House of Commons Hansard #119 of the 43rd Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was bank.

Topics

SeniorsAdjournment Proceedings

June 17th, 1:40 a.m.

Liberal

Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC

Mr. Speaker, first, let me say that the government has the greatest respect for its dedicated and hard-working public servants, both retirees and those who are currently employed. All current and former public servants deserve to be paid in an accurate and timely manner for their work on behalf of Canadians.

We recognize that the implementation of the Phoenix pay system had direct and indirect impacts on many current and former employees.

In June 2019, we reached an agreement with several public service unions to compensate current and former employees for the negative impacts caused by the system. Several elements of this agreement were implemented in 2019 and 2020. The process for claiming compensation for severe impacts and personal hardship was launched in January 2021, to be precise. The processes are now available to approximately 146,000 eligible current and former public servants.

In addition, in October 2020, we finalized an agreement with the Public Service Alliance of Canada for damages caused by Phoenix, as well as the late implementation of the 2014 collective agreements. This agreement with PSAC, like the 2019 agreement with the other unions, provides general damages to current and former employees. Most employees represented by PSAC received a payment up to $2,500 on March 3 for general damages and compensation for the late implementation of the 2014 collective agreements. Government officials are working collaboratively with their Public Service Alliance of Canada colleagues to implement the terms of the agreement.

There are a number of components to the agreement and we all want to make the process as easy as possible for those who wish to make a claim. Of course, this includes retirees and all former public servants.

We have learned from our past experience. One of the lessons we learned is that rushing does not always yield the best results. We want to get this right.

Former employees who were represented by PSAC will have to submit a claim to receive compensation. More information about when and how to do that will be provided in the months to come.

In the meantime, former PSAC members can still submit claims under the process in place for out-of-pocket expenses, reimbursement for tax advice, and impacts on income taxes and government benefits.

Let me assure my hon. colleague that we are working hard on behalf of retired and former public servants to get them the compensation they deserve.

SeniorsAdjournment Proceedings

June 17th, 1:45 a.m.

Conservative

Luc Berthold Conservative Mégantic—L'Érable, QC

Mr. Speaker, I will repeat what a retired public servant wrote to me when he learned that he could not get his compensation because he would have to wait for a form that does not yet exist and will be available only in the fall.

This retired public servant served our country to the best of his ability for many years and, unfortunately, for a certain time, he was deprived of his income because of Phoenix. He said he was “furious”.

I hope the parliamentary secretary will hear this retiree's heartfelt message. He is furious over having to wait for a form that could help him access the compensation he is entitled to.

That is why, tonight, I wanted to rise on his behalf and on behalf of all the retirees who are being told that the form does not yet exist. They are all people who are furious and who are waiting for someone to finally listen and respond to them quickly.

SeniorsAdjournment Proceedings

June 17th, 1:45 a.m.

Liberal

Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC

Mr. Speaker, I did indeed hear the message from my hon. colleague's constituent. Canadians can rest assured that public servants will have the government's unconditional support.

We believe in and support all of our federal public servants, including retirees. Retired public servants like my hon. colleague's constituent deserve a retirement free from financial worry after spending their careers serving Canadians.

We understand the concerns of some retirees, and we are working hard, in collaboration with the unions, to make sure that eligible public service retirees are paid what they are owed in a timely manner. We are fully committed to fair and timely compensation for out-of-pocket expenses brought on by Phoenix-related compensation issues.

We are moving forward with the damages process to look after all our retired public servants as quickly as we can. We will get there together, in co-operation with unions and current and former public servants.

Forestry IndustryAdjournment Proceedings

June 17th, 2021 / 1:45 a.m.

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity at this very late hour to stand up today for workers in forestry, contracting and home renovations in Kelowna—Lake Country, British Columbia, and across Canada, and, most importantly, the opportunity to stand up for everyday families.

Softwood lumber plays a critical role in Canada's economy, and thousands of families rely on its production to supply our domestic markets and our exports. A softwood lumber agreement is critical to providing that certainty and stability. With lumber being a North American commodity, Liberal inaction has led to higher prices in Canada. The last agreement Canada had with the United States was negotiated with the previous Conservative government and expired in October of 2015. Leading up to that expiration, the current Prime Minister promised to negotiate a new agreement within his first 100 days in office. There have been three U.S. administrations and over 2,000 days since then, and we have heard of no formal negotiations.

The Liberals were also outmanoeuvred during CUSMA negotiations by failing to include softwood lumber in that agreement. On February 27, 2020, the Conservative members from the trade committee wrote the Deputy Prime Minister, outlining the “adverse impacts of CUSMA” on softwood lumber and warning that CUSMA “does not prevent the United States from applying antidumping and countervailing duties to Canadian softwood lumber.” They gave many recommendations, none of which have been acted on. Taking the easy way out and failing to negotiate softwood lumber into CUSMA put Canadian businesses and workers at risk. Simply put, the Liberals keep getting outmanoeuvred.

There is clear evidence that jobs and investment are going south. The charts of North America production of softwood lumber show that as of 2015, Canadian production has fallen, while it has been steadily rising in the U.S.. We have heard from within the industry that this is due to so much uncertainty over the past almost six years. Lumber production and exports to the United States are key to the industry's long-term stability and viability, as our supply chains are integrated. This situation was further exacerbated when the U.S. commerce department announced that it intended to double the tariffs on our lumber exports on May 21, 2021.

That is why I, along with my Conservative colleagues on the international trade committee, called for an emergency meeting to address this potentially devastating issue. At the June 4 meeting, the minister stated during her testimony, “I think the tariffs that have been imposed are certainly causing concern for home builders and for consumers.” The minister postured, as she was unable to point to any meetings or calls that had taken place with any of her U.S. counterparts in the nearly two weeks it had been at that time since the commerce department's announcement. We have had no negotiations since the last agreement expired that we have heard of, and there are no upcoming scheduled negotiations.

Prior to that meeting, I also had the opportunity to question the minister during debates on the main estimates on May 31, when I wanted to clarify conflicting comments. The U.S. trade representative, Ambassador Tai, had testified during U.S. congressional hearings that Canada has “not expressed interest in engaging” when it came to softwood lumber. Several days later, the Canadian Minister of Natural Resources implied at a natural resources committee meeting that it was in fact the U.S. that was not willing.

My question to the minister is simple. When will the government quit hiding its failures behind a wall of opaque talking points and finger pointing and start getting to work for my constituents in Kelowna—Lake Country, British Columbia and Canada, and when will the government get serious and start negotiations on a new softwood lumber agreement?

Forestry IndustryAdjournment Proceedings

June 17th, 1:50 a.m.

Hull—Aylmer Québec

Liberal

Greg Fergus LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister

Mr. Speaker, the forestry industry is one of Canada's main economic pillars. We recognize the huge contribution made by the more than 200,000 forestry workers who play a key role in Canada's production of high-quality wood products, which are prized around the world and generate economic spinoffs for all Canadians.

I want to start this morning by unequivocally stating that the tariffs on softwood lumber imposed by the United States are unfair and unjust, and they are hurting workers and the industry on both sides of the border. The minister has raised this question at every opportunity with President Biden, with Katherine Tai, the U.S. trade representative, and with Gina Raimondo, the U.S. secretary of commerce.

As we have always done, our government will continue to vigorously defend Canada's forestry sector, which supports hundreds of thousands of good middle-class jobs for Canadians across the country. We are taking a team Canada approach, working hand in hand with the softwood lumber industry, labour unions and provincial and territorial partners on all fronts.

We have launched a series of challenges against the initial U.S. duties on softwood lumber through both the WTO and the new NAFTA. Over the years, we have consistently been awarded legal victories that clearly demonstrate that our softwood lumber industry is in full compliance with international trade rules and that Canada is a trading partner in good standing in the multilateral rules-based system.

Our support for the softwood lumber industry and its workers is unequivocal. In 2017, our government announced the softwood lumber action plan, providing $867 million in measures to support forestry industry workers and their communities. During the pandemic, we supported around 8,500 forestry firms with a total of nearly $600 million from our government's emergency wage subsidy program.

We know that market diversification for our wood products will create Canadian jobs and benefit the communities that rely on the forestry industry. That is why, in 2019, we made an additional investment of over $250 million for action plan programs to help producers tap into new markets and diversify production.

Budget 2021 includes $54.8 million over two years to enhance investments in forestry industry transformation, including working with municipalities and community organizations ready for new forest-based economic opportunities.

Forestry industry workers can rest assured that we will always be there to stand up for their interests, their families and their communities. Our government is working hard to achieve a result that benefits all Canadians. However, we will only accept an agreement that is good for our softwood lumber industry and protects Canadian jobs.

Forestry IndustryAdjournment Proceedings

June 17th, 1:55 a.m.

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

Mr. Speaker, it is not just the livelihoods of the workers in the softwood lumber industry that are under threat. Baseless tariffs also have the added bite of increasing costs to Canadians because of integrated markets. The cost of living and the increased cost of housing are the number one concerns for my constituents in Kelowna—Lake Country and across the country.

Our relationship with the U.S. continues to diminish on all fronts because of the mismanagement of our trading relationship. That is why the official opposition put forth a motion, which I tabled and was supported, to create a new Canada-U.S. economic relations committee.

There are 11,000 lost jobs in the forestry sector, over $100 billion of lost investment in oil and gas, and concerns over lost business because of buy American policies. The Prime Minister talks big, yet he all but shrugs at these issues. The minister says softwood lumber is her top priority, but she could not point to any actions or conversations, since the announcement of tariffs, that she has had with any of her U.S. counterparts when she testified at the trade committee.

When is the government going to get off its hands and start taking any concrete actions on a new softwood lumber agreement?

Forestry IndustryAdjournment Proceedings

June 17th, 1:55 a.m.

Liberal

Greg Fergus Liberal Hull—Aylmer, QC

Mr. Speaker, with all due respect to my hon. colleague, she is wrong. Canada has always vigorously defended the Canadian softwood lumber industry, and it continues to stand up for our forestry workers and our communities in every way possible.

Our government raises the softwood lumber file with the United States every chance it gets. We firmly believe that a resolution is in the best interest of both countries, and we remain ready to talk about it with the United States. We will continue to legally defend our industry through every means, including the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement, the North American Free Trade Agreement and the World Trade Organization.

This government has had and will continue to have as a priority the challenges faced by the softwood lumber industry. We have won before; we will win again.

Forestry IndustryAdjournment Proceedings

June 17th, 1:55 a.m.

The Deputy Speaker Bruce Stanton

Pursuant to an order made on Monday, June 14, the motion to adjourn the House is now deemed to have been adopted. Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until later this day at 10 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 1:57 a.m.)