 million in funding over two years in the latest budget to assist the forestry industry, the government is showing once again its lack of concern for the Quebec economy, which has been hard hit by the forestry crisis, since this amount falls well short of what this industry needs to see it through the current crisis, especially since this funding will serve to extend programs that are ill-suited to the needs of the industry in crisis; the government should therefore establish a real plan as soon as possible to help the forestry industry, a plan including a series of specific, sustainable development measures, including loans and loan guarantees, refundable tax credits for research and development, a policy to encourage the use of lumber in the construction and renovation of federal public buildings and measures to support energy and ethanol production from forestry waste.

Mr. Speaker, as you know, I come from a region, the Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean region, which, in recent years, has been hard hit by the forestry crisis. Quite a few of my colleagues from Quebec and Canada are experiencing similar situations. In our respective regions, whenever the sawmill shuts down, the entire local economy is affected.

When I was elected as the member of Parliament for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord in 2004, the forestry industry was going through tough times. In 2004, Abitibi-Consolidated shut down its Port-Alfred plant in La Baie. This resulted in 640 workers being laid off, and the impact could be felt throughout the Saguenay—Lac-Saint-Jean region. Since then, almost 4,000 direct jobs have been lost in the region. That is right, 4,000 jobs. It is as if 15,000 jobs had been lost in the city of Ottawa over the past five years.

The Bloc Québécois has chosen to have an opposition day on the forestry crisis and possible solutions to it because the government has completely failed to support the forestry sector, which is in dire need of support.

The fact is that the forestry industry has been struggling for several years. First, there was the softwood lumber dispute that started in May 2002 and ended in the fall of 2006. During that time, Ottawa systematically refused to support the industry and provide the loan guarantees it needed to stay afloat. As a result, 10,000 jobs were lost in the forestry industry in Quebec between May 2002 and April 2005.

Since April 2005, a further 21,000 jobs have been lost in the forestry industry in Quebec alone. What is worse, the situation is deteriorating each week. AbitibiBowater has just announced temporary closures of its mills in Amos, Dolbeau-Mistassini and Baie-Comeau. That is not including the pulp mill in Saint-Félicien, the lumber mills in Girardville and Saint-Fulgence, Arbec forest products, Coopérative Forestière de Petit Paris and many others that closed for a few weeks or have drastically cut their production.

We are in the midst of a terrible crisis and we have a government that prefers to ignore the plight of the thousands of workers and families.

This is such a serious matter that two weeks ago the president of the Quebec Forest Industry Council testified before the members of the Standing Committee on Finance here in Ottawa to ask for urgent assistance since the industry is at the end of its rope. He came to ask the federal government to establish a refinancing program and a support program in order to be ready for recovery.

According to the president, a number of companies need to do major repairs but they cannot currently access credit. A number of them would like to take advantage of the crisis by innovating but simply cannot invest because they have no money.

The president of the Quebec Forest Industry Council is not the only one raising the alarm: the message is coming from all sides. Last week, Michel Routhier, president of the FTQ Conseil régional du Haut du Lac-Chibougamau-Chapais, said that the budget is not helping the industry and that there is less help now than when there was no crisis.

The crisis being as serious as it is, equipment providers are also calling on the government. Robert Dionne, president of the Association des propriétaires de machinerie forestière du Québec, which represents 250 forestry entrepreneurs, said that his members are worried. They are scrambling to stay afloat. Last week Mr. Dionne said that more than 50 entrepreneurs went out of business in Quebec in 2008 and that the outlook for 2009 is not much brighter.

Lastly, Alain Michaud of Saint-Ludger-de-Milot, whose business is located in the riding of the Minister of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec) and member for Roberval—Lac-Saint-Jean, stated that we need to go back to the time when there were tax credits for equipment purchases.

The message in the community is unanimous: the federal government must adopt programs to support forestry entrepreneurs.

The Canadian and Quebec forestry industry is in no less difficulty than the auto industry. It represents 300,000 direct jobs in Canada, and another 450,000 indirect ones, while the figures for the auto industry are 158,000 direct and 335,000 indirect. Nevertheless, the Conservative government's aid to that sector is far higher than that announced for the forestry industry: $2.7 billion for the auto sector but only $170 million for the forestry industry in all of Canada, over two years. Yes, that is disgraceful. Do you see the disproportion in assistance?

As members of Parliament, we are duty bound to find solutions to help thousands of families. Our fellow citizens have asked us to represent them here in Ottawa to defend their interests. Unfortunately, certain members have chosen to promote their party's position rather than to come to the aid of their fellow citizens and relay their message here to Ottawa, to this House.

Among the biggest offenders in this are the members for Roberval—Lac-Saint-Jean and Jonquière—Alma. The Minister of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec) has been stating at every possible opportunity that he cannot, under the softwood lumber agreement, provide any loan guarantees. Yet he is incapable of stating exactly which section of it prevents him from doing so. Even yesterday in question period he was unable to clearly specify which part of the agreement it was, because there is no section that bans such a service of providing loan guarantees to businesses. Unfortunately, the member is obliged to defend the indefensible to back up his party, the Conservative government, since that government is refusing to provide loan guarantees to the forestry sector for purely ideological reasons.

Even the president of the Fédération québécoise des municipalités, Bernard Généreux, has commented on the member for Roberval—Lac-Saint-Jean, the Minister of State (Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec), “It is a matter of bad faith or lack of imagination. It is unthinkable that, with the billions of dollars of support handed out in the last federal budget, to the auto industry among others, they could not have found some money lying around somewhere to invest in the forestry crisis.” Those were the words of Bernard Généreux, a resident of Lac-Saint-Jean, in the riding of the minister responsible for the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec.

The position of the hon. member for Jonquière—Alma is also very disappointing. Seeing that his own government will not help the forestry sector, he is now calling for an emergency summit on the forestry crisis. I cannot help but wonder where the minister has been for the past couple of years. This feels a little like putting smoke detectors in your house after it is already on fire. It appears that the members wants to buy some time. The forestry industry does not need time; what it needs is tools to get through this crisis.

I see today as an emergency debate on the issue, to communicate the message and call attention to the reality facing entrepreneurs and workers in the forestry industry.

In our motion, we are proposing four concrete solutions based on a sustainable approach for the forestry sector. We are proposing these four solutions because the funds announced in the federal government's last budget are far from sufficient and do not meet the needs of the forestry industry.

The motion calls on the government to:

...establish a real plan as soon as possible to help the forestry industry, a plan including a series of specific, sustainable development measures, including loans and loan guarantees, refundable tax credits for research and development, a policy to encourage the use of lumber in the construction and renovation of federal public buildings and measures to support energy and ethanol production from forestry waste.

I am going to focus on a policy to encourage the use of lumber in the federal government's construction projects. Such a policy would increase the demand for lumber on the domestic markets of Quebec and Canada, and it could make us less dependent on the United States as regards this resource. When the United States stops building houses or lowers its production, lumber sales in that country go down. We are dependent on that market. When residential construction picks up, the Quebec and Canadian lumber is once again in demand. We must reduce our dependency on the U.S. market and increase lumber demand on the domestic markets of Quebec and Canada.

It is easy to talk about problems, but we should also propose solutions. One solution that would be both useful and symbolic would be to have the federal government encourage the use of lumber in the construction and renovation of its own buildings. Let us not forget that the federal government owns a huge real property inventory. We are talking about 13,782 buildings, including 198 that were built in 2008.

This means that, each year, the government spends a significant amount of money on the construction and maintenance of its own buildings. In 2007-08, the Canadian government's maintenance expenditures for Defence, Public Works, Correctional Service Canada and the RCMP alone totalled $827 million.

A number of governments have come to realize that using more lumber in their buildings was not only a concrete way of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but that it also provided direct support to the industry. The list of governments that have their own policy on the use of lumber is already quite long and includes Quebec, France, Sweden, Norway, Austria and Finland.

Why does the Canadian government not have its own policy to promote the use of lumber in renovation and construction projects, instead of steel or concrete? It could set an example for private owners of buildings by forcing itself to review in a fair fashion the solution provided by lumber for structural and cosmetic purposes, through its bids and those of its corporations and organizations. If lumber is a relevant option, and if it is beneficial to a project as a whole or to some of its elements, the government's policies should give priority to its use.

By using more lumber, the government itself could reduce the amount of greenhouse gases released by its buildings. For each cubic metre of lumber used instead of concrete or steel, we produce one tonne less of greenhouse gases. For example, during the life cycle of a typical four story building, we could avoid producing 154 tonnes of CO2 by using a structure made of lumber, instead of concrete.

That is the equivalent of driving a car for 36 years.

Forestry resources can be a lever for development, provided we find alternative uses, focus more on processing and use forestry as a tool to foster the development of new market niches. Forestry resources must be used to generate more employment and more wealth by increasing processing activities and the production of energy from wood. We must foster research and development for new products and make the R&D tax credit refundable. We must stimulate the creation and development of new processing businesses. We must support the modernization of companies through a loan and loan guarantee program that will allow them to purchase new, more efficient production equipment and to diversify production. We must restore the funding to diversify forest economies, which was cut by the former Minister of Economic Development, the member for Jonquière—Alma in the fall of 2006, and appoint regional stakeholders to manage it. We must improve the employment insurance plan to prevent workers from leaving the region when their income disappears. When a worker loses his job, becomes unemployed and eventually exhausts his benefits, what does he do? He looks at all possible options, even the possibility of leaving the area, which must be prevented by improving the employment insurance system. We must also put in place an income support program for older workers who are difficult to retrain. We should consider changes to tax rules for private woodlot owners so they can deduct forest management expenses and take advantage of income averaging, particularly when a high income follows a natural catastrophe.

Those are some of the solutions the Conservative government should consider to support the regions and the forestry industry.

I would like to conclude by asking the members of the House, particularly those in the Conservative government, whose ridings are feeling the pinch because of the forestry crisis, to persuade their colleagues to pass the motion I presented this morning.

I would point out that this motion urges the government to implement a real plan to help the forestry industry, and quickly. Things are tough in the auto industry, but the government should be helping the forestry industry too.

Let us not forget that the boreal forest is located on Quebec and Canadian soil. As such, this resource belongs to Quebeckers and Canadians.

Before I wrap up, I would like to summarize the motion, which refers to $170 million over two years. That alone is not enough to help the forestry industry. That amount will not meet the needs of the forestry industry and its workers. The motion proposes a four-part plan: a tax credit to help and support the forestry industry; a loan credit; promoting the use of lumber in construction and renovation; and using forestry waste to make energy.

I would like to conclude by pointing out that, in Quebec, 150 towns are fully dependent on forestry, and another 100 towns are 80% dependent on it. I am therefore asking the members to be compassionate and set aside partisan politics. The industry needs our support, and we are in a position to help.

Opposition Motion—Forestry IndustryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

Liberal

Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Newton—North Delta, BC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate my Bloc colleague for speaking to an issue that is not only important to Quebec, but is also very important to the forestry industry in British Columbia.

We on this side of the House believe in delivering a real plan for Canada's forestry sector, a national plan that serves all communities and forestry workers. I agree with the member that we have to come up with a comprehensive plan. In 2005 we announced a real plan for the forestry sector that addressed the issues at the heart of the motion, such as, loans, support for research and development, new technology, skills development and community adjustments. In 2006 when the Conservative government took over, it cancelled that plan. That is what has affected a lot of communities in British Columbia.

Is the $179 million that my Bloc colleague is talking about for Quebec forestry workers only, or is he also concerned about the forestry workers in British Columbia?

Opposition Motion—Forestry IndustryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

Bloc

Robert Bouchard Bloc Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC

Mr. Speaker, I specified in my remarks that it will be $170 million over two years for all of Canada, including Quebec. This money that was included in the Conservative government’s budget is just for marketing and also to support a number of existing programs. This is not new money, and it is clearly not enough.

Opposition Motion—Forestry IndustryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

Conservative

Cathy McLeod Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to acknowledge that the forestry industry is struggling throughout Canada. Of course in British Columbia not only do we have issues with the downturn in the market, but we have incredible issues with the pine beetle problem.

Having said that, I note it has been with great appreciation that our community has received a lot of support from the federal government in terms of dealing with the pine beetle issue. We look forward to the opportunities in the budget and to making sure we leverage them to support our industry, such as extending markets in China. We have companies that have lots of ideas around innovation and the community adaptation fund.

Has the member opposite looked at what opportunities are available for him and his community within the budget, and would they not be helpful for him and this industry?

Opposition Motion—Forestry IndustryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

Bloc

Robert Bouchard Bloc Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is talking about support and about support programs, but she should take a closer look at the budget and compare a few things. For example, the support for the auto industry stands at $2.7 billion, but there is only a meagre $170 million for the forestry industry throughout Canada. It is clearly not enough. The hon. member being from a province with a big forestry industry, she really has a duty to convince her government that it should provide a real support plan for the forest industry throughout Canada and in Quebec.

Opposition Motion—Forestry IndustryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:30 a.m.

NDP

Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON

Mr. Speaker, in my region the forestry crisis has reached such a state that Abitibi, which started on the Abitibi River in Iroquois Falls because the province of Ontario gave it wood rights and hydro rights on the dams and is still one of the most profitable operations in Abitibi's world chain, is trying to sell off its dams because it is so desperate for cash right now. Abitibi is in a cash crunch and is basically slitting the throat of one of its most profitable mills. If it has to buy the hydro back from a private enterprise, that mill will go down. Everybody knows that. We are looking at a company like Abitibi that has put 100 years into this region being faced with having to sell off parts of its mill to get through a credit crunch.

Why does the hon. member think it is that the government has walked away from key parts of the forestry sector that could still make it through this downturn if credit support was available?

Opposition Motion—Forestry IndustryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:30 a.m.

Bloc

Robert Bouchard Bloc Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member asked why the government let down an industry as important as the forestry industry and why it did not support it. It is clear for everybody to see that, unfortunately, the government simply dropped this industry. It chose to support only one sector, the auto industry. It should have taken into account the fact that the forestry industry provides many more jobs. I am not against supporting the auto industry and its jobs, but there are many more jobs in the forestry industry, and it seems to me that the federal government should have had a real plan to help this sector.

In the motion before us, we are making a few suggestions. If the four options put forward in this motion were taken into consideration, we would do the forest industry a great service.

Opposition Motion—Forestry IndustryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL

Mr. Speaker, I have a very quick question for my hon. colleague who brings this motion forward that involves some decent measures concerning his own industry in Quebec.

I recently had a mill close in my riding resulting in the layoffs of 700 people in direct jobs and a little over 1,600 people in indirect jobs.

In my province alone, the provincial government is the only player in town when it comes to silviculture, the planting of trees. Why is this measure about the federal government becoming involved once again in the investment in silviculture and in the renewal of our forests not in the motion?

Opposition Motion—Forestry IndustryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:30 a.m.

Bloc

Robert Bouchard Bloc Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC

Mr. Speaker, it would indeed be interesting to have a support plan for the provinces in the area of silviculture. It would be a way to manage the forest and make it more productive.

The hon. member gives me the opportunity to talk about the concerns of wood producers in Quebec. They want to get help to manage the forest and a program or tax measures to average their income. The federal government should have agreements with the provinces in order to set up a plan to help the development of silviculture in public and private forests.

Opposition Motion—Forestry IndustryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:30 a.m.

Bloc

Paul Crête Bloc Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC

Mr. Speaker, I would like to add to what my colleague has just said. We have been told lately that the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations believes that in the current period of economic slowdown, silviculture would represent an excellent investment to enable our forestry workers and people in our regions to have good jobs. This is employment for the future that would also fight the effects of climate change.

Would it not be possible to revive the Eastern Quebec Development Plan, for example? The federal government provided funds to the province, which made the appropriate expenditures. Would it not be important and useful to move in that direction at this time?

Opposition Motion—Forestry IndustryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

The member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord has time for only a brief response.

Opposition Motion—Forestry IndustryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:35 a.m.

Bloc

Robert Bouchard Bloc Chicoutimi—Le Fjord, QC

Mr. Speaker, there is an excellent suggestion. Treating our forests like gardens is the way we should be proceeding. These are the measures that should be pushed forward. Let us not forget that in Quebec, and in many other provinces, the operators of private woodlots could make their forests much more productive, to the benefit of the forestry industry.

Opposition Motion—Forestry IndustryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:35 a.m.

Halton Ontario

Conservative

Lisa Raitt ConservativeMinister of Natural Resources

Mr. Speaker, I am grateful for the opportunity to respond to the motion tabled by the hon. member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord. I believe the hon. member would agree that he does not hold a monopoly on concern for the forest industry in the province of Quebec.

All members of the House are aware that, since taking office, this government has listened to Canada's forest industry, has recognized the special challenges this industry faces in all parts of the country and has launched a number of specific initiatives to assist Canada's forest industry.

These initiatives have not been knee-jerk reactions to complex problems. They have been designed to assist the industry in dealing with present day challenges but they have also been designed with the advice of the forest industry, which is to have that industry transition to a stronger, more competitive and sustainable industry in the future.

Of course, the hon. member does not seem to share the concern of the industry in all parts of the country. His concern is only with the industry in the province of Quebec, as if that industry had no connection with the rest of the country. He may not appreciate that measures geared to assist Canada's forest industry as a whole also involve and support the industry in the province of Quebec. It may not occur to him that there is a wider context to the challenges with which he claims to be concerned. It may not occur to him that the solutions proposed to face these challenges must be international as well as regional in scope.

The motion the hon. member has put forward calls for a real plan as though the measures already adopted by this government and the measures proposed in Canada's economic action plan are not real, as though the measures already adopted and being proposed do not have substance, even though the industry, including the forest industry in Quebec, was consulted in devising the plan.

The motion seems to be a form of self-delusion, if not denial. For the specific proposals put forward in the motion as constituting a real plan, they already exist or are being proposed in Canada's economic action plan.

My government is delivering support for an industry that is fundamentally important to our country, an industry that does not exist in one province only and that is facing real challenges. Among these challenges are a world-wide economic downturn, a global increase in competition and a sharp decline in the prices of commodities and products.

The long term outlook for Canada's natural resources remains strong but the current economic situation presents an unprecedented mix of challenges for Canada's forest industry.

In order to fully understand recent developments as they have affected the forest industry and to develop a further strategic appropriate response, the government did not hold a conference in Ottawa. My colleagues and I fanned out across the country and undertook extensive unprecedented consultations. We listened to industry leaders, provincial colleagues, territorial colleagues, communities and other stakeholders. We also listened to the people whose local mill had closed down, in some cases the only mill and the only employment in town.

We listened to the forest industry in all provinces of the country, not just the industry in one province. What did we hear? We heard that even though Canadians recognized that the current economic crisis originated outside our borders, they expected stable leadership that would protect and advance our economy today and in the future. They do not want economic uncertainty compounded by petty political rivalry. They want strong balanced leadership that offers a clear vision for the future and how to capitalize on Canada's advantages to realize that future.

Canadians are also aware that we continue to fare much better than other countries, thanks, in a large part, to the decisions the present government made. Nevertheless, they realize Canada is not an island and that success in meeting today's economic challenges requires leadership in aligning our national interests with the interests of others. This is a global crisis, not a provincial crisis.

We also heard that this crisis affords opportunities, opportunities to put measures in place today that will pay off down the road. In other words, we do not want short term, short-sighted ideological thinking aimed only at achieving immediate relief. Canadians recognize and Canadians in the forest industry recognize that the only worthwhile strategy consists of smart investments, not bailouts, investments that will strengthen Canada's advantage in the long term. This has been the strategy of our government since the day it first took office.

In accordance with that strategy, forest sector stakeholders called on our government for further support in areas such as worker and community adjustment, innovation, market development, access to credit and taxation. Canada's economic action plan includes a variety of such measures.

For example, $1 billion have been committed to a community adjustment fund to create jobs and maintain employment in communities that have been strongly affected by the downturn in the economy, such as forestry communities. This is in addition to the $1 billion already provided through the community development trust, which was established in 2008.

Time and again in our pre-budget consultations with Canadians across the country, we were asked for help to support workers and communities. The community adjustment fund will help immediately by mitigating the short term impacts of restructuring in these communities, such as forestry communities located in Quebec.

The fund will also support activities in areas of science and technology, community transition plans that foster economic development and other measures to promote economic diversification in various communities, such as in resource-based and manufacturing dependent communities. A total of $428 million in investments are being provided to the Province of Quebec, through the community development trust and the community adjustment fund.

I recognize the importance of these measures. I grew up in Cape Breton in the 1980s and the early 1990s. In those years in the community of Sydney, specifically, in Whitney Pier, we saw the closing of the steel mills, the closing of the coal mines and the complete shutdown of the cod fishery. Like the hon. member, I know what can happen to a community when key industries are no longer there and I know the benefits that adjustment funds can bring in these situations.

Our economic action plan provides $170 million over two years to support market diversification and innovation and improve competitiveness in the forest sector. The motion before us refers to this investment as only $170 million in funding. That shows me a lack of concern for the Quebec economy.

This investment includes $80 million for the transformative technologies program administered by FPInnovations headquartered in Quebec and $40 million to develop pilot scale demonstration projects of new products for use in commercial application. Those are precisely the kinds of program cited in the hon. member's motion.

An additional $50 million is earmarked for expanding domestic and international markets for Canadian forest products and to support large scale demonstrations of Canadian use of wood in construction. This includes funding to support efforts to encourage greater use of woods in non-residential construction across North America.

In Quebec, we are pleased to support the cecobois initiative as part of our strategy to grow demand for wood products.

There is a green element to these initiatives that is very important. After all, we cannot get more sustainable than wood. Wood is renewable, it stores carbon, and life-cycle analysis tells us it has a very low carbon footprint. We need to find ways to market wood and wood products to serve a growing need globally for sustainable products.

Sustainable development is our greatest competitive advantage. That is why it must be embraced as an opportunity, not as a cost.

Economically, sustainable development can mean the difference between short- and long-term competitiveness. Socially, it can be a determinant for quality of life and the livelihood of individuals and communities.

Forest industry leaders across Canada also told us that access to credit was a key priority for them. Through a combination of existing measures and new initiatives in the budget, an extraordinary financing framework will allow our government to provide up to $200 billion to improve access to financing for Canadian households and businesses. More specifically, for newer businesses, our economic action plan provides measures that can include at least $5 billion in new financing, to be delivered under our new initative, the business credit availability program.

Budget 2009 also provided Export Development Canada, EDC, with more financial flexibility to support business during the current economic downturn. EDC has working relationships with more than 90% of the Canadian forest industry and has new flexibility to firms in the forest sector and across the economy to address financing gaps in the credit markets.

There will be up to $50 billion in additional insured mortgage pools through the insured mortgage purchase program, bringing the overall size of this initiative to as much as $125 billion.

We are determined that these measures will assist in stimulating house construction and spawn new and innovative businesses with a beneficial effect on the forest industry.

Canada's economic action plan provides one of the largest infrastructure-building programs in our country's history. This too will have a beneficial effect on the forest industry. Infrastructure funding will include $4 billion in new funding for local and regional projects, $2 billion for urgently needed repairs at our universities and colleges, and $1 billion for a green infrastructure fund to support projects such as sustainable energy. This is in addition to the $33 billion for longer term projects our government has already committed under the building Canada plan.

As members know, there will be a new home renovation tax credit, providing eligibility for up to $1,300 in tax relief for Canadians undertaking home renovations. Each time Canadians invest in home renovations, they are helping to create jobs in construction and in building supplies in their own communities. In fact, the budget provides as much as $7.8 billion to build quality housing, stimulate construction, and enhance energy efficiency through the eco-energy home retrofit program.

Given the importance of wood in construction and renovation, this will stimulate additional domestic demand for Canadian wood and Canadian wood products, perhaps more than a billion board feet of lumber and hundreds of thousands of cubic metres of wood panels.

Our budget also builds on earlier measures to give Canada a tax advantage in the global competition for investment in manufacturing. Budget 2009 included an extension of the accelerated capital cost allowance to a flat-line two-year depreciation through the year 2011.

Our economic action plan permanently eliminates tariffs on a range of machinery and equipment, thus lowering costs for Canadian producers in a number of sectors. These include forestry and energy, and this measure is expected to save Canadian industry more than $440 million over the next five years.

To assist workers and their families, there is an $8.3 billion Canada skills and transition strategy to help Canadians by means of a three-pronged approach: to strengthen benefits for workers, to enhance the availability of training, and to keep employment insurance rates low for 2009 and 2010.

Finally, Canada's economic action plan provides a $1 billion investment to establish a clean energy fund to nurture the development and demonstration of clean energy technologies.

These budget measures are not a series of isolated programs designed to prod our economy from different angles. They constitute a whole and integrated approach to economic stimulus in which these programs reinforce and build on each other. They constitute a real plan. The objective is to spur innovation now in ways that will reap even greater benefits later on. Evidence of success can be seen in the variety of initiatives that are appearing in the forest sector today.

For example, FPInnovations, our national forest research institute, has been working with a national network of university experts on the development of paper-based biosensors that can detect, report and destroy toxins and pathogens such as SARS and listeria. This network is pan-Canadian and includes researchers at five different universities in Quebec: McGill University, Concordia, École Polytechnique de Montréal, Université de Montréal and Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières.

In addition, FPInnovations is collaborating with industry to develop next-generation building systems. These systems include design for the construction of six- to eight-storey buildings using a combination of wood, concrete and steel building materials.

Our government's focus is to build on our strengths: our deep and diverse resource endowment, the systems that support its development, and the people and ideas that together are responsible for Canada's resource advantage.

The measures I have mentioned are precisely the kinds of measures cited in the motion before us. Unlike the motion, however, they are not focused exclusively on one province. They are focused on Canada's national forest industry in all provinces, including the province of Quebec. Moreover, they reflect what the industry has told us they want. They reflect what members of the forest industry in the province of Quebec have told us they want.

In conclusion, I would suggest the hon. member not be so fast in characterizing the measures proposed by the industry in his own province as constituting no real plan.

Opposition Motion—Forestry IndustryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:55 a.m.

Bloc

Johanne Deschamps Bloc Laurentides—Labelle, QC

Mr. Speaker, if I may, I would like to talk about a reality that is quite different from the minister’s remarks, which were very good.

I am referring to a local priority. After all, we must recognize that we are going through difficult times in our ridings. In one part of my riding, there once were 17 plants working in the forestry industry, Since the crisis began, 14 of those plants have closed and only three are still open. Those three plants have merged to form a single plant in order to restructure and reorganize. The administrators of this new sawmill have applied to various federal offices to obtain the funding that was announced in the latest budget. They knocked on doors at the Business Development Bank of Canada, and also at CED. Those offices told them that they had nothing for forestry.

Last week, our caucus had a presentation from CED on the different programs and—what I am saying is important—for the region, that is the Laurentians, Laval and Lanaudière, there is a niche called “Forests and Wood Products.” However, on the CED Web site there is nothing listed under that heading. They told us, to show how ridiculous it can be, that it is a shame the people in my riding did not vote for the right party.

Is that the new way the Conservatives now decide who is entitled to subsidies? Is this the Conservatives' new vision of economic prosperity?

Opposition Motion—Forestry IndustryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:55 a.m.

Conservative

Lisa Raitt Conservative Halton, ON

Mr. Speaker, first I want to say, as I indicated in my remarks, I understand only too well the devastating effects of companies closing down in communities, the effects on the families and workers, and the ongoing effects on the community in general.

That is why we as a government brought in not only the community development trust to aid at the very beginning of this forestry crisis but we put a further $1 billion into the community adjustment fund to deal with the after-effects of the reality of the fact that we are suffering in an economic downturn and the industry is facing structural challenges, in and of itself, those two forces coming together at the same time. That is why this government has recognized the effect on the communities and made those two pieces of funding available for communities.

With respect to the specific example of forestry companies seeking credit access, as I mentioned as well, we in this government have taken unprecedented measures to make sure that there is financing available across all sectors, including the forestry sector. As I indicated, there is over $200 billion available in the extraordinary financing framework. We recognize that as being important because, quite frankly, it is something that we were told by the entire industry.

I hope that is helpful for the communities and the industry as well.

Opposition Motion—Forestry IndustryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:55 a.m.

Liberal

Scott Simms Liberal Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor, NL

Mr. Speaker, I agree with the minister that it is not just Quebec but the entire nation. I thank her for bringing that up. However, I have a couple of pointed questions.

First, would the minister consider loans or loan guarantees a bailout or an investment? Also, is biomass investment, which is talked about in this motion, a bailout or an investment? She compared and contrasted those terms, but I want to know exactly what specific measures she would put into either bailout or investment.

She talked about the community trust fund. Essentially, here is the problem. The community trust fund is designed primarily for failed communities and not those who are failing. As I mentioned earlier, there is a mill closing down at the end of this month in my riding of Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor. It is AbitibiBowater. How would this community trust fund help these people keep that mill open? That is the specific question, not what it will do as far as communities that have seen mill closures are concerned, but how will the community trust fund keep that mill or other mills open?

Finally, she talked about consultations far and wide. Will she table documents pertaining to input regarding all her consultations across this country, with all stakeholders?

Opposition Motion—Forestry IndustryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11 a.m.

Conservative

Lisa Raitt Conservative Halton, ON

Mr. Speaker, I will start with the last question first. We have actually itemized the results of the consultation. I invite the member to read the economic action plan, because that is exactly what it was. We went across the country, consulted with the industry, and put the comments in the plan that we are currently trying to implement and that we would like to continue to implement for the sake of all Canadians.

With respect to the parsing of the words “bailout” versus “investment”, the reality is that we have put together an incredibly comprehensive strategy to take the Canadian forest industry through to the future and deal with the realities of what we have now.

It is obviously unfortunate, and coming from the same part of the country, the east coast, where we have experienced downturns, I fully understand and I feel for the people of Bonavista—Gander—Grand Falls—Windsor in that respect.

However, one provides the strategy not only to have the companies flourish, but for the industry to flourish so that someday maybe that mill will open again, but in the meantime, one has to look after the people. That is what the community adjustment fund does. It allows communities to economically diversify so that they are not single-industry towns and they can prevent the downturn from happening again.

Just to elaborate a little, anytime the government recognizes the importance of investing in innovation and research and development to take wood, this wonderful product and resource we have in Canada, and lever it, make it better, and bring it into the next generation, that is certainly not a bailout. That is totally an investment. It is a belief in this country, a belief in the people of this country, and that is exactly what the strategy is for this government.

Opposition Motion—Forestry IndustryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11 a.m.

NDP

John Rafferty NDP Thunder Bay—Rainy River, ON

Mr. Speaker, I was very pleased to hear the minister say she has faith in the future of forestry. I do too and so does everyone else in the House, and all Canadians. I have spoken to the minister on numerous occasions and I know her heart is in the right place, which is with the forestry workers and families right across Canada. Although there were some afternoon round tables last year, much has changed since then.

I would ask the minister most respectfully, would she sit down with me and the forestry critics from the other parties to plan a national forestry summit?

Opposition Motion—Forestry IndustryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11 a.m.

Conservative

Lisa Raitt Conservative Halton, ON

Mr. Speaker, as the member pointed out, we have had the opportunity to talk about the situation in Rainy River and Thunder Bay. It is of great concern to him and it is of great concern to us as well. I am always happy to speak with any member in the House regarding forestry issues within their riding, so without question, I would be happy to do so.

With respect to setting up a forestry summit, we have done broad-based consultations across the country. I continue to meet with industry people across the country. I would be happy to discuss the concept with the members in the House to determine what kind of agenda could be set up and whether or not this is the right time to do so.

The reality is that we have developed a strategy. The strategy is in the economic action plan. We are now fully on the implementation and execution of that strategy in accordance with the needs of the industry. The communities have told us what they need.

On one side it is marketing and innovation of the forestry products and on the other side it is making sure that communities and workers have both help through the employment insurance work share programs as well as general help for economic diversification in the communities hardest hit.

Within that spectrum, I would be happy to speak with anybody in the House, but we must realize that there has been enough talk on this matter. We have put our strategy in place. It is in the economic action plan. I truly wish that if the member did feel for the workers in his community, he would go ahead and vote in favour of this economic action plan, so that we can get it going and get the communities where they need to be, which is with money and with better help.

Opposition Motion—Forestry IndustryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11 a.m.

Conservative

The Acting Speaker Conservative Barry Devolin

Before we resume debate, I want to remind members of how question and answer period works in this place. We are now moving into 10 minute speeches with five minutes for questions and answers. Members will have about a minute to put a question and about a minute to respond.

I signal you. If you ignore the Chair, I will cut you off in terms of moving this along. So I encourage all members to cooperate with the Chair. There seems to be great interest in this topic today. Pay attention to the Chair. You will get a minute to ask a question and a minute for an answer, and we will all have an opportunity to participate.

Opposition Motion—Forestry IndustryBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:05 a.m.

NDP

Joe Comartin NDP Windsor—Tecumseh, ON

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I am not quite sure I heard what you said, but the NDP has not had its first round in this debate, so we should be having 20 minutes, not 10.