Debates of June 10th, 2019

Motion that debate be not further adjourned

[Cheryl Hardcastle, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I stand here today as someone who is very supportive of our steel industry, in particular, and our specialty products. I am very proud of the work we do in Windsor—Tecumseh to support a variety of industries using specialty products. Having the experts in that area, we know we need a legislative environment that has their backs.

I am very disappointed that at the time one of my NDP colleagues rose in the House in April to expedite this issue, that was not the time the Liberals chose to seize this and allow us to have a debate in the House and the proper discourse. It creates an avenue for all Canadians to get behind the industry and understand the ways we need to develop the national strategies that New Democrats have been calling for. I am really disappointed that we do not have the opportunity to do this.

What has taken so long? We pushed for this and had a voice vote in the House back in April. What has taken so long to act on this? We have really shortchanged Canadians on a really important discussion on this.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would remind my hon. colleague that we have taken action. We responded dollar for dollar to the unjustified tariffs that were imposed by the Americans, we retaliated in a very clear and concise manner, and we also provided significant support. The measures we are talking about today will be temporary measures for two years, once adopted. This again provides us with the flexibility we need to deal with surges and make sure we have significant capacity in Canada to deal with domestic and North American needs, as well as international needs. This is about supporting workers and the sector.

We are very confident that our plan is supported not only by the workers but by industry, both large manufacturers and producers, as well as small and medium-sized businesses that are part of the supply chain. They recognize that this government has played an active role through new smart industrial policy to continue to have not only a strong economy but an economy that has generated over a million jobs since 2015. We have a record unemployment rate of 5.4%, so clearly our policies and programs are working, but we recognize we must do more, and that is what this bill proposes. It would provide us with the additional tools we need to protect Canadian workers.

[Ken McDonald, Liberal, Avalon, NL]

Mr. Speaker, being from Newfoundland and Labrador, I know first-hand how important it is when industries shut down, whether it be the mining industry in Labrador when it is in trouble or the pulp and paper industry in central Newfoundland or on the west coast of Newfoundland. In 1992, the then fisheries minister put a moratorium on the northern cod fishery, which was the biggest layoff in Canadian history at the time, and probably still is.

Could the minister please explain why it is so important to get this done now, so we can continue on with the work we have to do?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the member for Avalon for his friendship, his leadership and his convictions when it comes to really fighting for his community.

We have had numerous conversations where he has made it very clear that economic development, particularly in different regions around Newfoundland and Labrador, as well as in his community, is absolutely essential. That is why our government has made significant investments in our resource development agencies. We have actually invested $1.3 billion in all our resource development agencies, including ACOA. This is really important because all 32 members, regardless of their political persuasion, made it very clear that we needed to provide more investments in Atlantic Canada.

The previous Harper government made significant cuts; we made significant investments. This is really essential to supporting our workers and really highlights the different tools we are using, as demonstrated in this legislation as well, to support our communities, workers and industries.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, my question has to do with the interesting timing of this bill. It came forward suddenly in a big rush two weeks ago, just after the steel tariffs were lifted and the government sacrificed our ability to put strategic tariffs on the U.S. in any future deal. I have a concern because, in my riding of Sarnia—Lambton, there are very large projects that are up to seven years long and involve a lot of steel purchases. This bill would give the government the ability to interfere in the steel free market.

Would the minister admit that this is just a virtual signal to steel workers, who know that the Liberals dropped the ball on the USMCA when the tariffs were put in place and that they might be reinstalled in the future?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, again, I respectfully disagree with my colleague, whose assessment of the situation is inaccurate. People understand very clearly that we are there to defend workers. That is why we renegotiated a new NAFTA, a new NAFTA that provides predictability, stability and market access into the United States and into Mexico. This is exactly what businesses wanted in Sarnia. This is exactly what businesses wanted right across the country.

As well, we made an important decision with our lobbying efforts and the advocacy and the leadership of the Prime Minister to get these unjustified tariffs removed from section 232 that were imposed on our steel and aluminum sectors. It was a huge win for Canada, and that demonstrates again that this file is very important.

I strongly suggest that we can play politics on a lot of issues, but when it comes to NAFTA and the section 232 tariffs, it is a great opportunity for all of us to work on a united front. I implore all members in this House to support this legislation.

[Garnett Genuis, Conservative, Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I am going to be specific, and I hope the minister will provide some clarity for my constituents. I hear from businesses in my own riding that are concerned and impacted because they are importers of steel. It is a common story in western Canada, where companies are importing steel. They are not able to buy steel within Canada because they see it as cost prohibitive, or there are limits of supply or whatever their concerns are.

Also, they have concerns about some of the administration of safeguards. For example, I have heard that permit applications can essentially only happen a few days before the shipment arrives, which makes it very difficult for companies to plan in advance whether they are going to get permits. Also, I have heard of cases where the application for a permit requires them to send a fax to a number in Ontario. These are real practical difficulties that western Canadian businesses have. There is a possibility of higher costs as a result of these safeguards but also a lack of predictability.

What would the minister say to producers who have contacted me in my riding who are concerned about the impacts on their business because they rely on, and need to rely on, imported steel?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is a very astute observation, when it comes to the integrated supply chain we have, that we need to recognize the different sources of steel. However, when it comes to Saskatchewan in particular, the member opposite knows full well that our government has been very clear in supporting that province, that region, when it comes to steel production. For example, EVRAZ receives significant investments. It received $40 million from the government, for a total investment of $112 million for its project.

That not only supports the employees at EVRAZ, but it supports a lot of the indirect businesses and their workers, including the supply chain to which the member opposite alludes. We want to make sure we have a strong domestic supply, we want to make sure we deal with surges and we want to make sure we provide predictability to businesses as well. That is exactly what this bill would allow us to do. It would give us the tools we need to have the flexibility to deal with these challenging times to make sure that businesses right across the country, particularly in Saskatchewan, understand that we have their backs.

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

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the importance of the debate. The bill seeks to amend and basically change the current process. Right now, we have the CITT, the Canadian International Trade Tribunal, that looks at the integrated supply chains, international markets and surges and falls. It has a full process that, the minister must fully admit, is far more fair to all those concerned than the simple discretion of the Minister of Finance.

Right now there is a rights-based process that also has evidence-based hearings. It hears and collects evidence and then makes a judgment. The minister is suggesting that we put the power in the hands of the minister to simply say that he or she will hear new concerns after there was that process.

Does the minister not believe, first, that this undermines the CITT and our commitment as a country toward a trade rule-based order? Second, is the minister not concerned about rushing the bill through without having a discussion about what are reasonable limits for a minister of the Crown to have? This would not just be applied to steel, but would be applied to other industries as well.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the fundamental point is about ensuring businesses understand that we have their backs and that we are looking at every conceivable tool. I discussed the retaliatory measures that we put in place when the initial tariffs were imposed by the Americans. I talked about a $2-billion support package, where $700 million have already been deployed to businesses right across the country.

This legislation is a temporary measure for two years, once adopted. It will give us the tools we need to protect our steelworkers from unfairly subsidized steel flooding the market. This is the problem we are trying to address. We need to be flexible, we need to be nimble and we need to act in a timely manner. That is why we are proposing these changes.

We have had this conversation in the House and in the committee. We have been talking about this with people in the industry for months. This is not a new issue. It demonstrates that our government is taking action and we continue to defend industry and, more important, defend our workers.

I want to apologize to my colleague beforehand. I was under the assumption he was talking about Saskatchewan, but he was actually referring to his home province of Alberta. I want to stand corrected on that as well.

[Nick Whalen, Liberal, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Speaker, Canadians have really felt the headwinds against trade. Canada, as a trading nation, looks to opportunities to have the high standard of living and prosperity that comes with trade. At the same time, with these headwinds, we feel a lot of uncertainty. Business leaders in my province feel this uncertainty.

How would the bill bring some certainty to the issues around steel and aluminum tariffs and for this industry, so Canadians know they can move into the summer season with confidence that there will be less uncertainty in trade with these commodities?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the fundamental issue is that as a government, we have been very clear when it comes to trade. We negotiated and finalized the free trade agreement with Europe. We renegotiated a new NAFTA with our American and Mexican counterparts. We also finalized CPTPP. That gives Canadian businesses, particularly smaller businesses, access to 1.5 billion consumers.

In order to keep that trade regime moving forward, we also need to have tools to deal with any potential measures taken by other jurisdictions to somehow impact our industry and our workers in a negative fashion. That is why we are moving forward with the legislation. It would allow us that flexibility. It is a temporary measure, but it is one more tool in our tool box to demonstrate very clearly to business leaders and to workers that we have their backs.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the minister said earlier that the government wanted to be nimble and quick, but he did not answer the question I raised earlier. The NDP has been pressing for years for the government to take measures. The government has now been in power for almost four years, but it has not acted at all in a timely manner and has not acted nimbly. Now it is pushing, for the 71st time, a motion of closure.

There is no doubt that members support the bill overall, but the bill could have been improved by putting in place permanent safeguards. There has been absolutely no effort or collaboration at all from the government side. Instead, the Liberals are bringing in closure, when they could have sat down with the opposition parties to improve the bill. We could have put protections in place for steel workers and firms right across the country.

I come back to the question I asked earlier, which really has not been answered by the minister. The NDP supports the bill, but why did the government not collaborate? Why did the government not keep the commitments of 2015? It said that we would have a new Parliament without the old Stephen Harper approach of ramming through omnibus legislation and using closure. Instead, we have a government that has used closure more often proportionally than the Stephen Harper Conservatives did.

This is one case in which closure was completely unnecessary. Had there been collaboration, we could have made better legislation. Why did the government not, in any way, shape or form, try to collaborate with opposition parties like it promised in the 2015 election?

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, again, I respectfully disagree with my colleague. We have been working very closely with workers, unions, industry and with parliamentarians in committee and in the House of Commons. This is not a new issue, as the member has highlighted. We have been collaborating with our colleagues across party lines.

We have said that it is important for the Canadian economy and that we must work together. We have to find a way forward. We need to demonstrate very clearly that we have the tools necessary to deal with challenges regarding surges in steel imports into Canada that may come up. How do we protect capacity in Canada? How do we provide predictability for businesses? How do we ensure we continue to have a strong integrated North American market with our American and Mexican counterparts?

We took measures with the $2-billion support package, which I highlighted. We also brought in safeguards that ultimately went to the CITT. Two of them were for surges and the other five were not.

We are in a position that we need the legislation to allow us the ability to protect our work. That is exactly what we have done, and it is exactly what we will continue to do.

[Rémi Massé, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Innovation]

Mr. Speaker, the minister highlighted the measures that our government has taken in recent months, such as ratifying NAFTA and getting the tariffs lifted.

Before the tariffs were lifted, we implemented a program, an important initiative, to ensure that companies could take advantage of incentives and measures to help them invest in their business. I was fortunate enough to visit Saint-Martin-de-Beauce on Friday on behalf of the minister to announce a $2-million investment. The entrepreneurs who were there had a smile on their faces. They were particularly impressed with the work we have done to support them.

I wonder if the minister could tell us about the kind of investments we made in other regions of Canada that have helped entrepreneurs and businesses in our ridings to continue to develop despite the tariffs that were imposed—and which, of course, were lifted recently.

[Navdeep Bains, Liberal, Mississauga—Malton, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the parliamentary secretary for his question.

It is absolutely essential to invest across Canada, particularly in the regions. I remember my visit to Saint-Martin-de-Beauce. We invested a lot of money in that region.

I also want to take this opportunity to note that we have made significant investments not only in Quebec, but right across the country, particularly in Fort Saskatchewan, where 2,000 jobs were secured and 175 new jobs were created through a $49-million strategic innovation fund investment. It allowed us to invest in the heartland petrochemical complex, which was an Inter Pipeline investment.

We are making investments in Quebec, Alberta and across the country.

We will continue to invest in communities and ensure they have the capacity, the tools and the ability to maintain a sustainable business model for years to come.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Anthony Rota]

It is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith the question necessary to dispose of the motion now before the House.

The question is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

No.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Anthony Rota]

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

[Some hon. members]

Yea.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Anthony Rota]

All those opposed will please say nay.

[Some hon. members]

Nay.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Anthony Rota]

In my opinion the yeas have it.

And five or more members having risen:

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #1346

Customs Tariff

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, Carol Hughes]

I declare the motion carried.