House of Commons Hansard #430 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was internet.
The House resumed from June 6 consideration of the motion that Bill C-101, An Act to amend the Customs Tariff and the Canadian International Trade Tribunal Act, be read the second time and referred to a committee, and of the amendment.
Second ReadingCustoms TariffGovernment Orders
The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes
The hon. member for Abbotsford has five and a half minutes left from his original speech.
The hon. member for Abbotsford.
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Madam Speaker, it is an honour to speak again to Bill C-101, which is effectively a story of failed foreign policy, a story of failed Liberal trade policy and a story of abandonment of our western industries and our manufacturers.
This bill, in short, is really reflective of the Prime Minister's failure to recognize how important the relationship between Canada and the United States is. That relationship is with our largest trading partner. Our bilateral trade is somewhere in the order of $850 billion a year.
What happened was that, for a number of years, the United States has been asking Canada to address a serious trade challenge. That trade challenge is the issue of steel and aluminum imports coming into North America, coming into Canada, effectively being dumped in Canada by countries that sell it at prices that are below the actual cost. It is about illegal imports of steel coming through Canada and then being transshipped into the United States.
The challenge here is that, even though the United States was asking Canada to implement some legislation that would address this very serious trade challenge, our Prime Minister did not listen. He thought that Donald Trump was bluffing, and he did not do anything about it.
A year ago, our American cousins became frustrated and said that if Canadians were not going to listen to their concerns, they were simply going to impose tariffs on steel and aluminum. That is exactly what happened. It took over a year for this Prime Minister to actually take that message seriously.
Today, we are debating the legislation that should have come forward over a year ago. We did not have to go through this period when the United States was imposing tariffs under the guise of national security concerns. We can just imagine Canada, one of the most trusted partners of the United States, security partner, trade partner, foreign policy partner, and the United States becoming so frustrated that it said it would have to use section 232, the national security exemption, to impose these tariffs on Canadians. It might be illegal at the World Trade Organization, but the U.S. was going to do it anyway because it was so frustrated with Canada's intransigence.
That has to be laid at the feet of the Prime Minister. It is symptomatic of a broader malaise in Canada's trade agenda and policy that started back in 2015. Canadians have a right to ask what the playing field was like back in 2015 when the Conservatives left government and the Liberals came in.
Over the preceding 10 years—
Ziad Aboultaif Conservative Edmonton Manning, AB
Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Since my colleague started his speech, we have been hearing a lot of noise. If some conversations could be taken outside the chamber, that would be best. Could the conversations be calmed down?
Second ReadingCustoms TariffGovernment Orders
The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes
I do agree with the member for Edmonton Manning that there is still a lot of noise in the chamber, and there was also some heckling. I would just ask those who have thoughts, instead of talking about them out loud, to hold on to them. There will be a period for questions and comments coming up.
The hon. member for Abbotsford.
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Madam Speaker, thank you for your consideration. There was a lot of heckling coming from over there. They have very thin skins over there because they do not want to hear the truth about their reckless trade policy.
What did 2015 look like? The Conservative government under Stephen Harper had just completed free trade agreements with 46 different countries around the world: trade agreements with the European Union, with the Trans-Pacific Partnership partners, with South Korea, with Jordan, with Peru, with Colombia and with Ukraine. We also modernized trade agreements with countries like Chile and Israel. We had the most aggressive, successful trade agenda this country had ever seen.
For 2015, the tableau had been set. Our diplomatic relationships and trade relationships around the world were as good as they had ever been. We then had a Liberal government come in. Here we are four years later, and what does that agenda look like? Can our Prime Minister travel to China and talk about trade policy? He absolutely cannot. The Prime Minister went to the Philippines and he embarrassed the president of the Philippines in his own country when our Prime Minister was the president's guest at the East Asia Summit.
It has been a disaster of a trade policy. We can think about India. We can think about the tweet about Saudi Arabia—
Second ReadingCustoms TariffGovernment Orders
The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes
Order. The time is up.
I just want to remind members again that if they have questions and comments they should wait until it is time for questions and comments. They should not be yelling, shouting and heckling.
Questions and comments, the hon. member for Malpeque.
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
Madam Speaker, one thing I can certainly say about the member for Abbotsford is that he can string quite a line together, but not with much fact.
The facts of the matter are that pretty nearly all during the Harper years we had huge trade deficits. The member talked about the TPP. It was this government that had to complete the negotiations because the Conservatives could not. He talked about the 46 different trade—
Second ReadingCustoms TariffGovernment Orders
The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes
Order. The same goes for what I just indicated to all the members in the House. Whether it is the government side or the opposition side, there needs to be respect on both sides.
Perhaps the member for Malpeque could wrap up and ask the question so we can get the answer.
Wayne Easter Liberal Malpeque, PE
Madam Speaker, the member talked about the 46 different trade agreements the Conservatives signed. We did some research when the Conservatives were still in government. Do members know how much trade that really amounted to? It was four and a half days' trade with the United States. They are just numbers on the table. They are not really effective agreements. Four and a half days' trade with the United States was all the Conservatives negotiated.
Why does the member for Abbotsford not admit that the Prime Minister and the international trade minister completed the deals that the Conservatives could not complete? They also stood up to Donald Trump the way he should be stood up to.
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Madam Speaker, that is funny. The member started off by saying the Liberals completed the agreements. He then said the agreements are not effective. We are talking about the largest consumer market in the world, the European Union, negotiated under the former Conservative government of Stephen Harper. It is the second-largest trade agreement we would have with any other trading partner in the world, the U.S. being number one. The one thing he said that is truthful is that the United States is our largest trading partner and our bilateral trade is some $850 billion.
However, the second-largest consumer market in the world is the European Union, a well-heeled market under which trade is growing. There are huge opportunities for Canadians to now penetrate that market and drive economic growth and prosperity here at home.
Karine Trudel NDP Jonquière, QC
Madam Speaker, the Liberals seem to be having fun this evening and not taking this seriously, but I want to come back to Bill C-101.
We are talking about workers who are being affected and who are facing an uncertain future because of the Liberals' inaction. If the Liberals had taken action when they should have, we would not be here talking about this right now.
I would like to know what my colleague thinks. In his opinion, how did we get to this point? Why did the government throw thousands of people into uncertainty by failing to take action?
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Madam Speaker, that is a great question. I am a former steelworker. As a UBC student, I worked summers at Wrights Canadian Ropes, a steel mill. I earned my way through university. It is absolutely critical that we understand the needs of Canadian workers, that we implement policy in a timely way.
What happened here is that the concerns of the United States were not listened to. We had a Prime Minister who thought he could bluff the United States and pretend that we are going to go on our merry way and not worry about surges and about dumping. Then the United States said to Canada, “Okay, you are not listening to us. Even though you are a security partner of ours, we are going to trigger section 232, impose very harmful steel and aluminum tariffs that are going to impact steelworkers across the country and many other workers.”
This includes industries in my hometown of Abbotsford, like Mayne Coatings that uses extruded aluminum to manufacture what is called longboard. It made a $100-million investment in Abbotsford and suddenly, overnight, it was told the Prime Minister was not paying attention or being respectful to the Americans and tariffs were being imposed on exports into the United States.
That is what happened. It has been devastating for many companies across Canada.
Second ReadingCustoms TariffGovernment Orders
The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes
Members want to ask questions, so I do want to go to questions and comments.
The hon. member for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell.
Francis Drouin Liberal Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON
Madam Speaker, I listened to my colleague from Abbotsford talking a good game, but he failed to deliver on CETA and failed to deliver on the TPP. Speaking of steelworkers, what does he have against the Canadian Steel Producers Association, or the mayor of Sault Ste. Marie who sent his leader a letter asking him to pass this bill right now? What does he have against Canadian steelworkers?
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Madam Speaker, that is quite something. Liberals are standing in the House claiming the high ground on trade, but everyone who knows anything about trade knows that the previous Conservative government under Stephen Harper was the most successful government when it came to opening up new doors for trade all over the world.
There has been a lot of gamesmanship going on across the way with the Liberals. They know that their time as a government is coming to an end. On October 21 there will be a reckoning coming when they will have to account for their failed trade policies, for breaking promises on balanced budgets and on electoral reform. They are going to have to account for mismanaging the relationship with first nations, the provinces and territories. Their time is coming on October 21. Watch for it.
Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON
Madam Speaker, I hear the Liberals and it has been a litany of disasters on the trade file.
Two weeks after the Prime Minister was elected, he was in Manila and U.S. President Barack Obama said that Canada—
Second ReadingCustoms TariffGovernment Orders
The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes
The member for Glengarry—Prescott—Russell had an opportunity to ask a question and if he has another question, he might want to hold his comments until then so that we can hear what the hon. member for Oshawa is asking.
The hon. member for Oshawa.
Colin Carrie Conservative Oshawa, ON
Madam Speaker, I want to quote the most progressive president in United States history, Barack Obama, who said at the APEC summit just two weeks after the Prime Minister was elected, that Canada and the United States would both soon be signatories to the TPP. The 12-country Trans-Pacific Partnership was signed October 5, and it was one of the topics they were discussing.
I would like my colleague to talk about this. If the Prime Minister had signed the original agreement, which was also the renegotiation of NAFTA, that would have been 13 or 14 months before Mr. Trump was even in office. The deal could have been done, but he could not get that deal done because Australia, New Zealand, Japan and all of the Asian members were upset at Canada.
Could the member please comment on the incompetence that started almost from day one with the government?
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Madam Speaker, as a former trade minister involved in the negotiation of the TPP, I can tell members that I was aghast, and all of my Conservative colleagues were aghast, at what happened in Vietnam. The 11 remaining partners of the TPP had completed negotiations and they all agreed that they were going to meet the next morning to sign the TPP, finalize everything and have a formal announcement. They all got together the next morning, except that there were two chairs empty. Canada's trade minister was missing and Canada's Prime Minister was missing. They were missing in action. They did not show up.
It is among the most embarrassing trade moments that Canada has ever been responsible for. I can tell members that under the next Conservative government, that kind of embarrassment will never happen again.
Francesco Sorbara Liberal Vaughan—Woodbridge, ON
Madam Speaker, in my riding of Vaughan—Woodbridge we have Extrudex Aluminum. We also have Titanium Transportation, which transports metal and steel across the province of Ontario into the United States. Both of these companies have been impacted by the tariffs that were put in place, which are gone now, and both companies are very happy with the deal we received.
Bill C-101 is supported by the mayor of Sault Ste. Marie, who put out a statement today in a letter. It is the same thing with the mayor of Hamilton. Why does the party opposite not join in and actually say that this is good for Canadian workers, that it is good for Canadian industry? The Canadian Steel Producers Association is on board and says that this is good for all Canadian workers directly and indirectly employed by the steel industry.
The tariffs are removed. We do not want any import surges or dumping going on in the Canadian market. It is the right thing to do. It is something I believe the party opposite advocated for in prior months. Why the hypocrisy?
Ed Fast Conservative Abbotsford, BC
Madam Speaker, let me get this right. What I hear the member say is that the government screwed up because it did not listen to the United States. For a year we had tariffs slapped against us because of the government's incompetence, but now we should be thankful that tariffs are gone.
Mayne Coatings, an industry in my riding, made that $100-million investment. There are many other companies in my community alone that were furious at the Prime Minister for his neglect of his responsibilities on trade and for disregarding the concerns the Americans had on dumping and surges. It is only now, at the very last minute as this Parliament is expiring, that we see this legislation coming forward. It is too little, too late.
Second ReadingCustoms TariffGovernment Orders
The Assistant Deputy Speaker Carol Hughes
It being 8 p.m., pursuant to order made earlier today, it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the second reading of the bill now before the House.
The question is on the amendment. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the amendment?