House of Commons Hansard #57 of the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was countries.

Topics

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

The Speaker Liberal Anthony Rota

Is that agreed?

Questions on the Order PaperRoutine Proceedings

10:20 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

moved:

That, given 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, the economic challenges caused by COVID-19, and the need for a serious plan for the economic recovery that recognizes the integration of the North American economy, the House appoint 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,

(ii) natural resources issues, including oil and gas exports and transportation, softwood lumber exports, and related jobs,

(iii) "Buy America" procurement rules, requirements and policies,

(iv) the government's efforts with the United States' administration to ensure a stable and predictable supply of COVID-19 vaccine doses for Canada as a major border and trading partner,

provided that:

(a) the committee be composed of 12 members, of which six shall be from the government party, four shall be from the official opposition, one shall be from the Bloc Québécois, and one shall be from the New Democratic Party;

(b) the members shall be named by their respective whip by depositing with the Clerk of the House the list of their members to serve on the committee no later than Thursday, February 18, 2021;

(c) membership substitutions be permitted, if required, in the manner provided for in Standing Order 114(2);

(d) changes to the membership of the committee shall be effective immediately after notification by the relevant whip has been filed with the Clerk of the House;

(e) the Clerk of the House shall convene an organization meeting of the committee on Tuesday, February 23, 2021;

(f) the committee be chaired by a member of the government party and, notwithstanding Standing Order 106(2), there shall be one vice-chair from each of the other recognized parties;

(g) quorum of the committee be as provided for in Standing Order 118 and that the Chair be authorized to hold meetings to receive evidence and to have that evidence printed when a quorum is not present, provided that at least four members are present, including one member of the opposition and one member of the government party;

(h) the committee be granted all of the powers of a standing committee, as provided in the Standing Orders, provided that (i) the provisions of Standing Order 106(4) shall also extend to the committee, (ii) until Sunday, April 11, 2021, the committee shall not meet on a day when the House is sitting, except for (A) the meeting required by paragraph (e), (B) the committee's subcommittee on agenda, if one is appointed;

(i) the committee have the power to authorize video and audio broadcasting of any or all of its proceedings;

(j) the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Minister of Small Business, Export Promotion and International Trade, the Ambassador of Canada to the United States of America, and other ministers and senior officials be invited to appear as witnesses from time to time as the committee sees fit;

(k) the committee be instructed to present an interim report, concerning an analysis of the importance of the Enbridge Line 5 pipeline to both countries' economies and the consequences of its possible closure, including the labour market implications caused by layoffs of unionized and other workers, together with recommendations to address and safeguard Canadian interests, no later than Thursday, April 15, 2021;

(l) the committee be instructed to present a second interim report, concerning current and proposed "Buy America" procurement rules, requirements and policies, together with recommendations to address and safeguard Canadian interests, no later than Thursday, June 17, 2021; and

(m) the provisions of the order adopted on Monday, January 25, 2021, authorizing virtual and hybrid committee proceedings, shall continue to apply to the committee and any of its subcommittees until Sunday, September 19, 2021.

Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup.

I am proud today to speak on our official opposition day and bring forward a Conservative motion to create a special committee worthy of our focus, which is the economic relationship between Canada and the United States. It is long past the time when the government was being proactive rather than reactive in terms of our relationship with the United States, but the motion before the House today will allow us to do exactly that.

Trade between Canada and the U.S. exceeds $1.5 billion per day. Our partnership with the United States is of critical importance. Our two countries share more than a just a border. We share common ideals, and many Canadians and Americans work and live across our borders and have family or friends who reside on the other side of the border. Their lives are integrated. Our business relationships provide countless jobs across the country with our two-way trade.

Since the ratification of NAFTA in 1994, and more recently with CUSMA, our two nations have enjoyed the benefits of the free movement of goods, services and people. It is a strong relationship that has become only stronger over time. However, like every relationship, it takes effort and work.

I know many of my colleagues today will speak on a wide range of challenges that affect different sectors across our country, some old and some new, which highlight the need for this committee.

We have had Keystone XL cancelled and other pipeline issues, such as Line 5, which may lead to immediate fuel shortages in Ontario and Quebec, higher fuel prices and the loss of thousands of jobs; tariff issues; disputes on softwood lumber, dairy, and aluminum; low-priced Washington apples being dumped into Canada; stricter buy American policies; and investigations on several of our fruit and vegetable exports to the U.S.

We need strategic focus. Most of us on this side of the House come from the private sector. We have been entrepreneurs. We have founded and operated companies. We have been in senior leadership roles. We have been involved in strategic planning and risk management, and we have been responsible for people’s livelihoods. We have foregone pay cheques ourselves to make sure our workers, who often become our friends, get paid.

We take seriously people being able to keep their jobs and support their families. Leadership is acknowledging when there are areas that need focus. It is common practice and good governance to put extra effort into important topics.

Striking this committee would be comparable in the business environment to an ad hoc committee, which would have a specific goal or focus and exist for a set amount of time. At the international trade committee we already have several studies cued up. We are quite behind due to sitting only once between April and September 2020, partially due to the prorogation of Parliament. Other committees are in a similar position.

This Canada-U.S. committee would allow the freedom to focus on the important relationship with this partner. There is a new U.S. administration from which we have already seen some new policies that are affecting businesses and workers in Canada, and that are affecting everyday lives in important sectors.

Our economies and supply chains are integrated, and I will explain what that really means. We may have the raw materials in one country, let us say the U.S., which are shipped to the other country, Canada, where a product is made in a Canadian business, and then sent back to the U.S. and perhaps turned into another item. This is the integration of our supply chains. This happens every day across our border in multiple industries, likely in the ridings of almost every member of the House.

The Prime Minister’s response to important Canada-U.S. economic issues has been concern or disappointment. Canadian businesses and workers deserve hope and plans. Concern and disappointment are not enough, and they are neither a strategy nor a plan.

One emerging issue is the new buy American executive order signed by President Biden, which has stronger language than we have seen before. This executive order creates a new made in America office within the President’s office. It will substantially reduce the ability for Canadian businesses to participate in U.S. government procurement contracts.

We have already heard from business groups that are concerned, and there is a lot of uncertainly. A small manufacturing business in my riding explained to me that they sell through a distributor in the U.S., which sells to a department of the U.S. federal government. It is unclear if this new buy American policy will outright stop them being able to have these sales.

In 2019, Canadian companies had nearly 700 million dollars' worth of government contracts in the United States. I spoke with a representative of an industry association the other day who thought this might actually be higher due to the integration of our supply chains.

When buy America provisions were announced by the Obama administration a decade ago, the previous Conservative government got to work. They showed those on both sides of the border the importance of the integrated North American supply chain and that promoting and ensuring our mutual economic recoveries were important during the financial crisis of that time. The then Conservative government negotiated an agreement that allowed Canadian companies to be exempt from buy America policies and to continue participating in U.S. government procurement.

We need our current government to work immediately to do the same to ensure stability for our local manufacturing businesses and workers, who depend on this cross-border supply chain. We are in a vulnerable position because, while the buy America policy is addressed in chapter 13 of CUSMA, Canada did not negotiate this and it only applies to the U.S. and Mexico.

The establishment of a special committee on Canada-U.S. economic relations would allow members of Parliament to do a comprehensive dive into the Biden administration's buy America rules. This motion before us specifically addresses instructing the committee to present an interim report on this matter.

Regarding another emerging issue in the past, 31 of my colleagues in the official opposition and I sent a letter to the Minister of International Trade and the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food urging immediate government attention. Last September, the United States International Trade Commission began an investigation on U.S. blueberry imports. Additional investigations began on strawberries and bell peppers. Canada was the fourth-largest producer of total U.S. blueberry imports in 2019 and, according to the BC Blueberry Council, was the largest supplier of frozen blueberries. These numbers represent $750 million of our exports to the U.S., which support 8,300 farming families and thousands of direct and indirect jobs.

Our hard-working farmers play an integral role in the economy, and we urge the government for immediate action on this. Apple orchardists in my riding are selling below cost due to large quantities of low-priced apples coming in from the U.S., and many are near bankruptcy. The creation of this special committee would allow us to get ahead of these issues.

We also cannot forget that our forestry workers are still looking for stability and a resolution to the current softwood lumber dispute. The previous Conservative government successfully negotiated a softwood lumber agreement with the U.S. government providing this much-needed certainty. Unfortunately, the current government has yet to reach a similar agreement. While I welcome reduced duties on Canadian softwood lumber exports, which were announced last November, this would not have been an issue if we had been able to negotiate a new softwood lumber agreement with the United States.

When we were debating Bill C-4, the CUSMA implementation bill, around this same time last year, I recall the Conservatives raised the issue of the softwood lumber dispute not being addressed by the government then. This was a missed opportunity, as there were over 6,000 jobs lost in the second quarter of 2020 alone.

In my maiden speech of this House in 2019, I raised the issue of the only lumber mill in my riding of Kelowna—Lake Country, the Kelowna division of Tolko, announcing its decision to close at the beginning of 2020, creating hardship for all those families. This has been a trend in our resource sectors. It is important that we stand up for our responsible resource sectors, a backbone of our economy. We need to get the government to succeed in removing countervailing measures on softwood lumber exports and stand up for Canadian resources, agriculture and manufacturing sectors.

I know my colleagues in this House across all party lines will talk on a number of important issues. I will move this conversation forward. We are talking about food security, energy security and mutual economic recovery. With the establishment of this committee, we can strengthen our resolve when acting on the best interests of Canadians.

We must start planning to rebuild, reopen our economy and get Canadians back to work. We are focused on securing jobs, our economy and our future. I encourage all members of this House to vote in favour of this motion, so we can get to work.

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:40 a.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for bringing forward her motion today to discuss what is indeed an extremely important topic. Two billion dollars' worth of trade happens on a daily basis between our country and the United States. Indeed, we do not have, and have not had, the benefit of such an important trading relationship with any other country in the world.

I would add that in the previous session this government negotiated very successfully the new version of NAFTA, despite the fact that the Conservative leader at the time was asking the government to capitulate at almost every turn.

Having said that, this is a great opportunity to get parliamentarians involved in the process. I, for one, hope that this committee can get formed so that we can get to work on behalf of Canadians.

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:40 a.m.

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

Madam Speaker, it is really good to hear those words.

As I mentioned in my speech, this is a very important issue to Canadians across the country. In every riding, we have so many industries that consider our relationship with the United States to be very important, so it is great to hear that we have other members of the House who consider it important as well.

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:40 a.m.

Bloc

Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her speech. I particularly appreciated the part about the forestry industry.

As we know, the forestry industry has always been overlooked by the Canadian federation when it comes to both trade negotiations and financial support. In that regard, many forestry industry stakeholders are saying that they want to see the dispute with the United States before the trade tribunals through to the end but that the big problem is access to cash.

I have never heard my Conservative colleagues comment on that. Would they support implementing a real access to cash program for forestry producers?

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:40 a.m.

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

Madam Speaker, when we look at the forestry sector, we can certainly see that it is across the country. We know that it has had a number of struggles over the years, and we know that there have been many layoffs.

We also know that it is a really responsible steward of the land. I spoke with some forestry groups recently in British Columbia, and they had planted over 300 million trees in the last year. This is definitely a renewable resource, and it is something that we need to focus on.

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:40 a.m.

NDP

Heather McPherson NDP Edmonton Strathcona, AB

Madam Speaker, it is a pleasure to be here today. I am particularly thankful that my colleague brought up the issue of jobs and prosperity. Obviously, in my province of Alberta this is a very pressing issue. I also applaud her and her party for bringing forward this opposition day motion.

My questions concern why she feels this work cannot be accomplished within the Standing Committee on International Trade, why the motion explicitly directs this committee, and why we would not want the committee to have the ability to direct its own work.

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:40 a.m.

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

Madam Speaker, as I mentioned, in a lot of the committees the workload is really heavy already. We have so many issues that we are dealing with. The international trade committee had only one meeting from April until September. We have a lot of studies already in the queue, and this motion is greater than this.

This would cover most sectors and most of our ridings. It is extremely important, and to have a number of very specific parameters in the motion means that we would be addressing the emerging issues we are dealing with today. The scope would be very clear, so we could hit the ground running on some of these very important issues, which are important to Canadians.

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

February 4th, 2021 / 10:45 a.m.

Conservative

Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like to congratulate my hon. colleague from Kelowna—Lake Country for her excellent speech. I thank her, as well as the leader of the official opposition, for moving the motion we are debating this morning, which would create a special committee to examine the economic relationship between Canada and the United States.

For more than 200 years, our two relatively young countries have been very prosperous in large part because of shared resources representing trade estimated at $1.5 billion per day. Until recently, 300,000 people crossed our common border monthly. We shared and traded not just raw materials but also manufactured goods and expertise in many specialized fields.

It is a symbiotic and reciprocal relationship in most cases. In 2019, the United States sold us $360 billion in goods and services, and Canada sold the U.S. $358 billion in goods and services. It is a two-way relationship that was going relatively well.

However, we cannot take anything for granted. Often there is a protectionist undercurrent, which hits Canada hard every time, after the elections that are held every two years in the country of Uncle Sam, and even after the election of a new president, as we saw this year. The good relationship that we have been relying on for so long is challenged and some sectors of the economy end up targeted by bans or new punitive tariffs whose only purpose is to look good with a small minority of the American electorate or a well-organized lobby. It is unfortunate, but it happens.

I believe the new special committee we are proposing would allow Canada to set the record straight on trade and ensure that our country is not the victim of punitive measures, most of which are absolutely not deserved.

The existing Standing Committee on International Trade is very important for the Canadian economy and I commend those of my colleagues who are members. However, contentious issues between Canada and the United States are starting to pile up and could jeopardize the economic recovery we are counting on once this taxing crisis of the COVID-19 pandemic is behind us.

Allow me to name a few, starting with the softwood lumber tariffs, which affected the forestry industry across Quebec and Canada. Some companies in my riding were hit very hard. Lumber exports from Groupe Lebel in Rivière-du-Loup, Maibec and Matériaux Blanchet in Saint-Pamphile, and Bois Daaquam in Saint-Just-de-Bretenières were all unfairly slapped with a 20% U.S. customs tariff. Although these tariffs were ultimately lowered to 10%, they still cost companies like Groupe Lebel $1.5 million a month.

We are a long way from the agreement the Harper government signed in 2006, which gave the forestry industry 10 years of stability and predictability. Canada's forestry industry did not present a threat to American producers; it helped them meet the ever-growing demand. Between 2001 and 2015, before the tariffs were imposed, the American forestry industry experienced a 10% increase in demand, and demand for softwood lumber increased by 21%.

Despite the pandemic, 841,000 new residential construction projects got off the ground in the United States in 2020, which caused the demand for wood and its price to skyrocket. The U.S. forestry sector is not in crisis and Canada is certainly not going to drive down the prices, since it is only responding to demand. However, the Liberal government is just washing its hands of the whole issue and allowing the tariffs dispute to drag on in the courts, causing further delays. We believe it is important for the government to step up and commit to settling this dispute quickly with the new Biden administration.

There is also the whole Buy America issue when it comes to transportation and infrastructure, which I have raised in the past. According to U.S. rules, when a public transit network in the United States receives federal funding, it is required to buy equipment containing a minimum percentage of American content, sometimes even as much as 70%. Favouritism happens in the U.S., but not in Canada. In 2018, I raised this inequity, noting that the Liberal government, here in Canada, awarded a major contract to procure Via Rail cars from Siemens, cars that are built in California. This is in addition to Ottawa's light rail cars that were built in New York.

It is this government's duty to defend free access to the U.S. market especially for products we need, like vaccines. We also want the people of Maine and other U.S. states to have free access to the Canadian market.

Many Canadians welcomed the election of President Joe Biden and his running mate Kamala Harris south of the border. Incidentally, she used to live in Montreal. After four years of “America First” and treaties constantly being disputed by the former president, we were hoping for a bit of calm and predictability.

Once again, however, the Prime Minister of Canada lacked the clout to get things done, and, in less time than it takes to say “Buy America”, President Biden issued new executive orders disregarding the special relationship we supposedly have enjoyed as neighbours and allies for decades. Such failures threaten Canada's economic future, and we must act quickly to defend our interests.

Several of my colleagues will address the issue of the energy industry, but I want to say loud and clear how important it is.

Keystone XL was vital for maintaining and growing Canada's revenues for a resource that will remain essential for at least 50 years, no matter what anyone says. It is unacceptable that Canada is letting tens of billions of dollars go to other countries every year, when we need that money here to fund our health care system, old age pensions and all the other services. Although members of other parties keep crying out for those things, they continue to oppose any development that would actually help fund them.

Canadians should also be worried about Enbridge Line 5 through Michigan, since it serves not only to export our oil to the United States, but also to supply southern Ontario and regions as far as Montreal. Without this safe, efficient way to supply our refineries, we could see even more ships on the St. Lawrence River in the future, close to home, which would be catastrophic. Not only would this bring us our quest for energy self-sufficiency to a standstill, but it would mean a step backwards in terms of environmental risks.

A special committee on Canada-U.S. economic relations would allow us to study all pressing issues related to international trade. The Leader of the Opposition's motion calls for this committee to convene its first meeting very soon, on February 23, since the situation is urgent.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs, who was transport minister at the time, responded that we had no choice because of our free trade agreements with the United States. If I understand his reasoning, we cannot sell them our trains, but we will be required to purchase theirs.

The Conservative Party is not a protectionist party. We know that customs tariffs cause damage on both sides of the border because they inflate prices for everyone. We do not want to take work away from the United States. We want to join forces and share the knowledge we have acquired over the years in rail transportation.

Not only do we have the Bombardier Transport plant in La Pocatière, which was recently acquired by Alston, but we also have a wide range of suppliers, such as Prelco, in Rivière-du-Loup; Technologies Lanka and Graphie 222, in La Pocatière; the LG Cloutier Group, in L’Islet; and Usines métallurgiques and Chabot Carrosserie, in Montmagny. Each of these businesses has spent years perfecting the parts that they supply. This is a topic I am quite familiar with.

I want to add that in light of what my colleague from Kelowna—Lake Country said earlier in response to a question from the member for Edmonton Strathcona, the existing committees are all running behind on their work. This committee must be created as quickly as possible so we can ensure good governance in our relations with the United States in the coming months and years.

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:55 a.m.

Bloc

Mario Simard Bloc Jonquière, QC

Madam Speaker, since my colleague had such a lot to say about the forestry industry, I would like to ask him two quick questions about it.

The first went unanswered earlier. My colleague mentioned a softwood lumber company in his riding. Does he agree that the government should create a good program to help such companies access cash, which is what all industry stakeholders want?

The Standing Committee on Natural Resources has now spent six meetings studying the forestry sector. Clearly, the solution involves creating a cluster of bioproducts to generate new market opportunities for the forestry industry. Unfortunately, that does not seem to be a priority for the Conservatives, because every time we raise the subject, they only want to talk about the clean fuel standard.

My second question is this: Does my colleague think his colleagues could benefit from gaining a better understanding of the forestry industry?

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:55 a.m.

Conservative

Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

I agree with him on the matter of cash flow for forestry companies. We need to look at that from the perspective of our domestic relationship, the relationship that we have within Canada, in order to support our industry, and from the perspective of the relationship that we have with the United States. All of the penalties and taxation rights imposed by the United States in recent years were extremely harmful to the industry. I believe that things have evened out a little now because the price of wood has skyrocketed over the last few weeks and months. However, the fact remains that we need to tackle these problems domestically.

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:55 a.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the President of the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada and to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Madam Speaker, Canada and the United States enjoy one of the most unique relationships in the world. As has been pointed out, there is $2 billion a day in cross-border trade. Our two countries enjoy the largest trading relationship likely in the world, so I can understand and appreciate the need to monitor it and be careful as we move forward with that very important relationship.

On the trade agreement the Conservative Party supported, does he believe there are any shortcomings that he would like to highlight at this time?

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:55 a.m.

Conservative

Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his question.

I did not talk about the agricultural industry, for example, which is still extremely upset about the most recent agreement with the United States. That agreement contains provisions that are very biased, or at least very difficult for dairy producers to manage.

This is the type of issue that could be quickly examined so that we can lay the foundation for a future renegotiation with the United States on agricultural issues.

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:55 a.m.

NDP

Alexandre Boulerice NDP Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech.

He mentioned the United States' Buy American Act. What does he think about the possibility of a “Buy Canadian Act”? For public transportation and aerospace projects in particular, the percentage of the labour that is done here in Quebec or in Canada is much lower than what other countries require.

Why should we not have similar measures to protect and maintain jobs here at home?

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

10:55 a.m.

Conservative

Bernard Généreux Conservative Montmagny—L'Islet—Kamouraska—Rivière-du-Loup, QC

Madam Speaker, that is an excellent question.

The fact is that Canada is a small country. Internationally, it is a minor supplier, especially in the transportation industry. We should seek to have those percentages lowered in the United States and other countries, so we can be viable partners for them. For the last decade and a half, our region has really suffered because of the Buy American Act, and it has gotten worse in recent years.

Unfortunately, I do not think a new “Buy Canadian Act” would make things better or change our situation globally.

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11 a.m.

Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount Québec

Liberal

Marc Garneau LiberalMinister of Foreign Affairs

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak to the motion today. Canada and the United States have long enjoyed one of the most productive, collaborative and mutually beneficial bilateral relationships in the world. It is a partnership of neighbours forged by geography, ennobled by shared values, enriched by common interests, maintained through deep people-to-people connections and reflected in powerful economic and security ties.

Our two countries enjoy the largest trading relationship in the world. We defend and protect North America. We are stewards of our shared environment. We stand on the world stage to respond to pressing global challenges together. This has been true over the course of history. It is true today and it will be true in the days and years to come.

These are not merely words or abstractions. This deep relationship between our two countries is reflected in the relationship between our leaders. Just two weeks ago, President Biden made Canada his choice as his first call to a foreign leader. Together, the Prime Minister and the President reaffirmed our shared values and interests both at home and on the global stage.

Just this past Monday, the Prime Minister spoke with Vice-President Kamala Harris, also her first call to a foreign leader. As many members of this chamber know, the Vice-President has a special relationship with Canada. She recalled her years spent in my hometown of Montreal with fondness. In fact, she went to school in my riding.

I spoke to my counterpart, Secretary Blinken, almost immediately after his appointment, when we reaffirmed the special relationship our countries shared and committed to working together on our shared priorities.

This personal connection is something I share. I spent many memorable years living in the United States, where I trained alongside American astronauts and where my children were born.

If I may begin by talking about COVID-19, the fundamental priority we share with the United States is to end the global pandemic. The spread of COVID-19 has caused upheaval in both Canada and the United States, and we have taken unprecedented action to combat the pandemic, support our citizens and stabilize both economies.

The pandemic has also highlighted how our important and unique bilateral relationship has shaped the way we have managed our co-operation in these uncertain times. Last March, Canada and the United States arrived at a far-reaching agreement to limit discretionary travel across the border, an understanding that has been extended several times by mutual agreement. The magnitude of this decision cannot be overstated. Ours is one of the busiest land borders in the world, with approximately 400,000 people crossing it on any given day.

The smooth flow of people and goods across this border is vitally important to both economies and communities on both sides. In the face of such high stakes, our two countries collaborated in an orderly fashion and quickly arrived at an agreement aimed at limiting the spread of the virus. The agreement has resulted in a 90% reduction in the number of travellers crossing the border while maintaining the flow of essential goods and travellers.

This collaboration set the tone for subsequent co-operation in getting our citizens home, ensuring the continued operation of our supply chains or assisting each other in the production and procurement of medical supplies and other essential goods. A striking example has been our co-operation to procure personal protective equipment, or PPE. As in so many other countries, Canada-U.S. trade in PPE is bilateral and reciprocal. Our collaboration allowed for the smooth flow of PPE across the border and into the hands of health care workers in both countries.

Canadian and American partners are also working together and investing in research to fight the virus with collaboration on 15 different diagnostic and vaccine projects.

Let me say a few words about our trading relationship with the United States.

In 2019, bilateral trade of goods and services totalled $997 billion. That is more than $2.7 billion in trade every day. Our level of economic integration is unique. Approximately 77% of Canadian exports to the U.S. are inputs used to make goods in the U.S. In addition, what we sell to the U.S. contains, on average, roughly 21% American content. We make things together and add value together. Canada is the number one market for most U.S. states, 32 in fact in 2019, and over 74% of Canada's goods exports go to the U.S.

The U.S. is the single greatest investor in Canada. In 2019, U.S. stock investment in Canada was $455 billion, representing nearly half of all investment in Canada.

The enduring trade relationship that has helped build this remarkable regional economic engine, starting with the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement in 1989 and continuing with the NAFTA agreement in 1994, has been a model of success for the world. Over generations, Canada, the United States and Mexico have built the biggest economic region in the world, encompassing a $32.2 trillion regional economic market, representing more than 492 million consumers.

We renewed our commitment to the trilateral commercial relationship with the entry into force of the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement, CUSMA. This new NAFTA addresses modern trade challenges, reduces red tape at the border and provides enhanced predictability and stability for workers and businesses across the integrated North American market. Crucially, the new agreement preserves virtually duty-free trade in North America and ensures the continued predictable and secure market access for Canadian exporters to the United States. These outcomes reinforce integrated North American supply chains and help enhance our competitiveness globally.

Of course, the government also recognizes the critical role energy plays in our trade relationship. Jobs, economic security and competitiveness on both sides of the border depend on our bilateral energy trade. Canada and the United States have a unique energy relationship. We know that the United States is Canada's most important market for energy. In turn, Canada is the largest and most secure foreign source of energy for the United States, including crude oil, natural gas, hydroelectricity and uranium.

In 2019, 91% of Canada's energy exports were destined for the U.S., totalling nearly $125 billion in value. The reverse was also true. Canada is the second-largest market for U.S. energy exports, and these exports play an important role in ensuring Canada has a reliable and secure energy supply.

The truth is that Canada and the U.S. have a highly integrated energy infrastructure system, which allows for the optimization of current global competitiveness, benefiting both Canada and the U.S. We know that the energy sector provides thousands of well-paying, middle-class jobs on both sides of the border.

An essential element of this energy system is a cross-border energy infrastructure, including pipelines. As the Prime Minister said directly to President Biden during their call two weeks ago, “we are disappointed but acknowledge the President’s decision to fulfill his election campaign promise on Keystone XL.”

This said, the Canadian oil industry moves through over 70 pipelines, creating one of the most integrated energy systems between two countries. We will continue to make the case that to continue to deliver and enhance the benefits of Canadian oil and gas to the U.S. we need to build and maintain the necessary infrastructure to get products where they are needed.

I would be remiss if I did not also mention our ongoing legal challenges related to Line 5. Our government has been clear. This pipeline, including the tunnel project under the Straits of Mackinac, is crucial to economic and energy security on both sides of the border. There is no question of Line 5's importance. It supports thousands of jobs in Ontario, Quebec and western Canada. It is essential for keeping the lights and heat on for thousands of Canadians and Americans. It provides a critically important fuel source for farmers and industry.

Line 5 has been operating safely for 68 years. A comprehensive nine-month review concluded that it would not affect protected public uses of Michigan's water resources. Even Michigan state's own environmental body has said that the project is safe.

These are the arguments our government has been raising with American officials and we are using every tool at our disposal to see to it that Line 5 continues its operation. We continue to promote our other sources of energy as well.

On electricity, exports of Canadian hydroelectricity provide clean, renewable, firm 24/7 baseload to many U.S. states. Electricity crosses the U.S.-Canada border along more than 30 major transmission lines, unrestricted by physical barriers, as part of an effective, efficient and highly integrated North American energy grid.

This highly integrated system benefits both Canada and the United States. Operators consistently take advantage of spare energy capacity in neighbouring jurisdictions to optimize their own systems. Ratepayers benefit from a more reliable and resilient electrical system that spans the international border.

Canadian hydro also contributes to U.S. energy security and helps states meet critical greenhouse gas emission reduction targets and move to a low-carbon economy.

Canada is also a leader in nuclear energy. Canada supplies the U.S. with 33% of the fuel used for its reactors, which in turn generate one-fifth of U.S. electricity. Industry and government in both countries are also collaborating on developing advanced nuclear technology, including the next-generation small modular reactors.

In the current context of a global pandemic, it is clearly more important than ever that we work closely to ensure a secure, reliable, sustainable supply of energy sources for North America and the world.

Of course, energy security is only one important factor in our region's safety and overall security. Canada and the United States work closely together in the area of national and international defence.

Canadians and Americans have depended on each other for decades. From the Halifax explosion to the beaches of northern France in World War II, from the hours and days following the September 11, 2001, attacks to the wildfires that devastated California and Oregon last fall, Canadians and Americans have faced the great challenges of the continent and the world side by side.

Today, hundreds of members of the Canadian Armed Forces continue to serve alongside their U.S. allies across America and around the world. The job of protecting the North American homeland continues under the watchful eye of Canadian and American aviators, sailors, soldiers, police officers and firefighters.

A further element that unites us is our shared natural environment.

For example, Canada and the U.S. share many waterways that mark or cross our shared border from the Great Lakes to rivers such as the mighty St. Lawrence. The shores of these lakes and rivers are home to tens of millions of Americans and Canadians, and decisions made within the basins of one country have consequences for the other. Hence, their joint stewardship is a cornerstone of Canada-U.S. relations.

Finally, despite so much progress together, we must acknowledge that our societies face similar difficulties and shameful legacies. Canadians continue to grieve alongside our American friends at the countless victims of police violence around the world. These are not isolated incidents or elsewhere problems.

Prejudice, discrimination and violence are a lived reality for too many people in Canada, just as they are elsewhere. In the face of these injustices we must be clear. We condemn anti-Black racism and systemic discrimination in all its forms. That is what thousands of principled Americans and Canadians have been doing throughout our two countries and we continue to admire and honour their work.

We hear the same calls for a more inclusive and just society here in Canada, where systemic racism is a problem every single day. Canada is not a bystander. As neighbours, this is a burden our two societies share, and we must do better together. Indeed, when the Prime Minister spoke with the vice-president this past Monday, he underscored the need to promote diversity, inclusion and mental health, as well as the importance of addressing online hate, firearms trafficking and gender-based violence. Just yesterday, we listed the white supremacist group the Proud Boys, and others, as a terrorist organization. Our fight against the forces of intolerance and racism is unequivocal.

It is clear that the Canada-U.S. relationship can withstand and even grow in the context of extraordinary challenges. After all, our relationship is a model for the world.

The Prime Minister and President Biden agreed to meet to further the important work of renewing the close and enduring friendship between Canada and the United States. Canada is pleased that this meeting will be taking place and is looking forward to future co-operation.

It is crucial to find partners that we can trust and who will stand by us, even amid the world's relentless challenges. For Canada and the U.S., those partners are each other. We will remain partners, friends, allies and neighbours.

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Conservative

Michael Barrett Conservative Leeds—Grenville—Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes, ON

Madam Speaker, can the minister update the House on the progress of negotiations with the U.S. administration on the buy American provisions? First of all, are those discussions ongoing, and has it been made clear to the United States administration that we are looking for an exemption for Canada under the buy American provisions?

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Marc Garneau Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC

Madam Speaker, as with the very successful negotiations of CUSMA under the previous administration, Canada has always forcefully put forward its position with respect to the highly integrated supply chain architecture that exists between our two countries, and I gave some examples in my presentation.

We will continue to do that. We believe that open, transparent trade between the two countries is in both of our interests. We will continue to carry that message not only to the federal administration but also to governors and other American politicians to ensure that protectionism does not creep into the relationship between the two countries. Of course, that process has begun with the new administration.

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Bloc

Monique Pauzé Bloc Repentigny, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank the minister for his speech. He touched on a number of issues, but I want to come back to the executive order.

The president of the Manufacturiers et Exportateurs du Québec wants the government to review its public procurement policies and require that an American company have a foothold here to meet the conditions of calls for tenders.

Would the Liberal government be willing to make that kind of commitment?

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Marc Garneau Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for her question.

As with any important relationship between two countries, we will work together to advance the values that are important to Canada and our interests. When it comes to trade, it is particularly important that the United States recognize how highly integrated our supply chains are. There are certain aspects that are more important to us, such as supply management. The Americans also have certain areas that they like to protect but, generally, it is in the interest of both countries to have open trade.

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Madam Speaker, it is my first opportunity to speak to the new Minister of Foreign Affairs since he was named to that portfolio and left the transportation portfolio. I congratulate him.

My question relates to Line 5. I have not had a chance to speak to that issue. It is obviously not a climate issue that the Government of Michigan is concerned about. It is a water quality issue in the Strait of Mackinac and, of course, Canada shares responsibility for water quality in the Great Lakes. The local concerns are that the pipeline is quite old and could break and contaminate the Great Lakes. It is not a pipeline that carries bitumen for export; this is a pipeline that essentially crosses the United States to reach refineries in Canada.

Has the Government of Canada been working with Enbridge at all to assist in finding an alternative to the underwater pipeline in the Great Lakes such that it would address the water quality concerns?

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

Marc Garneau Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC

Madam Speaker, I thank the member for her comments about my new appointment.

Of course, as the member knows, this pipeline has been in place for 68 years. It is regularly examined to ensure that it is safe, particularly the seven kilometres below the Mackinac Straits, and even the Michigan environmental assessment has deemed it to be safe. Having said that, Enbridge has undertaken to build a tunnel to make sure that an additional layer of safety is added to the portion of the pipeline that goes under the Mackinac Straits. We feel that this pipeline, which is so important for both Canada and the United States, should continue to operate.

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

Sukh Dhaliwal Liberal Surrey—Newton, BC

Madam Speaker, I would also like to congratulate the hon. minister on his new role as the Minister of Foreign Affairs. I am sure he will face many bullies around the globe, but being a fellow engineer, astronaut and a strong member of the Prime Minister's team, he will be able to stand up to those bullies. However, we are very lucky to have the new administration to our south, which will be very cordial.

In the previous 42nd Parliament, we were able to work together as a team with Conservative members, including the member for Prince Albert, and a former NDP member, Tracey Ramsey. We worked as a team for Canadians. As my riding is in a border town, how would this committee help Canadians?

Opposition Motion—Proposed Special Committee on Canada-United States Economic RelationshipBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

11:20 a.m.

Liberal

Marc Garneau Liberal Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, QC

Madam Speaker, thank you very much for the question and your initial comments as well.

Yes, you are right, that in our dealings with our closest neighbour—