Debates of Feb. 4th, 2021

Opposition Motion—Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic Relationship

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Madam Speaker, my sincere apologies.

Looking at the approach of the current Prime Minister's administration, we see a foreign policy approach that is based in selfies and tweets, like the current Deputy Prime Minister's tweet regarding Saudi Arabia. We do not see it based on a set of core values, as we saw with the previous administration. As Canadians, we have suffered for this, with terrorists ending up in Canadian organizations and citizens being arbitrarily detained abroad. I genuinely believe this is a result of not having core values rooted in our foreign policy.

I am going to apply that now to the Canada-U.S. relationship. In fact, I am seeing the same thing. I see four years that were wasted by the current Prime Minister's administration because it could not get past the head of state with our neighbour to the south. The inability to do that resulted in a number of shortfalls for all Canadians.

Instead of focusing on the individual positions, and what we could have achieved with the previous administration, the current Liberal government instead chose to make it about political positioning back here at home. It was a waste of four years.

Now we see that the tables have turned in the United States. There is a new administration under President Biden. We see the current Prime Minister and his government flipping the switch: they say they were against the previous American administration, but will not fight for Canadians with the current one.

Based on that, we need a Canada-first approach grounded in strong values. That is what has been missing for the last five years, as we have seen a foreign policy based on selfies and tweets, and not rooted in values like those of the Prime Minister's predecessor.

We have seen this in all different sectors and in a number of different issues all across government, including Keystone XL and the Line 5 project. Really, we need to consider what our values are, because the current government has not done that. As a result, it has taken a reactive position time and again to the detriment of Canadians.

What could we do if we had a Canada-first approach grounded in strong values? It would allow us to go to the table with confidence, respecting our partners. When we can do that, we can be empowered to fight for jobs here in Canada and to fight for the Canadian economy, especially at this time as we are coming out of a pandemic with $1.1 trillion in debt and $400 billion in deficit. When we have those strong values and a Canada-first approach, we can do that. This is not what we have seen from the current administration.

What we need going forward is to have the foresight and confidence to begin this committee. We have seen great success with the Canada-China committee. Let us look to the future with positivity and co-operation. Our relationship with our best friend to the south deserves it, and Canadians deserve it.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, I noted that the member spoke at great length on numerous occasions about the former former leader of the Conservative Party, when she said that he did not bow down to bullies.

The member did not mention the former leader, or even the current one, who are both on record regarding the USMCA and the tariff problems we had with the United States as encouraging Canada to capitulate and, indeed, back down from the retaliatory tariffs we put into place.

The member cannot say that the current leadership of the Conservative Party would not bow down to bullies, as that is exactly what they encouraged the current Liberal government to do while she was a member of Parliament in the last session.

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Madam Speaker, our current official leader of the opposition has a proud history with this nation, putting his life before others with respect to serving this great country. I know with certainty that he said this morning at his press conference that he would continue to put himself before Canadians, leading this nation forward as we come out of this pandemic. He is the only individual, the only leader, who has the experience, the wisdom and the heart to lead us out of the place we are in currently with this pandemic to a greater economy.

Never mind the vaccines and the horrific rollout that we have seen, the lack of foresight with procurement—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I am sorry. I have to allow for other questions as well.

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Calgary Centre.

[Greg McLean, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Madam Speaker, I want to ask my colleague questions about the file she is very engrossed in right now, which is air travel between our two nations.

We know air travel does not happen on one side of the border only and that we are interconnected in our transportation networks. As this motion is actually about how our two nations interact, could she comment on the failings we are currently seeing on travel between our two nations and how one industry on one side of the border is being treated much differently from the industry on our side of the border?

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Madam Speaker, it goes without saying that the airline sector in Canada has been treated the worst by far among all G7 and G20 nations. The U.S. has been far more flexible and has made better use of tools in an effort to allow its economy, including the airline sector, to remain open.

The result is that we are seeing the Canadian economy suffer greatly. Frankly, the Prime Minister is not contributing to this situation by any means when he forces Canadian carriers to travel their routes to sun destinations, yet allows American carriers to take Canadians to these destinations.

[Ziad Aboultaif, Conservative, Edmonton Manning, AB]

Madam Speaker, I congratulate my colleague for her wonderful speech. It speaks to her experience working and serving in the United States for Canada.

The question I have is this. We lack clarity on Line 5. It is as important to the United States as it is to Canada. When can we, as representatives of Canadians and the Canadian public, expect the government to clarify this situation? Why do we not know the true story? Why is this happening?

[Stephanie Kusie, Conservative, Calgary Midnapore, AB]

Madam Speaker, I hope that as the Unites States considers its decision on Line 5, it will remember the rich history we have, and as the current government fights for Line 5, will remember the high price Canadians will pay for not being successful in maintaining it.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Order. I have a correction to make.

It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Vancouver East, Health; the hon. member for Edmonton Strathcona, Health; the hon. member for Victoria, Small Business.

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Madam Speaker, it is an honour for me to be back in the House speaking to Canadians, especially Canadians in Mégantic—L'Érable, during this very difficult time.

Members of Parliament are always proud to represent and speak on behalf of our constituents, especially on a day like today when the topic is one that unites us all: our most important trade relationship with our biggest trading partner, the United States.

Anyone living in Thetford Mines, in Lac-Mégantic, in Plessisville or around Beauce does not have to look far to find a business that depends on that trade relationship with the United States, be it in metals processing, plastics, wood or aluminum. Businesses in Mégantic—L'Érable, businesses in Beauce, businesses in central Quebec and businesses in the Eastern Townships depend in large part on our wonderful long-standing relationship with our neighbours to the south, a relationship that has become even more expansive since the advent of free trade agreements.

Canada is the United States' largest customer. This works both ways; it is not a one-way street. It is not only we who need the United States, but the United States needs us too. Canada buys more American goods than China, Japan and the United Kingdom combined. Canada is the top trading partner in most U.S. states, more than 30 states. Canadian companies operating in the United States directly employ 825,000 Americans.

We therefore have a win-win relationship with the United States. I would even argue that it is particularly important for the United States because Canadian exports are worth $446 billion and Canadian imports are worth $305 billion. Those are enormous amounts of money.

We cannot take this relationship for granted. We cannot take our trade relationship with our neighbours for granted. We have experienced times in the past when things were not going well in the U.S. There is an old adage in Quebec that when the U.S. sneezes, we catch a cold. That is quite true. A number of signals have been sent in recent years to indicate that we need to pay more attention to this relationship with our neighbours to the south, the special economic relationship we have with our American neighbours.

Today's motion states that “trade between Canada and the United States of America exceeds $1.5-billion per day, more than 300,000 people normally cross the common border monthly, the two countries have enjoyed one of the world's largest open trading blocs for the free movement of goods, services and people since 1989”.

It calls for the creation of a “special committee with the mandate to conduct hearings to examine and review all aspects of the economic relationship between Canada and the United States, including, but not limited to (i) the expressed bilateral economic priorities of the governments of Canada and the United States”.

This is what that means to businesses back home. A. Lacroix Granit, in Saint-Sébastien, provided the granite for the 9/11 memorial in New York City. That is a business back home in the Eastern Townships. Across the United States, especially in the Boston area, there are courtrooms in many courthouses, as beautiful as this chamber, whose millwork was done by Polybois, a company in Thetford Mines. There is CVTech, Série-Act Peinture, CBR Laser, and Tafisa, a Portuguese company that was seeking a foothold in North America and decided to set up shop in Lac-Mégantic so it could export to the United States.

That is the reality. Hundreds and hundreds of jobs depend on the unique trade relationship that we have with the United States.

That is why it is important to take the time to think about it, sit down and figure out what parliamentarians can do to make this relationship better, not worse.

The relationship has deteriorated over the past few years. This was evident with the signing of the last agreement between Canada, the U.S. and Mexico. Unfortunately, Canada ceded part of its sovereignty to the U.S. because the agreement was negotiated at the expense of Quebec's dairy farmers. We agreed to cap exports of Canadian non-fat dairy solids, and we decided to let the United States set our pricing structure and eliminate a milk class. This was done because the negotiators were not aware that dairy farmers also need some protection in these agreements. That has always been accepted.

Contrary to what we were being told, the Americans did not want to abolish supply management. They did not even want to negotiate with Canada at first. They wanted to negotiate with Mexico. It was Canada that raised its hand and said that it did not want to be forgotten. They did not forget about us, and they really hurt dairy farmers.

I also want to talk about electricity exports, which play a key role in Canada's and especially in Quebec's relationship with the United States. Quebec produces a form of renewable energy that is highly sought out by the United States. For example, Hydro-Québec's own website talks about exports to New York state. Quebec has been supplying clean, renewable energy to New York state for over 100 years, starting with the construction of the 200-megawatt Les Cèdres-Dennison intertie in 1914. This relationship continued throughout the evolution of power pooling arrangements and wholesale electricity markets. We can contribute to a long-term renewable energy vision for New York state. This is what is important, and we need to talk about it. We need to focus on exporting renewable energy.

There are also energy exports to New England. Hydro-Québec has been selling electricity to New England since the 1980s. This U.S. region accounts for about half of Quebec's electricity exports. That is a lot. We are talking about jobs and revenue that help boost Canada's economy and support Canadians and Canadian businesses. These are things we absolutely must talk about when the time comes.

There are interconnection projects going on right now. Certain hydroelectric projects are currently facing opposition in some U.S. states that are opposed to purchasing electricity from Quebec.

This committee needs to look at this important sector of Quebec's economy so that we can talk about it and anticipate potential problems. Parliament has a role to play in helping Hydro-Québec with its exports.

Today's motion to create the committee talks about something that we find very worrisome, and that is the new rules related to the Buy American Act. It seems the new U.S. administration intends to put those rules forward again.

The last time that happened, all of our companies rallied together. All of our companies worked hard. What happened? Almost all of our big companies had to open a plant in the U.S. to be able to continue doing business there. It is not right that it has to come to that when we are neighbours and want to maintain a good economic relationship.

I hope that all of the parties in the House will support the creation of this committee for the good of businesses in my riding, businesses in Quebec, Quebec's hydroelectricity, and the Canadian economy as a whole.

[Francis Drouin, Liberal, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Mégantic—L'Érable for his speech.

He mentioned supply management. I know that he often spends time on the Facebook page, “Les amis de la gestion de l'offre”, or friends of supply management. I know that the Bloc Québécois completely agrees with supply management. I know that the NDP does as well. I know that members of the Liberal Party, on this side of the House, do.

We have done everything we can to defend supply management in trade agreements. However, I am not sure that members of the Conservative Party all see eye to eye when it comes to defending supply management. Even today, they have a motion to dismantle supply management, which they are set to debate at their convention. Before even contacting the United States, they want to dismantle supply management.

Can the hon. member guarantee that he will defend supply management within his party?

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Madam Speaker, we will continue to defend supply management. Our people are having these debates and, fortunately, we are winning them.

If there is one thing dairy producers will remember for a long time, it is that they were promised full, fair compensation following the agreement with the U.S. They have not yet seen a penny of that compensation or even a hint of a plan for it.

Compensation should have been paid for the free trade agreement between Canada, the United States and Mexico because, once again, market share was given up. The U.S. now gets 3% more. The government told us it would keep its promises, pay full and fair compensation, and so on. Dairy, egg and poultry farmers have not yet seen a penny or a plan.

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

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. I really enjoyed hearing him talk about what Quebec businesses and businesses in his area are contributing to the Canadian economy and to our relationship with the United States. He also talked about hydroelectricity and Hydro-Québec's contribution to the Canadian economy.

Considering the current state of the government's diplomatic relationships and how it does business, does my colleague think the government is doing enough to make renewable energy a priority in our relationship with our neighbours to the south?

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I think we can never do too much to promote Quebec's renewable energy.

Canada and the various provinces should make greater use of the green energy produced in Quebec. More should be exported to Ontario and elsewhere. It is important to have this channel to export Quebec's energy to other provinces and especially to the United States. As for exporting to the United States, we already have the power transmission lines. We are ready. All that remains is to champion them and ensure that everyone works together to get more of Quebec's renewable energy exported.

That should be the goal of all parliamentarians of all political stripes. That is why a committee is so important: so that we can talk about it and agree on how to move forward to promote this renewable energy.

[Matthew Green, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Mr. Speaker, on the topic of energy, yesterday in response to the death of Keystone XL, Art Price, the former CEO of Husky Energy, stated that “Pipelines today...make no sense.... [T]ere's a surplus in the market.... Stop trying to focus the Alberta economy on growing oil production. Drop it. The industry has.”

President Biden's decision recognizes that big oil and gas companies will not save workers' jobs and that energy transition with a plan to focus on job protection is what workers need.

Does the member believe that by maintaining subsidies to big business, the Liberal government is helping shareholders rather than protecting workers' jobs?

[Luc Berthold, Conservative, Mégantic—L'Érable, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I recall a propane crisis that affected our farmers, health care facilities and businesses in 2019. We almost ran out of propane because there was a rail strike. We could not get propane from Sarnia to Quebec and across Ontario.

Unfortunately, we are not reassured by the intentions being delineated. Propane might not even make it to Sarnia because Line 5 could be blocked.

This is important. It affects the daily lives of Canadians and Quebecers, of our farmers and our business people just about everywhere. We need these pipelines to make our economy work. Any other rhetoric is utopian.

Now is not the time to have these discussions and, more importantly, it is not at all the subject of today's motion.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

The hon. member for Avignon—La Mitis—Matane—Matapédia has about two and a half minutes for her speech.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am very happy because I did not think I would get the chance to speak. I am very pleased to be speaking today.

Any motion to create a special committee is very important, and I thank the Conservatives for moving this one. I think there are many topics to be studied in connection with the pandemic, the new U.S. administration and the Liberal government's repeated diplomatic failures.

As my Bloc Québécois colleagues have said, we support creating such a committee and going through this process. I must, however, be honest and remind members, as I mentioned earlier in some questions, that I am a little concerned about point (ii) in the motion, regarding natural resources. I was worried that the Conservatives were simply using it as a way to promote the pipeline. As we saw with Keystone XL, the U.S. government is prepared to focus on energy transition, combat climate change and give up on environmentally destructive oil projects.

Instead of worrying about this point, I instead view it as an opportunity to promote hydroelectricity and renewable energy and to highlight Quebec's example to our southern neighbour. I believe parliamentarians on this committee would do well to look to Quebec and learn from it.

Let me remind you that in 2017, Quebec's energy sector emitted 0.4% of Canada's greenhouse gases, which is very little given that it is the largest producer of electricity in the country. That is remarkable and I believe that we should really be inspired by it. Quebec's energy model is a green model that is financially viable and it must be on the table as we engage with the United States.

As I also mentioned a little earlier, it seems that the Liberals are never very keen on creating special committees. The Bloc Québécois proposed creating a committee to study COVID-19 spending given that there had been several scandals. Our proposal was rejected, but I truly hope that this time the opposition parties and the Liberals will get behind this special committee because it is very important.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

It being 5:15 p.m., it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith every question necessary to dispose of the business of supply.

The question is on the motion. If a member of a recognized party who is present in the House wishes to request a recorded division or that the motion be adopted on division, I would invite them to now rise and indicate so to the Chair.

[Matt Jeneroux, Conservative, Edmonton Riverbend, AB]

Mr. Speaker, we request a recorded division.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Accordingly, pursuant to order made on Monday, January 25, the division stands deferred until Tuesday, February 16 at the expiry of time provided for Oral Questions.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I think if you seek it, you will find the unanimous consent of the House to see the clock at 5:30 p.m.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Is it agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

It being 5:30 p.m., the House will now proceed to the consideration of Private Members' Business, as listed on today's Order Paper.