Debates of Feb. 8th, 2022

Opposition Motion—Amendment to the Constitution of Canada (Saskatchewan Act)

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, to start off on a positive note, all members on all sides of the House are recognizing the importance of what the Saskatchewan legislature did in passing a unanimous motion to deal with something that has been around for well over 100 years. It is about time, and we are glad the Saskatchewan legislature has led us to the point where we are today by passing that motion back in November.

My colleague across the way made reference to the price on pollution. In that reference, she somewhat implied that she opposes a price on pollution, or the carbon tax, as she refers to it.

The Conservatives were originally against it and then they were for it, under the previous leadership. Are we to believe now that the Conservative caucus is once again against it? Have the Conservatives done a triple somersault on this particular issue?

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the colleague across the way for giving me a chance to reaffirm my record. Anybody who looks at the record in Hansard will see my position on a carbon tax. It is ineffective and makes life more expensive for Canadians. The member opposite would know that I have always been against a carbon tax. It does not work in rural Canada, especially in a landlocked province where every commodity or product that is produced has to be shipped out.

One great way to reduce pollution is to look at pipelines. They take our oil and energy off the rail line, which gives us an opportunity to put our agricultural commodities on there. This was mentioned earlier by another Liberal colleague. It would feed the world.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I have been listening to the debate, and something is bothering me, specifically the rather jovial unanimous agreement we have reached to rescue Saskatchewan, which wants to keep the $341 million.

I cannot help but compare this to more acrimonious debates. When it comes time to help Saskatchewan, to amend the Constitution to help a western Canadian province, everyone is on board, everyone is pleased, everyone is happy. When it comes time to help Quebec, however, which would like to amend the part of the Constitution that concerns it, things get more complicated. We saw this in the spring, when the Bloc Québécois introduced a motion seeking recognition for Quebec as a nation with only one official language, French. Nine Liberal members abstained; they had better things to do. They went for a walk or a smoke, but they did not vote.

Does my colleague not think that we have a double standard?

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I believe this is actually about fairness. I support any province that wants to amend the Constitution, as it gives the province the ability and authority to exercise its own governance.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the situation before us really highlights big corporations' ability over time to get special treatment and, in this instance, a tax exemption. The NDP absolutely agrees with the motion and we think this should be addressed forthwith.

The other question it raises is the issue of tax fairness. Many corporations today have special treatment from the government and can exercise a variety of loopholes to avoid paying their fair share. The NDP has been calling for changes to close these loopholes for a very long time.

Does the member agree that this needs to be done? Should the Liberal government close all the loopholes for big corporations stashing their dollars offshore and other loopholes that are available to them so that they are made to pay their fair share?

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government should do a lot of things, but this does not necessarily mean it is going to do them. We have heard that today throughout the debate. However, this is a great place to start. There is this 13-year legal battle between CP and the Government of Saskatchewan worth $341 million, and the people of Saskatchewan should not have to pay. CP should have to pay so that the people of Saskatchewan can render services, whether in health or education. That burden should not fall on Saskatchewanians.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure, as always, to speak to this important motion today, and I am proud to be speaking on behalf of Saskatoon West.

Saskatoon is the economic engine of Saskatchewan. For example, in January, there were 6,000 jobs in Saskatchewan and 4,000 of those were created in Saskatoon. My riding is west of the river in Saskatoon and includes the downtown commercial district with all the high rises. It has industrial parks for our oil and gas sector, the energy sector. There is much manufacturing and food processing. For agriculture, we have grain elevators and farm equipment manufacturing in my riding. Of course, it is also a transportation hub. We have highways going in all directions, there is an airport and of course there are trains. About 75,000 individuals live in my riding, from multi-generation Canadians to new immigrants, and we have the fourth-highest urban indigenous population in Canada.

What I do here in Parliament matters to the people in Saskatoon West, and what the Prime Minister and the leader of the NDP do also matters to the people of Saskatoon West. Today's motion is about the most fundamental bedrock that this country is built on. Today, we are debating Canada's Constitution and Saskatchewan's part in it.

The motion would rewrite the Saskatchewan Act, which is the legislation that brought our great province into Confederation. Currently, Canadian Pacific Railway may have an exemption under the act that excludes it from paying taxes to the province. This is a concession that was granted to the railway well over 100 years ago in exchange for its role in building the infrastructure of our province. This point is in dispute and is before the courts, with over $300 million in taxes to the Saskatchewan government at stake. Our motion would amend the Saskatchewan Act to remove any ambiguity about this issue to ensure that CP, like its counterpart CN, pays its taxes like all corporations are required to do. It would also settle the $300 million-plus tax question hanging over the provincial treasury.

I want the people of Saskatoon West to know that today I worked with my colleagues throughout Saskatchewan and throughout the House to get this done for them. As MPs, we can get great things done as Canadians when we work together.

For a little context, the economy, of course, is critical in Saskatchewan, and energy is 26% of the economic activity in the province. We produce an average of 13 million barrels of oil per month, which is about 500,000 barrels a day. For context, Canada as a whole consumes about 2.5 million barrels a day. Saskatchewan has another 1.2 billion barrels of oil in reserve. According to the City of Saskatoon, there are almost 40 businesses in my riding that are directly involved in primary energy production, and hundreds more in secondary manufacturing and service-sector jobs that service the energy sector. Of course, many workers who live in my riding drive to drilling locations all over western Canada.

As I mentioned earlier, Saskatoon has the fourth-largest urban indigenous population in the country. Our companies want to work with indigenous communities on energy and other projects, and many are.

I want to highlight the work of the Saskatoon Tribal Council and what it does in our city. Its website says:

STC Economic Development creates business and industry partnerships to promote sustainable wealth creation for our First Nation Communities. Industry Partnerships are collaborative agreements between key industrial stakeholders in Saskatchewan and the Tribal Council that are participation driven rather than profit driven.

STC's Industry Engagement Strategy was developed in response to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's (TRC) Call to Action, # 92-ii which calls for, 1) equal access to jobs, training, and education opportunities in the corporate sector and, 2) long-term sustainable benefits from economic development projects.

While I am talking about the Saskatoon Tribal Council, I want to give it a shout-out for the great work it is doing with its temporary shelter in Saskatoon. Saskatoon faced a housing crisis this winter, and on very short notice back in November, various stakeholders came together. Within weeks, the STC put together a plan to create a shelter facility with 50 beds for the winter. I visited this facility about three weeks after it opened, and it was a very smooth-running operation, which is amazing considering they had such a short period of time to get it going. They are providing such a critical service in Saskatoon. This is a great example of different organizations and different levels of government working together to creatively solve a problem in a very short period of time. I congratulate Tribal Chief Mark Arcand and all the staff who are working in the shelter to look after Saskatoon's people to make Saskatoon a better place.

STC has multiple business partnerships with companies such as SaskEnergy, the largest energy company in the province; Saskatchewan's largest construction firm, KPCL; and Nutrien, the biggest developer of fertilizer on the planet.

Let us talk about Nutrien a bit. Nutrien is a Saskatoon success story. It is the single largest fertilizer manufacturer on the planet with over 20,000 employees worldwide. Where are its corporate headquarters? They are in Saskatoon West, in my riding. Everybody must be fed and to feed those people takes a lot of plants or animals that eat plants. All plants require four elements: oxygen, nitrogen, carbon and potassium. Nutrien extracts potash from the ground and potash is the potassium component of that equation.

The areas around Saskatoon have some of the highest naturally occurring potash reservoirs on the planet and PotashCorp, the Saskatoon-based predecessor to Nutrien, merged with Agrium three years ago to form this new company. Today, no matter what we eat, it has been grown with fertilizer supplied by this company based in my riding.

That brings me to agriculture in general. The lush cropland surrounding Saskatoon makes my riding the perfect hub for all that product to come into. Wheat, canola, pulse and speciality crops, beef, pork, dairy, chicken, it all has to move through my riding to its destination. If it is cattle or pigs, the animals are on trucks for hours until they reach slaughterhouses in Alberta or Manitoba. The grains and crops make their way to Asia, Europe, Africa and throughout the Americas. For that, they need to go to Chicago if it is going south, west to tidewater or east to Thunder Bay for the Great Lakes.

All of this takes trains. CN's largest switching yard between Winnipeg and Kamloops is on the edge of Montgomery in Saskatoon West. CP has its track that runs through the core of the city, right by my constituency office. Farmers, manufacturers and energy companies all depend on these railways to get their products to market.

Canada was built on these two railways. CN was an amalgamation of a bunch of railways that made up the Yellowhead route between Winnipeg and Kamloops in B.C. These railways helped develop the farms and settlements that made up Saskatoon in northern Saskatchewan. CP, of course, traces its roots back to Confederation. The colony of British Columbia joined Confederation on a promise of CP Rail and Sir John A. Macdonald won and lost his government over the CP Rail scandal.

The railways are so critical to our country that they have their own section of the British North America Act. Standing Order 130 of the House of Commons lays out a special procedure to deal specifically with railway legislation, separate from regular government business, and today we are debating a motion that deals directly with Canada's Constitution and the requirement of CP to either pay taxes or not in the province of Saskatchewan.

Now 116 years ago, the Saskatchewan Act created my home province and CP was granted an exemption related to its land concessions exempting it from provincial taxes. CP has been a good corporate citizen and has been paying taxes regardless, but now the railway is seeking $341 million in damages from the province in relation to those taxes.

The province argues that CP gave up the right not to pay the taxes over 60 years ago and is not owed that money back. That brings us to the caboose. Where is the train today? Just three months ago, the Saskatchewan government introduced a constitutional motion to clear up this issue and all MLAs supported it. There was perfect unanimity in the Saskatchewan legislature and that is rare.

In that spirit, I will quote NDP MLA Trent Wotherspoon who spoke on behalf of the official opposition in the provincial legislature. He said:

This is an important action for us as a province. And it represents history in the making because if this motion succeeds, it would be the first time the Saskatchewan Act and our Constitution has been amended with a motion that originates from the Saskatchewan legislature.

He is right. The process for amending the Constitution of the province under the Constitution Act is, first, that the motion has to be passed in the legislature of the affected province, and in this case it was. Second is that the motion has to pass both chambers of Parliament, and third, once it is approved, it then goes to be published under the Great Seal of Her Majesty. Step one is done. Hopefully, step two can happen today in the chamber and then the motion in the Senate can pass soon after.

Given that we are in Her Majesty's 70th jubilee year, this would be the perfect present for her to bequeath the people of Saskatchewan with this motion under her Great Seal.

These are weighty issues. We are talking about a constitutional issue with real economic consequences for my riding. The energy sector, the agriculture sector, corporate headquarters, jobs and indigenous development are all tied together with the growth of the railways. Saskatchewan and Saskatoon West need the railways to remain strong and healthy. They also need the railways to remember they serve the economic good of the people. Without our people thriving, the railways cannot survive.

It is time for CP, the province and the House to turn the page. I encourage MPs from every party to stand up and support this motion.

[Kody Blois, Liberal, Kings—Hants, NS]

Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague touched upon the importance of agriculture. I know, sitting on this side of the House, having been in the class of 2019 with the member for Saskatoon West, I am proud of the work the government has done to increase business risk management programs. We were there during the drought this summer, providing the AgriRecovery framework.

I had the opportunity to speak with the Hon. Ralph Goodale this weekend, talking about the importance of irrigation in the Prairies. I know this was something that Scott Moe's government had signalled.

Given that the member is from Saskatchewan, could he highlight to me where the government might be, at the provincial level, in terms of advancing irrigation projects that the Government of Canada might be able to partner with in the days ahead?

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I am not a spokesman for the Government of Saskatchewan, so I cannot comment on that. I can say that, obviously, water is a key component of agriculture in our province. I indicated in my speech how important agriculture is to everything we do in the province of Saskatchewan.

Obviously, we need good solutions for water and we need reliable solutions for water. I know the project my hon. colleague referred to is something that is being worked on. Hopefully, that will all come together. The key is that we need to be very smart with our water. We need to use it wisely, cherish it and protect it.

[Xavier Barsalou-Duval, Bloc, Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, QC]

Mr. Speaker, something struck me earlier in my colleague’s speech.

We are studying a motion to recognize the constitutional amendment requested by Saskatchewan to make a company, Canadian Pacific, pay the taxes it should pay like any other good corporate citizen.

However, in my colleague’s speech, most of what he said was about how important he thinks oil transportation is. I am trying to understand whether he thinks that rail transportation has other, more valuable and more important purposes than transporting oil.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Mr. Speaker, of course, rail is, as I mentioned, very critical to many of the things we do in our province. Our province is a resource-based province, whether we are talking about oil, minerals, potash or agriculture. All of these things require various forms of transport.

The best way to transport oil is, of course, through a pipeline if we can. We would love to have pipelines built to allow us to do that. If there is no pipeline capacity, then it does go on rail. Rail is critical to so many of the primary industries we have in our province. We need to keep going with that and encourage and have good partners in our rail suppliers in the province.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if the hon. member was here earlier to hear about my grandfather's farm in Asquith, but I spent many of my summers there driving from Saskatoon to the farm in my car as we were checking the herds.

The construction of the rail line was important, I am sure, in those times. Those deals were made in a different time. Today, we have similar deals being made with large corporations in Canada. I am just wondering if the member agrees with the NDP's position that we really need to be taxing corporations fairly from the start.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I was not present when the hon. member was speaking about Asquith, but that is adjacent to my riding so I know the area well.

What is critical in Canada are jobs. We need jobs in our country and we need employees to fill those jobs. The way we get those jobs is by encouraging healthy competition, healthy businesses and strong corporations. Yes, they need to pay their taxes and they need to be fair, but we need to level the playing field with everybody and encourage companies to create jobs and to build wealth in order to help us build wealth in our country.

[Warren Steinley, Conservative, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to say, once again, it is great to see all the connections to Saskatchewan that so many members in the chamber have.

I have a quick question for my friend from Saskatoon West who gave a great speech. Are there other areas where perhaps the federal government has not been listening to the Saskatchewan government or the people of the Saskatchewan for some of the needs they might have going forward?

I could think of the environmental plan and a few others, but are there any other things that we would like to get on the record that we would like to work together to make sure we get it done for the people of our province?

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Mr. Speaker, there are many things. He mentioned the environment and that is a key one. We need to be able to work together. We need to be able to recognize our unique situation with agriculture being so key and our ability to store so much carbon in the ground. Agriculture needs to be recognized with the federal government. That is something we need to work on.

Also on the agriculture file, we need the federal government to step up when there are issues and problems in that area and really help us out to ensure we have a stable Canadian food supply.

Message from the Senate

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

I have the honour to inform the House that a message has been received from the Senate informing this House that the Senate has passed the following bill, to which the concurrence of the House is desired: Bill S-207, An Act to change the name of the electoral district of Châteauguay—Lacolle.

The House resumed consideration of the motion.

Opposition Motion—Amendment to the Constitution of Canada (The Saskatchewan Act)

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence]

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the opportunity to speak on this important motion. Before I get into the details of the motion, which is about whether we amend the Constitution to remove the tax exemption of the Canadian Pacific Railway that is contained in the Saskatchewan Act, I want to speak about the importance of railway in Canada and the role it has played in developing Canada and helping our business community and the economy.

Canada's history is somewhat tied to the railway because, when the Constitution was written and passed in 1867, part of that plan was to open up construction in the four major provinces at the time. It was going to be the new Confederation, the new Canada, which was Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Ontario and Quebec. I am so proud to be from Nova Scotia. I want to thank the legislature and the people at the time, because I know back then it was a very tough fight to join Nova Scotia with the other three provinces, but we did succeed. It was well worth it and we need to continue to support each other.

Part of the Constitution was the construction of the railway to expand or develop western Canada. What is really remarkable is that the engineers at the time were able to put that together. Not so long ago, I was watching a movie on the History channel that was talking about engineers and the role engineers played.

I apologize. I got so excited that I forgot to say I want to share my time with my colleague from Pickering—Uxbridge, who will follow my speech today. When the Speaker started bringing up some information from the Senate, it took some time out.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

I did not interrupt the member's time at all.

The hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the railway not only helped to build the country, it also played a major role with our businesses, communities, transportation and growth. It is hard to believe it, but there are 43,000 kilometres of rail across this great country. Just thinking about, it is unbelievable. Of course, the Canadian National Railway and Canadian Pacific Railway, the CN and CP, have ownership of most of that ground, along with the responsibility. Last year alone, the rail industry shipped 324 million tonnes of goods right across the country and internationally, in connection with others.

Not only does the railway play a role on developing communities but also, as I said, in moving our natural resources, which is so important for the forestry, mining, chemical and petroleum sectors. There is also the farming sector and, of course, the automotive sector. We have auto transport right in my riding. It plays a very big role in the shipping and moving of automobiles right across the country. That plays a very important role in what we call supply management in that industry.

I remember when I was a kid with my dad. He was very upset because they were closing one of the train stops from Sydney to Halifax. It was not far from a small island of 3,500 people, 14 kilometres by 11 kilometres. He was a businessman, and this was going to be an interruption. It would also have additional costs for travel, etc. I remember that from way back when I was a kid, and the rail lines still play an important role today. I think we should keep that in mind.

Now, CP and CN did and continue to invest in the infrastructure of industry and services, but so did our government. Our government continues to do so through various investments, such as the national trade corridor fund to help reduce the bottlenecks that are created in certain areas. That is where investment is most focused because it allows for more efficiency.

Also, our government plays a role in legislation and the regulations around it. As an example, that is why we brought forward the Transportation Modernization Act in 2018, delivering a range of measures and various supports for transportation with strategies for their plan until 2030. It is a lower emission mode of transportation. It allows us to fight climate change as well. We have seen a move from coal to wood to steam to electric to diesel, etc.

Not only did the railway help to build the country, but Canadians helped build the railway and helped build the country as well, not just physically but through significant cash funds, land grants and, of course, exemptions, such as the one we are talking about today. That is why I feel so good about giving my thanks to Canadians who contributed in various ways to that.

Today we are discussing the passing of the constitutional amendments that would put an end to the exemption from CP. This is not the first time that we are talking about exemptions. Let us keep that in mind that, back in 1966, during the modernization of transportation, the Government of Canada and CP came to an agreement for that exemption would be removed. However, it was never formally done through the real avenue of amendments to the Constitution of Canada. That is what brings us today to this point.

CP has been a very profitable company. In 2019, for example, it had revenues of $5.8 billion, so do they really need a tax break? Is that fair to its competition? Is it a fair playing field? Those are important questions that we could ask ourselves.

Is it also fair to the people of Saskatchewan? Of course there are those who may not gain for having to pay more to make up for the loss of revenue. We understand that as a government, and we understand that this discussion is very important for Canadians as well.

Prompted by the court case and the unanimous motion in the legislature in Saskatchewan, the province is seeking to formally and finally remove the exemption from the Constitution of Canada, and we are revisiting that question today. I cannot predict the future or the end game of this debate, but any debate and sharing of various strategies to move forward is always very positive.

I know our government will work with parliamentarians to do the right thing, as our railway transportation system is a very important piece of our success and growth in Canada.

[Warren Steinley, Conservative, Regina—Lewvan, SK]

Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to see my friend rise to speak in the House. I am glad we are on the same side and that the Liberals will be able to support this motion. I have a question that I have asked a few of his colleagues as well.

We have talked about other issues for Saskatchewan that the Liberals have not been as supportive of, such as the environmental plan put forward by the Saskatchewan government. I am wondering if they would have a chance to revisit that decision. I know the Prime Minister dismissed it out of hand a year ago, but it is very similar to a few of the other environmental plans put forward by other provinces that were accepted, such as those from the maritime provinces, and the member would know that.

Therefore, I wonder, in this new sense of coming together and great decorum in the chamber, if they would take another look at the environmental plan put forward by Saskatchewan Premier Moe and his government to see if it would meet their standards.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

Mr. Speaker, I believe the member has been here two years now and has had the opportunity to see the strong climate plan we promised Canadians. We were quoted as having the best one in the country of all the parties, including the Green Party and the NDP, so we are staying focused on delivering for Canadians. In areas where Canadians are paying a price on pollution, there is a rebate that allows them to gain through that return of revenue. Our plan has been solid, but we are always open to working with all provinces and all members of Parliament.

[René Villemure, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like my hon. colleague to tell me if he believes it is immoral or unethical to give a tax break to Canadian Pacific, which made more than $2 billion in profit last year.

[Darrell Samson, Liberal, Sackville—Preston—Chezzetcook, NS]

There is no doubt that $5.8 billion is a huge amount of money in that sector.

With respect to the exemptions, the situation was not the same at the time because we needed to develop this means of transportation and to have companies that would invest. Since then, the situation on the ground has changed dramatically and we therefore need to make the changes required to ensure that the people living there and Canadians benefit more.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Mr. Speaker, this is about the fair treatment of Saskatchewan in Confederation. Saskatchewan deserves to be treated equally with the other provinces, and it has been denied that. This also privileges one big corporation. I want to give a shout-out to the members of the Saskatchewan NDP, who have been really strong advocates on this issue and who pushed for these changes. It is great to see the cross-partisan collaboration to push this forward.

These unfair tax breaks for corporations are only one example of an outdated system that gives immense power to the big railway companies. They also continue to run their own private police forces, which allows them to investigate themselves when real accidents occurred. That happened in 2019, with the CP Railway derailment near Field, British Columbia, in which three workers were tragically killed. Does the member and his government think it is time to end these outdated special privileges for the big rail companies?