Debates of Nov. 25th, 2025

Softwood Lumber Industry

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Richmond East—Steveston, BC]

Madam Chair, I would like to inform my colleague from the Bloc Québécois that it is not just Quebeckers who are concerned about the forestry industry.

I will be sharing my time with my dear friend, the member for Trois-Rivières.

As a B.C. member of Parliament, this issue hits close to home, as it does for all British Columbians. It affects communities from Richmond to Prince George, which is why I will be speaking about what we are doing to support this critical industry.

As members are well aware, the global trade landscape is fundamentally changing as a result of increasingly persistent geopolitical tensions and persistent unfair trade practices. This transformation is also occurring in parallel with technological advancements, such as the increased adoption of artificial intelligence. As a result, the Canadian economy finds itself at a crossroads.

As a government, we are focused on building our strength at home, investing in domestic production and diversifying trade with stable and reliable economic partners and allies. Inherently, we are implementing a new industrial strategy that will transform our economy to make it more competitive, more productive and more resilient towards global shocks, including U.S. tariffs.

Richmond has a strong wood products sector, which is why I continue to work with the BC Council of Forest Industries. In 2022, forestry accounted for one-quarter of B.C.'s exports, contributed $17.4 billion to provincial GDP, raised $6.6 billion in taxes and accounted for over 100,000 jobs.

In the face of the unjustified tariffs from the United States, the government is supporting Canadian workers and firms through a range of industrial supports to build a more resilient economy. For example, to help companies recover from U.S. tariffs and support innovation, the government announced $5 billion towards the strategic response fund. This new program will help tariff-impacted firms to adapt, diversify and grow by supporting projects that build economic resilience, strengthen supply chains and pivot firms to better serve the domestic or international markets.

Additionally, to support small and medium-sized enterprises impacted by tariffs, the government is providing $1 billion to Canada's regional development agencies for the regional tariff response initiative, or RTRI. This is part of the government's industrial strategy to defend Canadian jobs, industries and supply chains by strengthening domestic firms through investments focused on productivity improvements and market diversification. These investments will strengthen Canada's industrial base in the face of continued global uncertainty.

The government also recognizes that certain economic sectors are more exposed to tariffs than others given targeted action by the United States, and that is why we are taking targeted action to help industries, such as the forestry and softwood lumber sectors. To ensure the forestry and softwood lumber sectors remain competitive and that they transform to succeed in a new geopolitical and trade order, the government is investing $1.2 billion to unlock the full potential of the industry. This includes $700 million for the Business Development Bank of Canada to ensure companies have financing and credit support, and $500 million towards Natural Resources Canada's forestry programs to support market and product diversification.

The government is committed to leveraging procurement as a means to prioritize the use of domestic lumber and steel in housing, construction and federal procurement. The government remains committed, working with Canadian workers and industry to ensure that the Canadian economy comes out of this turbulent period in a stronger and more resilient position than before.

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC]

Madam Chair, the Prime Minister promised to negotiate a win with President Trump by July 21, just eight months ago, but since the Liberals became government in 2015, 30 mills have closed in B.C. alone.

Despite the Liberal Prime Minister's promises that he would have a great relationship with the President, U.S. tariffs on Canadian softwood lumber have tripled to 45%. In B.C. alone over the past 10 years, there have been 10,000 direct jobs lost, and more than three to five times that in indirect job losses, with more to come unless things change. This fall, Sinclar Group Forest Products reduced its production by 40% in three of its mills in northern B.C., and 350 more mill workers were affected by the cuts.

When will the Prime Minister finally get a softwood lumber deal done with the U.S.?

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Richmond East—Steveston, BC]

Madam Chair, I thought the member opposite was going into his speech. Quite frankly, I am not sure I heard the question, but I empathize with every member who is concerned about the forestry industry and what is happening with the challenges we are facing with the United States and the tariff issues.

If the member had listened to what I talked about, he would know that I spoke a lot about diversifying the supports we are offering the industry at a critical time right now when we know that we need to get the best deal for Canadians, not just any deal.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Madam Chair, we all need to be aware of the situation and its impact. Last week, Arbec cut 100 jobs. Abitibi—Témiscamingue has been hit hard over the past year. Hundreds of jobs have been lost. I will ask the question. We all know the metaphor. If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

Clearly, that sound is not reaching Ottawa, it is not reaching the government, because it is not taking any action. In concrete terms, jobs and families are being affected. Plus, there is a network of small businesses in the background. There are entrepreneurs who buy machinery and use whatever room they have on their credit cards. How did the government and the Minister of Finance respond? They are going to provide a line of credit. At some point, it is going to take more than a line of credit to manage this situation. These people have expectations of the government.

What will the government do to provide meaningful assistance to workers in the forestry industry?

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Richmond East—Steveston, BC]

Madam Chair, when a tree falls, the earth shakes, and it was not us who made the tree fall. If we look at the fact that the United States has chosen to take up this fight with a trusted partner, we are doing what we are supposed to do to help the industry. We are not only providing supports for the industry and the affected workers and families; we are also helping the industry move forward in different ways.

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC]

Madam Chair, the B.C. forestry workers I know do not want handouts; they want their jobs back.

BC Council of Forest Industries president and CEO Kim Haakstad said recently:

The recent increase in U.S. tariffs and duties is a serious blow to an industry already strained by years of uncertainty, mill closures, and job losses. The federal government must make resolving the softwood lumber dispute a national priority.

My simple question for the Liberals is, when will the Liberal Prime Minister finally make resolving the softwood lumber dispute a priority?

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Richmond East—Steveston, BC]

Madam Chair, again, I empathize with every British Columbian standing up today and asking questions and talking about this.

[An hon. member]

They don't want EI; they want their jobs back.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Richmond East—Steveston, BC]

Madam Chair, we are not talking about handouts. Workers need support at a time when we are negotiating a deal, and we have to get the best deal for their families.

What we are hearing from the other side is to just give them any deal, with no consequences regarding a potential strong future for the industry. What we are talking about is prosperity for the industry and looking forward to a stronger industry. In the meantime, we need to ensure we are there for the families.

[Caroline Desrochers, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Housing and Infrastructure]

Madam Chair, it is a privilege to rise in the House today to take part in this debate on an issue that is very important in my region of Mauricie.

For more than 40 years, the softwood lumber dispute with the United States has been weighing heavily on the Canadian economy. Our neighbours' unfair arguments have been repeated over time, through changing priorities and different administrations, regardless of political affiliation. Canadians are deeply disappointed by the United States' decision to impose additional tariffs as part of its section 232 investigation.

These measures are completely unjustified, and Canada will vigorously defend its industry by all means possible. Although duties and tariffs have changed, one thing remains the same: Canada stands firm. We will accept nothing less than a fair deal for Canadian industry and families.

We will not settle.

We recognize that the economic uncertainty pervading the forestry sector has repercussions that extend beyond businesses. They touch the lives of children, families, teachers and educators, health care workers, first nations and countless communities. This means that our response needs to focus exclusively on Canadians whose daily lives are profoundly connected to our forests.

Last August, the Prime Minister announced a major forestry industry support program. I want to highlight one key component of this program: $700 million in loan guarantees through the Business Development Bank of Canada.

This initiative aims to keep businesses afloat in these difficult and volatile times by providing them with essential financing and credit when the usual sources run dry under the pressure of unfair U.S. tariffs. This is not a temporary situation, but a commitment to continuity, stability and future growth.

However, we know that liquidity alone does not guarantee the future. That is why this support is being rounded out by reskilling and development programs, enhancements to the EI program for workers in the softwood lumber sector and a $500-million investment to help the industry diversify its production and markets. Budget 2025 provides roughly $186 million in new funding to implement the buy Canadian policy, which takes effect this month and will be fully implemented by the spring.

For our softwood lumber sector and the value chains it supports, this means stable and predictable demand for Canadian lumber, panels and engineered products. It means new markets and more jobs in Canada. In concrete terms, this means affordable housing complexes where Canadian lumber is at the core of every construction project, with recreation centres, libraries and day care centres built with modular elements of Canadian wood, supporting families and young children, while creating local jobs.

We have always excelled in sustainable resource management and innovation. Today, more Canadian sawmills have an exceptional opportunity to modernize so they can produce mass timber and all kinds of wood for innovations that will allow us to build taller, safer and healthier buildings with a lower carbon footprint.

Our government has also launched Build Canada Homes to foster innovation and align investments with sustainability, so that new homes will be built with Canadian wood and will be affordable and climate-resilient. On this side of the House, we actually believe in climate change. One of the most promising opportunities for softwood lumber is in the construction of prefab homes.

Of course, Canada cannot build the future of the forestry sector without the leadership of indigenous peoples. Our government has prioritized not only partnership but also empowerment by funding indigenous-led forestry companies, supporting the construction of prefab homes in communities, and ensuring that knowledge, responsible management and economic benefits flow to first nations, Métis and Inuit communities.

The forestry sector is much more than an industry; it is the backbone of hundreds of communities, both rural and urban.

By investing in local construction, we create positive benefits for all communities. By encouraging innovation, we help small businesses in remote communities access new markets.

Canada's future is strong, resilient and united. We will build it together with Canadian wood, Canadian labour and Canadian determination.

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC]

Madam Chair, we heard another very long word salad from the Liberal member across the way. One thing the Liberals are great at is talking a lot.

The government has been in power for the last decade. I distinctly remember former prime minister Justin Trudeau and Obama were going to have a softwood lumber agreement signed, sealed and delivered when Obama came to Ottawa. However, he came to Ottawa and left with no softwood lumber agreement, and here we are, 10 years later, still with no softwood lumber agreement.

Thirty mills have closed in B.C. alone.

[An hon. member]

Oh, oh!

[Bob Zimmer, Conservative, Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, BC]

Madam Chair, I am glad the member thinks it is a joke that 30 mills have closed and over 10,000 jobs have been lost. The Liberals need to take softwood lumber seriously, regardless of whether Brookfield has investments in it.

When are they finally going to get a softwood lumber deal done to provide surety to our softwood lumber workers in British Columbia?

[Caroline Desrochers, Liberal, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Madam Chair, I worked at Global Affairs Canada for 20 years, including under the Harper government, when we were grappling with the same tariffs, the same problem. People can say whatever they want, but these issues have been around for years.

We fought, we always succeeded, and we will do the same this time around.

[Marie-Hélène Gaudreau, Bloc, Laurentides—Labelle, QC]

Madam Chair, when I hear my colleague say that her government will fight, that it will help, that it is aware of the problem, that this is an important issue and that it is dealing with climate change, there is definitely something I do not understand.

Does the government really care about this? If it did, it would already be taking concrete actions in connection with the measure my colleague did such a good job of describing, which we have been talking about for three weeks now.

People talk about loan guarantees. Seriously, given everything that happened in the auto industry, which is one of my files, if the government is confident and believes the forestry industry matters, it should be taking action starting tomorrow after this debate.

[Caroline Desrochers, Liberal, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Madam Chair, action has already been taken.

Last week, I visited a company that specializes in prefabrication and met with Arbec workers who thanked me for the measures introduced by the Government of Canada. That does not mean that the situation is not difficult for industries; we understand that. It is also difficult for workers and their families. However, we are here and we are taking meaningful action.

When we talk about the Build Canada Homes program, we are actually talking about fast-tracking the construction industry's development in order to create new opportunities. In all the prefabrication companies I visit, the walls are made with Canadian wood, Quebec wood. That is what we are trying to do. That is why we have developed a thoughtful and well-designed budget.

Furthermore, when it comes to combatting climate change, the Build Canada Homes investment policy launched on Saturday makes it clear that one of our investment priorities is the energy efficiency of the materials used, in order to reduce our environmental footprint.

[Claude Guay, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources]

Madam Chair, I would like to remind the House that during question period today, the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources said that additional assistance for the softwood lumber industry would be announced this week. I just wanted to point that out.

My question for the parliamentary secretary is this. At the Standing Committee on Natural Resources, the CEO of Domtar said that one of the measures likely to help the industry would be to shift 2% to 3% of Canadian demand to mass timber, which would increase prices and make the industry more economically viable.

How does the government intend to ensure that Build Canada Homes programs promote the use of mass timber?

[Caroline Desrochers, Liberal, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Madam Chair, I thank my colleague for his excellent question.

Indeed, the investment policy of Build Canada Homes clearly promotes the use of Canadian wood, including mass timber. It also encourages developers to use wood for the construction of large structures. This is not really being done in Quebec yet, but it is being done extensively in British Columbia. The building code allows for buildings of up to 18 storeys. This type of program will help accelerate development and support our lumber industry.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière, QC]

Madam Chair, I will manage to finish this debate, I promise.

I do not share the enthusiasm of my colleague from Trois-Rivières and my friend the parliamentary secretary.

As for the announcements made on August 5 regarding the $700 million in access to liquidity and the $500 million earmarked for improving production chains, unfortunately I am hearing on the ground that the $700 million will be used up by March. There will be nothing left for access to liquidity. However, I would remind members that this $700 million is intended to compensate for the $10 billion that is currently being held captive in the United States.

I also found out today that the people affected by the closure in Saint‑Michel‑des‑Saints do not have access to the $700 million for administrative reasons that escape me. They do not have access to it. The 150 employees in Saint‑Michel‑des‑Saints who are unemployed because of the mill closure will remain unemployed. Between August 5 and the time things started moving in late October, early November, I feel like it took a very long time before action was taken.

It is also important to point out that Building Canada Homes can be part of the solution, but we will never be able to replace the entire American market. I take no pleasure in saying that. People in the forestry sector say that we will never be able to completely replace the American market. We need to accept that. If we want to achieve that, the forestry sector will have to undergo a major transformation, and that is not going to happen in five or six months, or even in two or three years. It will take 10 to 15 years. What we need during that 10-to-15-year period is concrete action.

As I said, we want to talk about concrete measures this evening. I would like to share a few suggestions with my colleagues right now. I will come back to payments for countervailing duties at the end of my speech.

We could implement a program modelled on the Canada emergency business account, which we used during the COVID‑19 pandemic, by offering interest-free loans that are conditionally repayable, in part, to self-employed workers and forestry subcontractors. That is important. When I talk about subcontractors and self-employed workers, it is important to realize that the forestry sector is an industry with people whose job profiles are very different. Liquidity programs are very little help to subcontractors and the self-employed. However, if the government sets up a program similar to the emergency account, it could help those people.

The government could set up a wage subsidy program to enable laid-off workers to keep their jobs. What we want to do with the people who are in limbo because of sawmill closures, such as in Saint‑Michel‑des‑Saints, is to keep them working so that they do not disappear into other sectors, and we do not end up with weakened industries once the construction crisis in the United States is over.

As part of the renegotiation of CUSMA, we need to ensure that the dispute mechanism is better structured in order to prevent the American stalling tactics that we are currently seeing. The Americans always lose at international trade tribunals. However, since the United States plays dirty, it is continuing the dispute.

The allegations made by the American lobby only involve wood from public forests, so we are asking for an exemption for wood from private forests. It has long been known that the Americans claim that Canada's forestry sector is being illegally subsidized with very low stumpage fees, which is no longer the case. However, the special status of private forests, which are in another sector, is never recognized.

We must ensure recognition for Quebec's forestry system, which operates on an auction model and complies with free trade requirements. We must create an industrial development strategy focused on increased resource processing and on research to develop new products. The government may be working on this, but it will take time, as I said earlier.

This brings me to what I consider to be the key measure. I want to explain it properly, because I was a bit rushed earlier. Where does the real problem with countervailing duties come from? It comes from the fact that 45% of all money in forestry transactions is held captive. We could recover that 45% if the government agreed to pay 50% of the anti-dumping countervailing duties at the end of each month.

If that were to happen, we would save jobs and support the forestry sector. The government would be guaranteed repayment once the dispute is resolved.

It would not cost anything, no one would pay for it and we would save one of Quebec's leading economic sectors.

[Rob Morrison, Conservative, Columbia—Kootenay—Southern Rockies, BC]

Madam Chair, I want to start off by saying I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Chicoutimi—Le Fjord.

I want to thank the great people of Columbia—Kootenay—Southern Rockies for their support.

For the last decade, Canada has been locked in the same exhausting, costly and frankly predictable dispute with the United States over softwood lumber. For a decade, it has been Canadian workers, Canadian families and Canadian communities who have been forced to shoulder the burden of the ongoing trade conflict. It is not a new issue and not a surprise. It has been staring at us in the face for years, yet somehow, despite all the warnings, all the promises and all the opportunities to act, the Liberal government has failed to secure a stable, lasting agreement, leaving the forestry sector to navigate the longest period in Canadian history without a negotiated settlement. It is not progress. It is not leadership. It is failure.

Softwood lumber is not just another commodity. It is one of the foundational pillars of Canada's economy. It supports more than 200,000 direct and hundreds of thousands of indirect jobs. It sustains hundreds of rural, northern and indigenous communities. It feeds our domestic construction industry, fuels innovation and generates billions of dollars in exports. When the lumber sector thrives, Canada thrives, but when it is threatened the shockwaves ripple across the entire country.

Right now, the sector is under threat. Punitive U.S. duties, which are unfounded, protectionist and arbitrary, continue to hammer Canadian producers. Nearly $10 billion in duties have now been accumulated. That is $10 billion that should be supporting workers, innovation and reinvestment here at home sitting instead in an international account.

What has the Liberal government done in response? It has done nothing that has made any meaningful difference, nothing that has moved the needle for struggling mills and nothing that signals to Americans or Canadians that the dispute is being treated with the seriousness it deserves. Year after year, we hear the same lines from the government: that they are working on it, that talks are ongoing and that a solution is close. However, here we are 10 years later with less certainty, less stability and fewer tools to protect our producers than we had before.

Let us talk about the past deals for a moment because history matters here. Previous softwood agreements, when they actually existed, provided at least a degree of predictability. They allowed producers to plan, invest and grow. The 2006 softwood lumber agreement provided clarity and protection, including caps, and prevented the kinds of disproportionate duties we are seeing today, especially for value-added producers who are now punished for simply selling higher-value finished products. That agreement did not happen by accident but because Canada had a government unwilling to accept endless uncertainty, a government prepared to negotiate with focus and determination, and a government that understood the needs of the forestry sector.

What do we have now? We have a vacuum, a leadership gap, a government that appears more comfortable with reacting to a crisis than preventing them. Without an agreement, investment dries up, mills do not modernize, producers hesitate to hire, projects get shelved and opportunities vanish. Once the jobs are gone, once a mill closes, once a community loses its primary economic engine, it rarely comes back.

We are seeing that risk at play across the country. British Columbia is already dealing with reduced harvest levels, wildfire impacts and fibre shortages. It must get more value from less wood just to survive. How can that happen in an environment where the federal government cannot secure predictable market access?

From our fourth-generation sawmill, Kalesnikoff, Ken said that the softwood lumber dispute is beyond its control and that the current rates of 45% tariffs are unsustainable. He said that businesses are drawing on their lines of credit to pay payroll. At J.H. Huscroft, a 100-year mill, Justin said, “We need a plan for three years, just to feel secure” and he said that they have a million dollars in annual shipping bonds, but they don't have access to it.”

At another small family-operated mill, Porcupine, Craig said, “The combined 45% plus tariff is a severe challenge to any business in the industry.” At the ATCO sawmill, with 70 years in business, Scott said that all mills rely on each other for success and that when one operation fails, everyone fails. At the logging contractor Hummers, Nick said that he had to lay off half their staff, that shipping to the U.S. was not economical and that Europe was slow as well. He said that even local mills have cancelled some of their orders.

The question is simple: How long will they be forced to wait before the government finally delivers the leadership it has been promising for a decade?

[Corey Hogan, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources]

Madam Chair, we have already talked about the fact that, with negotiations, we cannot just magically wish them to go better, but I certainly welcome any suggestions on how to deal with Donald Trump.

I wanted to turn to a comment that was made about B.C. and the fact that not all the tenures are being used, which I think is true. The forestry sector, of course, to be successful needs four things. It needs economic access to imports, specifically timber for sawmills. It needs access to capital. It needs access to markets. It needs the talent.

Does the member opposite have any opinions as to which of those levers would be best pulled in order to expand the B.C. forestry sector?

[Rob Morrison, Conservative, Columbia—Kootenay—Southern Rockies, BC]

Madam Chair, that is for sure a complicated issue, especially after 10 years of the market, the lumber industry, slowing down and losing mills. I do not know how many mills have been lost in B.C., but it has been maybe 10 or 15. Once we lose them, it is really hard to get them back.

For British Columbia, I agree that we need to work with the province as well for tenures for our logging, but it also takes leadership from Ottawa. We really need action, not words. We really need to see something produced, not just some comments about people being given money. Again, they are not looking for handouts; we all agree on that. They are looking for stability. They want to be able to predict what they are going to do in the next three years so that they can actually start to upgrade their mills and do more with the lumber they have. A lot of the mills now are actually really specialized and to do that, they need more equipment and it takes more investment.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Madam Chair, I want to clarify something. In Abitibi-Témiscamingue, 600 people have temporarily lost their jobs in the forestry industry over the past year. Obviously, these people still have hope.

That said, the forestry industry is an entire ecosystem. There are forestry contractors who work and invest in machinery, who take out loans ranging from $100,000 to $300,000 for machinery without any guarantees. These people have not received any support from the government. Is there no way to propose solutions that are tailored to their situation?

It is all well and good to talk about Donald Trump, the United States and how to proceed, but there are people suffering on the ground. How is the government going to help them? I look forward to hearing some solutions.

[Rob Morrison, Conservative, Columbia—Kootenay—Southern Rockies, BC]

Madam Chair, it is really about innovation and it is about our sawmills moving ahead. For example, one mill is building modular homes and is trying to work with laminate products. It is investing its own money in it, but when it sees there are 45% tariffs down south and how difficult it is, it has a hard time surviving. How does it continue to invest money when it is losing money?

I brought up the example of a business that is actually using a line of credit to make payroll; that is not sustainable. We need to go back to that predictability. We need to know where we are going with softwood lumber across Canada, and we are not there.

[Scott Anderson, Conservative, Vernon—Lake Country—Monashee, BC]

Madam Chair, when the Liberals were elected, they were elected to save us from Donald Trump and his tariffs. Apparently, lately that does not matter; it is who cares whether he wants to talk about it or not. We have now heard that it is a long-term problem.

Can my colleague say whether it is a problem of Donald Trump and his tariffs or of long-term Liberal neglect?