Debates of Nov. 26th, 2018

General Motors Plant Closure

[Erin Weir, Independent, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Mr. Speaker, we have heard some very legitimate criticism of the bailout of General Motors. Two potentially encouraging aspects of that bailout were the fact that GM committed to maintain its share of Canadian production and the Government of Canada gained an equity stake in GM. Unfortunately, that commitment to maintain a Canadian footprint expired last year. Meanwhile, the federal government sold off its stake in General Motors to create the impression of a balanced budget.

I wonder if the member for London—Fanshawe would agree we might be in a better situation today if the Government of Canada had negotiated a longer commitment to Canada from GM, or had at least maintained its equity position in the company so that it could influence management decisions on behalf of our Canadian workers.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I did refer to this in my remarks. The Government of Canada should have made this commitment, in regard to the $10.8 billion, a much longer-term requirement from General Motors. However, most important is the equity stake that the people of Canada had in General Motors. That was leverage. That was an important opportunity to make demands and dictate to General Motors. What a lovely thought to be able to turn a corporation on its head instead of being the one constantly spinning, trying to manage.

I believe it was a significant mistake for the government to sell off that equity, because we could have and would have been at the table. We would have been able to make those demands I spoke of.

[Celina Caesar-Chavannes, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am certainly pleased to be here this evening to participate in this emergency debate. Of course, we are very disappointed at the news from Oshawa this morning. It started last night. It will have an impact, not only on Oshawa but also my riding of Whitby and the surrounding Durham region.

Before I go any further, I do want to commend the member of Parliament for Durham, one of the individuals who decided to bring forward this emergency debate. All three parties agreed to have this emergency debate this evening. I do also want to send my support to the member of Parliament for Oshawa. We work really well together, and I know that today would be a particularly tough day for him. I know he is in the riding. He is going to have a tough go, going forward. Both members represent some part of Oshawa. I do want to lend my support to them.

I also want to be sure to lend my support to my local MPP Lorne Coe, who represents Whitby and Oshawa, as well as MPP Jennifer French. At this point in time, we need all levels of government, all hands on deck, to ensure that we make a way forward. It is not a partisan issue, but one in which the people of Oshawa will see all levels of government and people across all sectors standing in solidarity and support of them. I want to first lend support to those individuals.

Throughout the day, I have been in many conversations with leadership across the community, across Durham. I have given them the opportunity to send me their messages so that I can make sure to get their message out in my speech today.

The first is from John Henry, whom we have heard many people talk about. He is the mayor of Oshawa, soon to be the regional chair of Durham Region. He said to me today that “lt takes a lot of great people to make great cars, but this today is not about the end product. lt is about the people who make these cars and their families.”

It is about the people. It is about the neighbours. It is about the individuals and their families who are impacted by this devastating news.

Before I go further, I want to say that I will be splitting my time with the member for Guelph. My apologies, Mr. Speaker, and I thank my colleague who reminded me.

Additionally, Heather McMillan also wrote to me. She is the executive director of the Durham Workforce Authority in Oshawa. The organization does great work in looking at data and the ways we can utilize it to see what our workforce looks like and how we are responding to various issues. I do want to thank Heather for not only weighing in but also for the work that she does. She said wrote to me that “The Durham Workforce Authority helps to mobilize and build capacity of our communities. We address workforce and training needs in areas experiencing workforce realignment. The Oshawa GM plant is one of the best plants in General Motors and we are disappointed with today's announcement. A closure and a layoff of this magnitude will have a significant impact on the local economy. This layoff will be a challenge for the community service providers. We will work with the union, the workers and the community to support these workers through this transition by supporting their transition to education, training and other employment.”

Lastly, as I mentioned, this closure is not just going to have an impact on the people of Oshawa, but also on the Durham Region and my riding of Whitby.

The re-elected mayor of Whitby, Don Mitchell, said, “The closure of General Motors in Oshawa is beyond devastating and disappointing”. I share that sentiment. He continued, “We recognize that this is an especially difficult time for all employees and families who have been impacted by the news. The automotive sector has been a vital part of the Canadian economy, including Whitby, for almost a century. Whitby is one of dozens of communities who benefited enormously from the growth, innovation and good, middle-class jobs supported by Canada's automotive industry. We will work together to support Canadians facing the loss of high quality, well-paying jobs.”

The mayor's sentiments are absolutely right. Oshawa has been the heartbeat of the Durham region, especially with GM there, an anchor to our community, providing good-paying, middle-class jobs, as the mayor said, for almost a century. We heard that from the member for Durham as well.

We know that the way this company has survived through the last 100 years is a testament to the resilience of the people who work there. It is a testament to the resilience of the people of Oshawa. It is a testament to their tenacity and their ability not only to make a thriving company, but also to make a thriving community within Oshawa and spread that across the Durham region. It of course had some impact in my riding of Whitby.

We heard people say today that they hope the doors will stay open at GM. I for one hope that happens. However, we know that no matter the outcome, the people of Oshawa and those in the Durham region will build back better. They are strong and resilient folk, and I know they will do that.

I will use the opportunity of this emergency debate to speak of the resilience of the people of Oshawa. I would like to refer a little bit to a letter from General Motors. GM wanted to underscore that today's decision had nothing to do with the performance of its Canadian workforce and the people who work at the Canadian facility. GM says its worker have done everything it has asked them to do, and that they have done it with high quality, outperforming business standards. We did not need a letter from GM to attest to that. We know that is the case simply from the work those individuals have done at the plant.

I know that the closures will, of course, not only make people in Oshawa upset and disappointed, but also may make others across the country quite nervous. I want to re-emphasize our government's support for the auto sector.

We heard the minister talk about the 500,000 direct jobs in the auto sector here in Canada.

In that regard, we have extended the automotive innovation fund to a $2-billion strategic innovation fund that attracts investment and keeps Canada's automotive sector competitive.

GM's decision was made because of a restructuring. It says that it is closing not only the plant in Oshawa, but also those in Detroit, Ohio, Maryland, and Korea.

We heard that this might be due to the price on pollution or the tariffs. There is no price on pollution in these other jurisdictions, and yet GM is closing plants there, so we really need to look at what is happening here.

I want to close with this. The member for St. Albert—Edmonton, in his earlier question to the member for Durham, wanted to talk about the opportunities. If, by chance, this plant closes, there is tremendous opportunity in the Durham region. We see the work shortages with the Ontario Power Generation at Darlington. We have seen our government make a $9.5 million investment in the climate wind tunnel at UOIT's Automotive Centre of Excellence. There is the capacity to really build back better, to harness the investments we have made so far and to make sure that Oshawa comes out of this thriving.

That is what I want to see. We want to be here to support the people of Oshawa to ensure they know that all levels of government will work together, across all aisles, so that at the end of the day we are here for them.

[Peter Kent, Conservative, Thornhill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is clear that all three parties in the House share the concern and a commitment to do the right thing, even if between us there are differences on exactly what things need to be done.

While investment is essential for jobs in the manufacturing industry under threat by so many factors these days, we have to remember that jobs in manufacturing are directly related to consumer preferences and the products offered. Dennis DesRosiers, a pre-eminent automotive consultant, reminded us today that the Oshawa plant, where the work was magnificent and the workers delivered on every commitment, produced more than 900,000 vehicles 15 years ago, and in 2016 fewer than 150,000 of the particular vehicles being made there.

Would my colleague agree that where investment is possible, so also is encouragement by the government of the day to ensure that the investment goes into manufacturing companies and industries where the products being produced will ensure the success and continued viability of a company?

[Celina Caesar-Chavannes, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we did hear from GM today that it is restructuring its global business to focus more on electric and autonomous vehicles. Investments are essential and it is essential that companies make forward looking investments.

When we talk about pricing pollution, we have heard about the multi-trillion dollar industry available to those who are a part of it. Ministers across government talk about the importance of making those investments and ensuring that we have a green economy. We have heard about the investment that we made to make sure that we have the skilled labour force that we need.

Yes, the investments are important, but the strategic investments that are made are even more important to ensure that we have not just the jobs of today, but also the jobs of tomorrow.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Minister of Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, it really is an honour to represent the riding of Mississauga—Malton, where I am raising my family and my two young girls, Nanki and Kirpa. It is a riding where there are also many small and medium-sized businesses that are part of the auto manufacturing sector, supplying key parts to many of the key automakers.

From her knowledge of the automotive sector, what is the member for Whitby's message to those small and medium-sized enterprises? What is her message to the auto suppliers about how the government should respond to those workers? I would really appreciated it if she could shed some light on what we should do as an important step for suppliers, which are part of the debate as well.

[Celina Caesar-Chavannes, Liberal, Whitby, ON]

Mr. Speaker, at the end of the day, what we want the suppliers and the people in Oshawa to know is that we will support them. We will be there for them every step of the way.

We have to be forward looking. I was a small business owner as well, and I know that many businesses in the region will be impacted by this news today, some of them in Whitby. We want them to know that we have made investments along the way to ensure that small and medium-sized Canadian businesses thrive. We have lowered the small business tax rate. We have made conditions through trade that make it possible for some of these business not just to thrive locally, but also internationally.

This is a very devastating day, but we also have to look at what we have done so far to ensure that our businesses do well and to know that we will stand with the businesses that are particularly impacted by the decision today. We will stand with the auto sector as we have done in the past, and we will make sure that going forward it will have the same opportunities.

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

Before we resume debate, I would like to briefly remind the House that, for emergency debates, as with adjournment proceedings, for example, the Standing Orders allow members to address the House from the seat of their choosing.

All the other debate rules, essentially, are followed in the same way that we do during normal debates, on Government Orders for example.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Guelph.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as the government, we are incredibly disappointed and concerned by the announcement today from General Motors to shut down its facility in Oshawa. My heart goes out to the women and men whose jobs will be affected along with their families and their communities, as well as everybody in the supply chain who is affected by decisions like these when they occur.

As a member of another community with deep ties to the automotive sector, I can understand the feelings of workers, families and the community in Oshawa today. The Oshawa assembly supports thousands of high-paying, good middle-class jobs, and we want the people of Oshawa and all Canadians to know that we are committed not only to them but also to ensuring the economic growth, strength and diversification of the Canadian economy. Canada has a strong and proud automotive history stretching back more than 100 years and that proud legacy continues today, employing over 500,000 people, directly and indirectly. It contributes $18 billion to our GDP and is the country's largest export industry.

Coming from Guelph with the automotive supplier Linamar, I can speak to the importance of automotive suppliers and the impact of the network of suppliers that support all the plants impacted by GM's announcement today, regardless of which side of the border or, in fact, where in the world they are located. Canada's automotive supply sector is a major employer in Canada, accounting for approximately 130,900 jobs and contributing $9.7 billion to Canada's GDP, and more than 90% of our suppliers in Canada are SMEs. Therefore, decisions like this have a ripple effect throughout our economy.

Our government recognizes the importance of this sector, especially suppliers. That is why, through the strategic innovation fund, a $2-billion program, the government has provided funding to support innovative projects in the automotive sector, including the automotive suppliers that are adding value and providing innovation within this sector. For example, we provided $49 million to help Linamar Corporation launch a new innovation centre in my town and my riding of Guelph. It is dedicated entirely to research and development. It is going to create 1,500 new jobs and maintain another 8,000 jobs in Guelph.

Additionally, through the strategic innovation fund, we also provided $110 million for Toyota Motor Manufacturing Canada in Cambridge that will help to retain 8,000 jobs there, create 450 new jobs and provide 1,000 more co-op placements, making Toyota's Canadian plants the largest producer of Toyota hybrid vehicles in North America. These investments are a testament to the strength of Canada's automotive sector and speak to the quality and skill of our highly educated and efficient workforce. On days like this, we need encouragement and we need to see where Canada really stands in this key sector. It really stands with the talent of the people who operate and work within the assembly plants and in the feeder plants going onto the line.

Canada continues to be home to the world-renowned experts working in many of the technical areas that are contributing to automotive innovation, and really redefining the car of the future, including cybersecurity, battery and fuel-cell technology, ICT, sensors, lightweight materials and alternate powertrains. Industry 4.0 is alive in Canada. This makes Canada an ideal place to do automotive R and D, and I know that this strong tradition is going to continue and in fact is going to grow forward from here.

In addition to the strategic innovation fund, our government recently put in place measures to ensure that our automotive and manufacturing industries remain competitive in the global economy. We are committed to enhancing confidence in Canada by supporting Canadian businesses as they grow, expand into new markets, and create additional good, well-paying jobs.

The fall economic statement implemented several measures to ensure that Canada continues to innovate in the face of international developments and increasing competition. These measures will allow businesses to immediately write off the cost of machinery and equipment used for the manufacturing or processing of goods, as well as write off the full cost of specific clean-energy equipment.

The fall economic statement also introduced the accelerated investment incentive, an accelerated capital cost allowance for businesses of all sizes, across all sectors of the economy that are making special capital investments. It will help to encourage investment in Canada, providing a timely boost to investor confidence and ensuring that Canada remains competitive in the global market going forward. There is a path forward. These measures are in addition to previously announced initiatives that will strengthen Canada's economy and ensure that Canada remains a place that can develop the car of the future.

Our world-class talent, and leading institutions and researchers make Canada an ideal place for cutting-edge R & D, not only in the automotive sector but across all disciplines, including agriculture, looking at bioproducts, and what can come from the farm to the factory floor. Our budget in 2018 made a significant $925-million investment in fundamental research through the granting councils, which is one way our government is committed to R & D and our world-leading researchers and institutions. This investment will ensure that Canada builds upon its incredible reputation for talent and skills, making Canada the place to develop the car of the future. From alternative fuel research in British Columbia to lithium-ion battery research in Nova Scotia, Canada's automotive R & D stretches from coast to coast to coast. I know that I speak for all Canadians and my constituents when I say the people of Oshawa have the support of those across the country and they will lead us on the path to the future.

Further, our government has committed to strengthening our free trade agreements and opening global markets for business. We are committed to diversifying our economic exports to the Asia-Pacific region and Europe, as well as developing new markets in services, digital products, health technology and e-commerce. We will continue to promote Canada abroad as a world-leading destination for investors and businesses. To do this, we launched Invest in Canada, an organization dedicated to attracting global investment and simplifying the process for businesses to invest in Canada. Paired with our major investments in R & D, our competitive funding support programs and our recent announcements in the fall economic statement, our government has positioned Canada to take advantage of a rapidly changing global landscape, and to be the location of choice to build the car of the future.

While we are devastated by today's announcement, all Canadians, and especially those in Oshawa, should know that our government is considering every option to ensure that those affected by today's decision will be supported.

Canada has a long and proud automotive history. We will continue to ensure that rapidly changing industry continues to call Canada home. The measures being taken by our government that I have outlined will increase our economic prosperity and increase opportunity for well-paying quality jobs, not only in Oshawa but right across our great country.

Message from the Senate

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

Before we go to questions and comments, I have the honour to inform the House that a message has been received from the Senate, informing this House that the Senate has passed the following bill, Bill C-89, an act to provide for the resumption and continuation of postal services.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

General Motors Plant Closure

[Randy Hoback, Conservative, Prince Albert, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his presentation and the talking points that are embedded within it. The Liberals talk the game. They talk about having done all these things. They talk about the fall economic update, yet this happened after that statement. We have been hearing from companies and manufacturing right across Canada, since June, July, that they cannot survive unless they see changes and some things addressed as far as competitiveness. They have been saying this at the trade committee over and over again. They continued to say it even last week, yet the current government does not understand that. It is not taking this seriously.

I have a manufacturing facility in my riding where 8% of the employees were laid off. There were 80 people laid off just before Christmas. It did not want to do that, but it had to do it. We are hearing this over and over again.

When will the Liberals get serious about what they need to do, like reverse some of the bad decisions they made in the last three years and move forward with some progressive policy that will see our manufacturing be competitive in the global environment?

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Speaker, when we talk about progressive policy, the Conservative Party does not come front of mind. However, this is not a political discussion in terms of one party doing something differently or better. We are looking at providing support for Canadians.

When we look at the pathway to the future, the pathway will get past the current decisions. It will get past the fact that an automotive plant has decided, based on volumes, that it can no longer continue to provide yesterday's products. We are working on alternate fuel cells. We are working on vehicle-to-vehicle communications. We are looking at the car of the future, positioning our workers and our researchers to support the ongoing industry 4.0 that we are all heading toward globally.

[Bob Bratina, Liberal, Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my friend from Guelph knows that we in Hamilton have gone through similar disturbing chapters in our economic history. Certainly, the member for Hamilton Mountain will remember when there were 25,000 people working at the Steel Company of Canada. There was a layoff of 7,000 in one year alone. Currently, the workforce is well under 1,000. However, we found many assets that were left behind when the industry changed, which allowed Hamilton to reinvigorate to the point now where we have the most diverse economy in Canada and a very good unemployment rate. I spoke earlier about that.

What I would ask my friend from Guelph is: What assets would be left in place that another company or group of companies might take advantage of in the situation in which we are finding ourselves in Oshawa?

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I have worked in the steel mills in Hamilton. I worked in the Oshawa plant as well when we were introducing new technologies for the paint booths. We were putting pneumatic cylinders in the place of electric drives, which are now being replaced by the next version of electric drives. Oshawa has kept up with investments in equipment, so there is the equipment of the physical assets that are there, similar to the steel mills. When we looked at transitioning the steel mills and going into new servo systems and variable drives, Hamilton had the basis and the bones of a good steel mill that was made better by new technology that was then making it into world-class steel, and now is shipping around the world as well.

We have the physical assets, but most importantly, we have the human assets, the people who have been trained to be world class in their field in the automotive sector, who were hoping to pivot into new jobs, working together with the provincial government and with business.

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Central Okanagan—Similkameen—Nicola, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I would absolutely agree with the member on one thing. It is important for those families who are going to be impacted to get access to EI. They have paid into that system and will expect those benefits to be there when they need them. I appreciate that end of it.

The finance committee, last November and in the spring of this year, went to Washington and New York. We spoke specifically to politicians and businesses there. The tax reform measures the Americans passed late last year absolutely had drawn the attention of a lot of people, because we saw a lot of opportunity for investment, and people were doing that.

Since then we have had tariffs put on the Canadian economy that continue to make things worse for us. In his speech, the member talked specifically about some of the investment provisions in the fall economic update. Does he not agree that this is far too late? For these kinds of incentives if someone is looking to go out of business they are not looking to invest, so it does not help them. It does not help the people in Alberta, and it will not help the people in Oshawa tonight. Does he not see how his government has allowed for this to go on far too long, where we are seeing some of these decisions are made in advance?

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as the co-chair of the automotive caucus, we spoke this morning with the Canadian Vehicle Manufacturers' Association. We talked about the trade agreements we have been able to negotiate. We talked about the vehicle of the future, with zero emission vehicles, and what is needed in terms of technical developments.

We are very encouraged by the CVMA telling us that we are on the right track, that we are working toward global competitiveness. Right now, we have some unreasonable, and we think illegal, tariffs that have to be removed. The steel and aluminum tariffs will be lifted. Right now, we have also provided support for companies like Linamar in Guelph, which are being affected by the steel tariffs, so they can still be competitive on the supply chain. We are supporting throughout the tariffs, and as we negotiate out of the tariffs, we are also supporting financially, and with a vision to the future. The CVMA was very complimentary on what we are doing. We are working very closely with it through this issue and all issues going forward to develop the vehicle of the future.

[The Deputy Speaker, Bruce Stanton]

That five minute period has finished, and before we go to resuming debate, I have a note for hon. members.

The Chair takes note of the fact that all three parties supported today's request for an emergency debate. Accordingly, with the nature of this type of debate, we will be abandoning the usual form for choosing members by their party affiliation during the period for questions and comments.

It is also apparent that this is an issue that is relevant to many of the members who are here this evening and the taking of their time, so we want to make sure that all members who want to stand up during questions and comments get the opportunity to do so regardless of their particular affiliation. Certainly members who may not have stood up under that part of the debate will be given preference to make sure that they have an opportunity to do so.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Carleton.

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank you and the House for agreeing to host this debate this evening. I think members of all parties will agree that it is an important conversation and that our constituents across the country will be listening. This is one of those rare occasions when a national news event sends reverberations right across the country, even though its crucible is in one particular geographic location. All Canadians stand with the people of Oshawa today.

Tonight, moms and dads will go home in that city and sit their children down at the dinner table and tell them they have terrible news, that the place they go to work every day might not be around for very much longer. After the kids go to bed, moms and dads will come together and talk about what they are going to do, how they are going to pay the mortgage, how they are going to make that minimum contribution to the registered education savings plan so that the kids who are graduating from high school in just five or six years will have a chance to go to university.

This night might be a very long one. Those parents might go to bed, but they might not sleep because those incredible pressures will weigh on them all through the hours of darkness. We want them to know that there will be light at the end of this tunnel and that we have the opportunity to rebuild these opportunities. We have the opportunity to rebuild the economic livelihoods of the people who have received this terrible news.

There is nothing I can say or that any of us can immediately do this evening that is going to change the decision of General Motors to shut down its operations in Oshawa. There is nothing we can say that will provide comfort to those families, but what we can do is learn from the events over the last 24 hours and plan accordingly. What these events teach us is that no matter how good things seem to be going on the surface, trouble may just be around the corner.

I remember back in the early 2000s, both Liberal and Conservative governments faced criticism. People asked, “Why are you so focused on paying off the debt?” Ministers, like Martin and later Flaherty said, “We have our reasons.” Both of them paid off large quantities of national debt, to their credit. The member for Milton, with whom I will be splitting my time, will comment further on this point. Those men understood that good times do not always last, and that is why it is always wise to save up money and store it away for a rainy day.

Our ancestors taught us that. We are a nation with agrarian roots, and when our ancestors had sunny days, they filled up the cellar with goods so that when a rough season came, when the rain fell too hard for a crop to be harvested, they would have something to get them through the hard times. That was the same lesson that governments, both Liberal and Conservative, followed during those earlier years.

That wisdom became apparent when the great global recession of 2008 hit. For a brief moment, I think all of us who were around at that time were reminded of those terrible days. We turned on the news and Lehman Brothers and massive investment banks were literally collapsing. Large financial institutions were losing literally tens of billions of dollars a month, and that is individual financial institutions. Of course, large sectors literally came to the brink of falling right off the cliff and being eliminated altogether. The manufacturing heartland in Ontario was threatened, and GM was among those companies that received a bailout just to survive.

Of course, no one is suggesting that we have returned to that crisis-level situation. The worldwide economy has not collapsed. To the contrary, the world economy has done very well over the last couple of years. It peaked in 2017, with roaring growth both around the globe and, in particular, south of the border with our largest trade partner, the United States, which purchases 75% of our exports. Times have been good and it is very easy for us now to forget that it was not so long ago, only one decade, when the entire global economic system had come crashing down.

The fact that the Flahertys, the Chrétiens, the Martins and the Harpers made the decision to pay off tens of billions of dollars of debt gave us enormous structural resiliency going into that crisis. Members of both parties, historically, deserve some credit for those decisions. As a result, Canada was the last country to go into recession and deficit and the first country to come out of both. Consistently, we had among the lowest unemployment rates in the G7. We did not have to bail out our banks. We had no debt crisis at the governmental level. However, now Canadians look on with great concern as their government is doing precisely the opposite of what our wise predecessors did 10, 15 and 20 years ago.

We are reverting to the first Trudeau government's approach of diving deep into debt, structural deficits that exist even when times are good. The government recently released its annual financial report and in it pointed to the factors that delivered massive revenue windfalls in the 2017-18 fiscal year. The government's own admission was that those factors were low interest rates, booming housing markets in Vancouver and Toronto, roaring U.S. and rural economies and high commodity prices. These are all factors out of the government's control. They are also factors that can come and go with the wind. They generated $20 billion in additional unexpected revenue for the government in the last fiscal year. What did the government do with that revenue? It spent every single penny and then borrowed $20 billion more.

The Prime Minister had said that next year we would have a balanced budget. He famously said the budget would balance itself. We learned in the recent fall economic update that not only will the budget not be balanced next year but the deficit will be bigger than it is this year. He plans to put another $20 billion on the national credit card. Again, this is in the good times. As Canadians look on with great compassion and sympathy to their compatriots in Oshawa, they first think how can they help and, second, what if this happens more broadly across the country and across the economy? Will our foundations as a government and as an economy be solid enough to resist the kinds of storms we have seen in the past? With the debts the government is accumulating, many Canadians are concerned that the answer is no.

Our suggestion, as the official opposition, is that it is not too late to do the right thing, to turn the corner, to moderate government spending, allow the economy and the taxpayer to catch up with the cost of government so that we can gradually return to a balanced budget in the medium term and, hopefully, even begin to pay off debt as the government, as represented by both Liberals and Conservatives, did in the past. That is the responsible thing to do. That is the Canadian way. It is what our ancestors, were they here today, would advise us to do with their great knowledge of history. Not only would our ancestors advise us to do it but our grandchildren would thank us for doing it.

[Lloyd Longfield, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Speaker, focusing on us versus focusing on the automotive industry is not the way forward or what we do in this House criticizing each other versus looking at the bigger picture. GM's global restructuring plan is what we are debating tonight. We are looking at what GM has done in Oshawa, Detroit-Hamtramck, the Lordstown assembly plant in Warren, Ohio, Baltimore operations, the Warren transmission operations, the Gunsan plant in Korea and two other plants outside North America that are being closed by the end of 2019. Clearly, we are looking at an industry that is pivoting into a new car. It is pivoting into a new design. What we need to do to support the workers in Oshawa and the new industry that we are creating through our talented workforce is what we should be debating.

Could the member comment on Oshawa and what he thinks about the people of Oshawa tonight?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

I did, and I can comment, Mr. Speaker. I opened my remarks by very extensively talking about the great people of Oshawa, among the most productive and talented auto workers in the world, who, through circumstances completely out of their control, that are not their fault or their doing, are now in this terrible situation.

There is no doubt that the government should immediately dispatch teams from Service Canada to make sure that these people know exactly what services they are entitled to receive in the form of work-sharing potential agreements, in the form of employment insurance and in the form of job training, all of which exist already. We believe those should be made available to those people, and we encourage the government to deliver them.

I think the member would acknowledge, if he had listened to my remarks carefully, that I praised both past Conservative and Liberal governments for deeds well done. I simply ask that the present government learn some of the lessons those past governments have to teach them.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I agree with my friend from Carleton that this is a nonpartisan debate. The Speaker made reference a few moments ago to the fact that this emergency debate is supported by all three parties. The Green Party also very much supports having this emergency debate tonight. This is an emergency, and as the member for Carleton quite eloquently put it, it is a devastating blow to families where one or more of the partners is employed by GM in Oshawa.

I would like to ask the member if he could turn his mind to the fact that GM announced more than a year ago that it was going to discontinue manufacturing internal combustion engine cars and would be shifting to all-electric and potentially some diesel-powered cars. Was there not something we could have done through a recognition that the world is shifting from internal combustion engines? Could we not have done something to be prepared to talk to GM, to talk to the Ontario government, which is moving in the other direction, and to talk to the federal government, which has not yet put in place the kind of program that could entice any corporation to decide to get rid of the internal combustion engine and manufacture electric vehicles here?

[Pierre Poilievre, Conservative, Carleton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I acknowledge that the member and all the other parties support this debate, and I commend them for that as well.

Could any government have done something to address the fact that GM is shifting to electric and self-driving vehicles? I do not know how any government could decide for a particular corporation what its production line will be.

What we can do, though, is create an environment that is attractive for investment and capital. That should be our goal. Our goal should be to be a low-tax, light regulation, open free-market, free-trading nation, where international investors say that this is the place to build the next great product. That will not happen because of central planning or government edict. Businesses do not want to go where governments are going to try to control their decisions. It will happen in a place where there is a big free-market open economy that allows businesses to get ahead by producing the best product rather than in a government-run economy where businesses get ahead by having the best lobbyists.

[Lisa Raitt, Conservative, Milton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am grateful for the opportunity for us to debate such an important issue this evening.

Last night, when I was sitting in my house, I received an alert that there were rumours in Ontario, in the GTA, that there was going to be an announcement in the morning that the Oshawa GM plant was going to be closed, and unallocated vehicles would be their future starting in 2019. I knew in that moment how devastating that was going to be for that community.

I decided to write a friend of mine. His name is Jerry Dias, and he is the president of Unifor. I told him I was hearing these rumours and asked if there was any truth to the rumour that the Oshawa plant was going to be closing. His comments back were very swift and to the point. He said, “Over my dead body.”

I bring that up, because it shows the importance of this plant and what it means to the families there from an economic point of view as well as from a social point of view. I know many of us have said this already, and I will say it again, because it should be repeated consistently. My heart goes out to the families who are so impacted by the decision they heard about today.

I have been there. I grew up in Cape Breton in the 1970s and 1980s. During that time, there were changes in the world economy, and choices were made by different companies. As a result, a decision was taken that the steel plant was no longer going to be part of the Sydney infrastructure, and the coal mine, as a result, was going to be closed down too. At the same time, we had difficulties in the fisheries. We experienced in that short period of time some incredible body blows to the economy of the area. The government stepped in to try to help out with more EI, more programming, possibly a tax-free zone and all of those kinds of things governments try to do to deal with a terrible situation when it happens. The reality is that the impact and the lasting effect on the people who have lived the experience is devastating.

The situation in my part of the world, in Cape Breton, is the reality that the saddest place in the world is the Sydney airport. That is where grandmothers who have never seen their grandchildren come to see their babies for the first time as they come off the plane, because their children have moved away. I do not know of many of my colleagues I went to high school with who are still in Sydney. It is a handful at best. In my family, it is about 50%. Fifty per cent go away to make their living and 50%, the lucky ones, we call them, get to stay home and make whatever living they can. The reality is that when we lose such an important private sector employment opportunity in a smaller community that is so dependent on that source of income, it takes a lot to make sure that it can be, in fact, replaced.

I was struck by the fact today, looking at an economic impact statement about the importance of GM to not only the Oshawa economy but the GTA economy, that of the top 10 employers in Oshawa right now, GM is number one, but it is only one of two private sector employers on the entire list. The second private sector employer is way down at number eight, and in between are universities, hospitals and all the other public sector jobs that are there. However, it really is the private sector jobs that drive the economy and are the lifeblood of a community.

As I pointed out, we lost that in Cape Breton, and as a result, we lost our population, and we have lost generations. In fact, we have never been able to come back. The sad part is that while the government, with its great intentions, whatever the political stripe, tried and was determined to help Cape Bretoners by giving them that cheque to get them through to the next time, the reality is that it did not help us as a people, because we still do not have private sector employers, even 40 years after we suffered the terrible tragedies we did in losing the manufacturing base. I tell this place that story because we cannot put any more emphasis on the importance of having private sector employment or manufacturing in a place like Ontario than by looking at examples of where it was lost.

I spoke to someone who is in the auto parts business today. I asked, “What is your best advice? What do we do now? Where do we go? What should we be talking about tonight in the House of Commons?”

He said that the most important thing we need to do is make sure that, as Canadians, we retain the footprint we have of auto manufacturing. He reminded me that around the world, every country would like to attract an automotive manufacturing industry, because it is high tech and there are well-paying jobs that are great for communities and for economic development. We truly do compete with the rest of the world.

As a result, we have to look at how to present ourselves to the rest of the world as a place to invest. My colleague, the member for Carleton, has done an excellent job laying out the difficulties associated with Canada's unfortunate reputation as not being competitive in the world. Perhaps this came into a lot of the decision-making made by GM in the past number of years.

I also know that when these larger companies are making decisions, they look at some very important issues. They take a look at the tax policy of the country. They take a look at what the energy costs of the country are, and they take a look at what the regulatory system of a country is at the time to determine whether they are going to be able to make money going forward. That, in reality, is what corporations do.

As much as it hurts to see that share prices may rebound as a result of the decision to cut so many jobs in a community that does not deserve to have the jobs cut, that is the system we have. That is something a government should be always aware of and understanding. It is important to show that the country is competitive and understands the bigger picture in competing on a worldwide basis.

In the economic update the Minister of Finance just presented, there were some good things that many of the auto parts manufacturers, and indeed some of the auto manufacturers, indicated were good, such as accelerated capital costs, something that had been asked for for many years, and a regulatory review, which are all great. However, we are being presented those in 2018, nine months after the United States has implemented so many other incredibly, I guess, business friendly moves to improve their competitiveness.

Where was our government in 2016? I will tell the House. It was in Davos. In 2016, it had a crucial meeting with the head of GM, Mary Barra. It was the government's first opportunity, just two months into the new government, and it sent every minister that had a pulse over to Davos to have conversations about the importance of competitiveness. It gave very flowery prose to the media, and it was reported. The story was that Canada is great, therefore companies should invest in it.

For the record, I just want to read into Hansard some of the reports that came back and some of the quotes. What I believe they show was the naivete of the government in dealing with an issue that I submit could have been foreseen and could have been mitigated instead of having the issue we have today.

[The Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development] spoke this morning with Mary Barra, CEO of the General Motors Company, just before she had a closed-door meeting with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau at the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum.

[The minister] said the government made the case for GM to keep its plant open in Oshawa, trying to play up Canada as a high-tech hub and Ontario as an automotive centre.

This was in January 2016. The government was talking about keeping this plant open.

He said the company didn't give the government any specifics about the future of the Oshawa plant....

“These decisions by companies are not made on the spot. What they're looking for is a government that's willing to work with them, to partner with them,”

How did the government partner with them? We ended up with steel tariffs, aluminum tariffs and countervailing tariffs. We ended up with a carbon tax, which made energy incredibly expensive. We saw an incredible unwillingness to react to the Trump competitive issues that were introduced by the government.

The minister said:

We made it very clear that Canada is open for business, that we're a willing partner in that and as they plan production, as they plan their business plan for the next two to three to five years, that we're part of that business plan....

At the very end, to show the complete naivete of the government in dealing with incredibly important issues to Canadians, he said:

Relationships matter. There's so much global competition that when they have a relationship, when they have a level of comfort, it does go a long way.

So much for sunny ways.

[Adam Vaughan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Families]

Mr. Speaker, I am a little astonished. I have been sitting in the House since the election of this government and I have never heard the Conservatives talk about GM until tonight.

I just listened to the member for Carleton talk about the fact that everything is great in the country, that everything is booming and therefore we should be implementing things, like the member for B.C. said, such as the tax cuts that Donald Trump put in place that added a trillion dollars to the U.S. debt. A party that pretends to be concerned about the deficit has no problem recommending we add a trillion dollars to the debt through a bunch of reckless tax cuts.

The Conservatives say that there is no strategy for the auto sector in the country, yet that very same meeting at Davos and the $5.6 billion the government has invested in the auto industry has produced 1,000 high-tech jobs at one of the leading research facilities in the country in Oshawa, operated by GM. Quite clearly, this government is very focused on it. However, if the Conservatives had advice for us three years ago on how to save this plant, what was it and why did they not table it publicly?