Debates of Dec. 1st, 2021

Softwood Lumber Dispute with the United States

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Mr. Chair, I would like to thank the new member for Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill for probably one of her first speeches.

Right now, forestry workers in my riding do not want to hear rhetoric about a win-win because this has already been a loss-loss. They have already lost the jobs, the mills are already closing and forestry companies in B.C. like West Fraser are looking to go south of the border. Frankly, the government has had since 2016, when it started talking about signing a new deal, to get things done, but it has not.

The other day I asked the minister in the House of Commons during an adjournment debate what positive steps she was going to take. I agree that she took a positive step today; she went to Washington, D.C. However, we have not outlined for industry a transparent process that it can look to for any type of certainty.

Could the member please comment on whether she agrees that it has been way too long and the government has not acted quickly enough to support the workers in my riding and across British Columbia who are impacted the most by the lack of government action?

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Chair, we all share my hon. colleague's concerns. Whether these jobs are defecting from our ridings or not, they are Canadian jobs and they are good Canadian jobs. We all agree this evening that we want to protect these workers and this industry, but this issue has been going on for decades, and the current round of irritants in this trade dispute has to do with American protectionism, quite frankly.

We want to assure members that we are interested in outcomes that are acceptable for industry workers. Canadians elected us to work together, and I think we all agree that these are the outcomes we want. We are going to keep standing up for the workers and the forestry sector. Our government has consistently stood up for Canadian businesses and workers, and we are always going to fight for the best interests of all Canadians.

[Kristina Michaud, Bloc, Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia, QC]

Mr. Chair, I would like to know what my colleague thinks of the liquidity program. In order to qualify, producers practically have to declare technical bankruptcy. Forestry workers in my region would like to access this program before reaching bankruptcy, in order to cover the tariffs. Does my colleague think that her government would be prepared to make this program accessible to workers?

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Chair, of course no one wants to see any of these industries fail or these businesses shut down. Our government has always fought for workers and industries in Canada. I know we will do whatever it takes to keep these industries open and working and to keep these workers employed.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Mr. Chair, as this is a take-note debate, I want to ask about a gender lens on these negotiations. However, before I do that, I will recognize the skills of the Quebec forestry and mill workers who came to my riding in the early 1900s to start the Fraser mill, which is no longer in place. I definitely want to recognize them, as well as the skilled forestry workers, the Sikh and Chinese immigrants who came to my community in the early 1900s.

This year, the gender equality in forestry national action plan wrapped up. I am wondering if there was or can be a presentation of this work in the U.S. negotiations so the Americans understand how important this diversity work is in this sector.

[Leah Taylor Roy, Liberal, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Chair, I believe that the lens on gender equity is very important. The government will be making its appeals and presentations with that in mind. Our government is a feminist government committed to making sure there is gender equality, and I know this is very important to all ministers and all parties involved.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Mr. Chair, I will be splitting my time with the member for Miramichi—Grand Lake.

While I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak today, it is unfortunate that we are here late tonight having this take-note debate on softwood lumber as a result of the Liberal government’s continued mismanagement of our relationship with the United States.

Softwood lumber is a critical industry across the country, particularly in my home province of British Columbia and in the Okanagan. Workers in this sector have been looking for certainty and stability through the finalization of a new softwood lumber agreement. The last softwood agreement, negotiated and signed by a previous Conservative government, expired in October 2015.

Despite the Liberal Prime Minister pledging to negotiate a new agreement after the Liberals formed government, six years, four trade ministers and three different U.S. administrations later we are still waiting. The Liberals also failed to negotiate softwood into CUSMA.

Last February, because of my role at the time as shadow minister for international trade, I led, on behalf of our Conservative caucus, the forming of a special committee on Canada-U.S. economic relations, as there were so many serious issues the Liberals were mismanaging. The softwood lumber sector had seen thousands of people lose their jobs.

Despite the Prime Minister touting his relationship with the U.S. administration and President Biden, that same administration has now formally announced a doubling of tariffs for our softwood lumber sector. Our relationship is strained, and instead of moving softwood lumber issues forward, they have gone backward.

The trade minister's inaction on getting a new softwood agreement with the U.S. is devastating for small businesses and workers in forestry. My community has seen this first-hand. Kelowna-Lake Country used to have a thriving forestry sector, with good jobs and many in the community relying on its success. However, uncertainty and poor market conditions led to over 200 people in my community losing their good jobs at the mill over the course of two years, and the final blow was the mill closure in 2020, a mill which had operated and supported families for over 80 years.

Close to 10,000 businesses, large and small, provide services across the value chain for the forestry sector in British Columbia. They rely on the sector thriving to make their payrolls, employ workers and reinvest in their communities.

Despite the U.S. announcing its plans to increase countervailing duties on softwood lumber last May, we have seen no concrete evidence that the Liberals made any effort in that time to convince the U.S. that these duties are unjust. The Liberals had five months to act, and what we saw in that time is they were prioritizing an unnecessary election instead of acting for Canadian forestry workers this summer. On top of this, our supply chains with the U.S. are integrated, and this uncertainty has led to higher pricing, which ultimately leads to higher construction costs.

The Conservatives have pressed the Liberals to act time and time again. Last spring, when the U.S. announced its intent to double softwood tariffs, my Conservative colleagues and I called an emergency meeting of the international trade committee to hear what actions the trade minister had taken and was planning to take to stop these countervailing duties from happening. What we got instead was the trade minister unable to tell us of any action she had taken, not even whether she had met with U.S. counterparts following the countervailing duty announcement or whether she had discussed it with the ambassador to the U.S.

When I asked the trade minister last spring why she was not acting on U.S. plans to double softwood duties, she said she was disappointed that the U.S. was doing this. These are comments she has made again. In a readout of a meeting the trade minister had with her U.S. counterpart yesterday, she once again said that she voiced her disappointment.

Being disappointed is not equivalent to taking action. If I were to tell a B.C. forestry worker not to worry as the minister has expressed her disappointment to the U.S. administration on softwood duties, I highly doubt they would find that overly reassuring. Being disappointed will not magically resolve the softwood dispute.

We need to see concrete action from the trade minister and the Liberal government to get a new softwood agreement. Our forestry sector depends on this, and it is time the Liberal government takes this seriously, as it is part of our country’s economic recovery.

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Mr. Chair, my colleague from Kelowna—Lake Country mentioned how important the industry is to British Columbia, and the local impact. An aspect we cannot stress enough is that these are jobs, these are livelihoods. It is more than just the overall economy that is at stake here.

I am wondering if she can expand more on the local concerns, some of the things she has either heard from those in B.C. or heard from her colleagues on what is happening on the ground in their ridings.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Mr. Chair, as I mentioned, we have seen job losses in my community. There were people who had worked at the mill for 15, 20, 25, 30 or 35 years and all of a sudden they are out of work. This was their profession. There are not a lot of other options available for them.

We do know as well that, when we look at production in North America, production still exists. What we have seen, though, is loss happening in Canada and increases going to the U.S., so we are losing business to the U.S. What this is doing is causing so much uncertainty in the industry. There is not a lot of confidence to invest here in Canada and to keep those jobs here. This is why a softwood lumber agreement would be so important.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Chair, what is happening is not right and it is not fair. Unfortunately, and sadly, this is not the first time this has happened. It has happened on several occasions where the wealthy elite within the industry, stakeholders and lobbyists in the United States are successful.

Canada has been successful in terms of getting the matter resolved and being there for our industry. Once again, unfortunately, the Canadian government does have to step in, get involved and break down the barriers to take it wherever it needs to be taken. I am hoping that the members on all sides of the House will concur that, at the end of the day, this House will unite and ensure that Canada prevails on this very important issue.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Madam Chair, we have to remember that we have not had a softwood lumber agreement now since 2015. As I mentioned in my speech questioning the minister, there were very few talks, negotiations or communications going on. That is what happens when there is a breakdown in a relationship.

The current president in the U.S., President Biden, was the vice-president back when we had an agreement, which the Conservatives had extended, so it is absolutely achievable. It has not been a focus of the government at all, and it is a real failure.

[Sylvie Bérubé, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

You know, businesses in our regions are coping with losses, job shortages, and administrative costs. Some are on the verge of bankruptcy; some are already gone.

The forestry sector in my region, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, is huge. You know, the Prime Minister went to Washington, there was talk about the return of the three amigos, but we all know what happened next.

The minister is in Washington right now. Do you think we will be getting good news or more bad news?

[The Deputy Chair, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I would remind the member to address the Chair, not the members directly.

The hon. member for Kelowna—Lake Country.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Madam Chair, I am sure we are all hopeful there will be some solutions that come out of this. The last time there were highly publicized conversations between the trade minister, the Prime Minister and their counterparts, it was announced shortly after that these countervailing measures might be coming.

We have seen the trend here. We are certainly hopeful that there will be some resolution. That is what we all want. Everyone in this House wants a resolution so we can give the industry certainty and stability.

[Jake Stewart, Conservative, Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB]

Madam Chair, the U.S. and Canada share the world's longest international border and have been allies for more than 150 years. This past year, the Prime Minister has been concerned with cross-border relations. He has been concerned with electric vehicle production and border carbon adjustments. He has been concerned with climate change in his own country, and he has not been very concerned with the softwood timber dispute.

President Biden does not have much respect for our Prime Minister because former prime minister Brian Mulroney got deals done. Liberal prime ministers after him got deals done, and former prime minister Stephen Harper was actually managing to get exemptions for Atlantic Canada. Under the current Liberal government, New Brunswick, Atlantic Canada and all of Canada are facing more than double the tariffs that we were already struggling with.

The Obama administration sent the Department of Commerce into a deep dive to determine how the United States could get something they wanted and how the country of Canada could not get something it wanted. The basic rules of friendship are to respect each other. This is an over 150-year relationship. We are two nations that have always managed to get something that is in the best interests of their nations.

Right now the United States has no respect for our country because our Prime Minister is weak on the international stage. This is part of the problem we are facing right now. The Clintons gave the Prime Minister a nice endorsement at election time knowing how easy it would be for the Americans and their buy America campaign. Everyone worried about President Trump and talked about how bad Republicans were. This started under President Obama, and it has been doubled twice, now again under President Biden. This is actually a liberal agenda stemming from the United States, which our Liberal government here has no impact to counter.

The forestry sector is crucial in New Brunswick, as it employs thousands of New Brunswickers. The government must stand by lumber producers for our communities. It has not been able to do it. The evidence is very clear. I have three or four mills in my constituency and many communities benefit. My father was a logger. My grandfather was a contractor. The forestry industry runs deep in my blood. There are a total of 24,000 jobs and the sawmill sector alone in New Brunswick is the foundation of those jobs.

Tonight, I heard Liberal members across the floor standing up in total hypocrisy talking about how they are going to prevail. Where have they been when right now the evidence is that they have failed not once, but twice? Now we are expected to believe they are going to prevail. They are not going to be able to prevail because the Prime Minister is failing on the international stage. This one is affecting all of Canada.

I would like to say to the people of New Brunswick and the people of Miramichi—Grand Lake that Conservatives are going to keep the government accountable because right now Liberals are unable to do any damage across the border. When we have a 150-year relationship, we should be able to say what is good for them, and what is good for us, and then make a few deals. They are the basic rules of trading. There has to be something that we are exporting to the United States that they depend on our country for. There has to be something more important than electric vehicles.

The government across the floor has no interest in fixing this issue right now. Canadians were promised a renewed relationship by the Prime Minister and, instead, what do we get? An EV tax credit that threatens Canadian auto manufacturing, stringent buy America policies, measures targeting agricultural exports and actions against energy pipelines, which are contributing to skyrocketing energy prices, just like the inflation on everything else in this country.

Now the United States is at it again, doubling tariffs on Canadian softwood. What is going to be done about it? The hypocrisy from across the floor is that they will prevail. That sounds great. On behalf of the people of Miramichi—Grand Lake, I ask how they will prevail.

Tonight I am proud to speak for New Brunswick and New Brunswick companies. We need a government that will put them first on softwood timber.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Madam Chair, I disagree wholeheartedly with what the member is saying.

The Government of Canada will in fact prevail, as we have done in the past on this issue. If we take a look at the origins of the debate, we are not going to do what Stephen Harper did and concede hundreds of millions of dollars to the Americas over this issue. No government in the history of Canada has achieved as many formal free trade agreements as this Liberal government has in the last six years. To say that we do not have that international relationship is bogus.

Would the member not recognize that, at the end of the day, the industry needs to be supported, and this Liberal government will continue to support the industry here? We will fight the battle that needs to be fought so that Canadians and Canada will in fact prevail on this very important issue.

[Jake Stewart, Conservative, Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB]

Madam Chair, when former prime minister Stephen Harper signed the first deal in 2006, the esteemed member across the floor, in his prevailing ways, comparable to sunny ways, actually voted against it.

How shameful is it to stand in this House after failing every softwood lumber company in the country and talk about something when the Liberals failed in 2006? The Liberals are going back all these years on something they have failed on. That is total hypocrisy in the House of Commons.

The Prime Minister has to show leadership here, and he has not done it. He has not been able to do it. Obama started it off. He could not build a relationship with Trump. Now Biden, and no pun intended, has taken the Prime Minister to the wood shed, and every softwood lumber company in our country is feeling the effects of that right now.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

Madam Chair, several factors are playing into this. One is definitely the diplomatic fiasco I talked about earlier, and another is a kind of bad faith on the Americans' part. That is undeniable.

Generally speaking, Quebec did its part to implement a system that complies with the free trade rules. Unfortunately, the system is undermined by other provinces' stumpage fees. That is the conclusion we came to.

Does my colleague think Quebec's unique system should be recognized as such during future negotiations?

[Jake Stewart, Conservative, Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB]

Madam Chair, I am sure the member has a valid point in terms of his own province, and I would dare say the member knows more about his own province than I do. However, every province in Canada is suffering because of the Prime Minister's inability to forge a relationship with the country that is supposed to be our very best friend.

If the United States is our best friend, our country should be able to forge that relationship, whether we are Liberal or Conservative or Bloc or anything else. That should not matter. Right now, we have seriously been taken to the wood shed by the United States, and the Prime Minister has done nothing but talk about the climate crisis and electric vehicles.

Now everybody is suffering because of that.

[Charlie Angus, NDP, Timmins—James Bay, ON]

Madam Chair, this has been very instructive. Tonight I got to meet the Liberal softwood caucus, with the representatives from downtown Toronto and suburban Toronto and suburban Ottawa.

They told us they were going prevail. They told us to call all our relatives and friends in the United States to say how unfair this is. We know we are in really bad shape on a trade deal when the Liberal softwood caucus is telling us to call our relatives and friends in the United States to say we are being picked on. That is not going to restore the jobs in my region or protect the mills that I have across northern Ontario.

What I do not see from the government is any real commitment to the working class in forestry communities in this country.

[Jake Stewart, Conservative, Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB]

Madam Chair, I could not agree with the member more.

Right now I have mills in my riding, the same as the member opposite. I agree with him. We need leadership from the Prime Minister. It has to supersede politics and political parties. We need real leadership. There is an inability by the Liberal government to provide it.

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Madam Chair, I will be sharing my time with the member for Fleetwood—Port Kells.

As this is my first opportunity to speak in this House during this Parliament, traditionally we all thank our voters, I will thank them, but also pledge to do my very best to uphold both their interests and their dreams for Canada.

Their interests do extend to softwood lumber and this issue. I know that causes some amusement, but we actually believe that an injury to one is an injury to all, and we can actually all be engaged in this issue equally and care. It may be that people in my riding use those products or they have a corporate interest in those mills doing well, but nonetheless, they care about this issue deeply and profoundly.

I would also add that personally, I actually care about it a lot, having grown up as the son of a professional forester who worked in northeastern Ontario for some 40 years, providing softwood lumber for mills in northern Ontario. The fact that my education was paid for, at least in part, by my father's work in the forest industry means that I am committed to this issue personally and passionately. Because I live in an urban centre now does not make me any less committed to the working class, the people who build this country, in every sector, whether it is the extractive industries, the softwood lumber industry or other industries, including agriculture.

The softwood lumber industry has been unjustifiably targeted by these U.S. duties once again. The softwood lumber dispute is not a new trade irritant between our countries; it is an ongoing one that flares up consistently and constantly. I will agree with every member in the House that it is not fair. It is unfortunate that our largest trading partner fails to see the harm that it is causing on both sides of the border.

Our countries have a highly integrated forestry sector. It relies on predictability and stability to maintain the supply of lumber and meet the demand, which is incredibly high in the United States right now, and that is to make sure we have prosperous economies in both our countries. As a trading nation, Canada has rested and will always rest itself into the international rules-based order, and that trading system, which is dependent upon people playing fairly. We will try to ensure that Canada and Canadians receive fair treatment in the global market at all times.

In a relationship as large and as important as the one we have with the United States, there are bound to be trade irritants. That is normal. Relationship building at all levels, respect for the rules-based trading system and enforceable trade dispute settlement mechanisms are the keys to resolving these irritants.

I would say that this is not a partisan issue. I think in the House we all need to agree that we need to work together. The reason we were able to keep the trade dispute mechanism in the new NAFTA, in CUSMA is that Conservatives, NDP, Bloc Québécois and Liberals worked together with industry partners to ensure that we got the best trade deal possible. In fact, we improved upon the old NAFTA. We were able to keep that trade dispute mechanism alive, because we worked together.

There is no failure of leadership here. There needs to be an engagement co-operatively with the imagination that I am hoping all members of the House will bring to this issue. We need to be working together on this. The Minister of International Trade has said very clearly that she wants help, she wants ideas and she wants to engage with every member of the House to ensure that happens. That means engaging with people we know who are legislators in the United States, so they hear the story of Canada and are reminded that their interests, as well as our interests, are bound together in this.

They need our wood, as simply put as that. They need it. We have it. We will supply it well, and our industry needs to be effectively protected by the international rules-based order. We will do it. Our Prime Minister is committed to it. We are committed to it. I know the House is committed to it, and I look forward to working with members and their creative solutions that can only improve our approach on this issue.

[Ryan Williams, Conservative, Bay of Quinte, ON]

Madam Chair, I agree with the hon. member across the way that we have to work together, because the government has just failed to make this negotiation. We had so much time in the last six years to make this happen. President Biden said in his presidential run that he did not want the U.S. to continue the Trump tariffs on their allies.

The U.S. Lumber Coalition last June said that it had not seen Canada come to the table. It said that it wanted to make a deal, but that Canada was not bringing it a deal.

We have had all the time. The biggest thing we have in the negotiation is that we have the wood and the U.S. does not. It does not have enough domestic supply to supply its own nation. We have the negotiation tactics.

Will the government go back with some harder negotiations to make the deal done for our Canadian softwood industry?

[Rob Oliphant, Liberal, Don Valley West, ON]

Madam Chair, with all due respect, that is not the way international trade disputes work.

The fact is that we will steadily and carefully take our case to the places where trade dispute mechanisms actually exist.

I remind members of the House we have consistently won. This is because we are clear, we know where Canada stands on these issues, we listen to our industry partners, we are able to look at this issue in a holistic way and understand those mechanisms will work.

I received criticism at one point from one of my colleagues because in a question in the last Parliament, I said that we will win. I used the definitive “we will win” in this dispute, and we did, and we will again because we will be careful, clear and consistent.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, QC]

Madam Chair, I listened carefully to my colleague from Don Valley West's speech, and I strongly disagree.

He claims there was no failure of leadership, but there was. The United States said it was planning to double the duties long ago, in May. That was six months ago. What did the government do? It did not respond.

Once again, we are in the same situation we have been experiencing year after year. They say we must go through the mechanisms. How many times has Canada sought recourse before the World Trade Organization? Its decisions are not binding. We have to raise our voice when our neighbours disrespect us.

I will ask my colleague: What is the silver bullet?