Debates of Dec. 3rd, 2025

Canada's Auto Industry

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

Mr. Chair, rarely do I get the feeling that my speeches in the House are so clear that they do not prompt any questions. I think that this may mean that what I am saying is resonating.

One point that really resonates is the one made by my colleague from Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton. I am thinking in particular of the forestry industry. What does the forestry industry get compared to the tens of billions of dollars in subsidies given to oil and gas companies and the automotive sector? The forestry industry gets only a few tens of millions of dollars that are poorly targeted to meet urgent needs. As for sustainability, not nearly enough is being done. This is a major concern for me.

I would like to come back to something fundamental to Quebec's economy, and that is the whole concept of innovation. Where is the federal government when it comes to innovating in an industry that could have been sustainable, that of strategic critical minerals and local processing? What is the strategy right now? The focus is entirely on exports. We are not keeping our resource, we are sending it to China, we are becoming dependent, there is dumping and our economy is collapsing. Those are the consequences.

[Chris Lewis, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Mr. Chair, I do want to get back to the fact that electric vehicles are, quite frankly, not selling in Quebec. The number is 17.3%, but it is being pushed so hard to basically force people to purchase an electric vehicle, when the industry is screaming that it is not going to meet the mandates.

Would my hon. colleague agree with me that the mandates will not be met and that they need to be lifted? Does he agree that we need to let industry continue to thrive in Canada?

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

Mr. Chair, I, for one, applaud the incentives that were offered. We are doing this for the planet, from an environmental perspective. The break-even point in the pollution emitted by an electric vehicle versus a gas-powered vehicle is 20,000 kilometres. After 20,000 kilometres, an electric vehicle is good for the planet. My electric vehicle has over 200,000 kilometres on it, and I am very proud of that.

We need to start investing in innovation and technology again, because we do not have a second planet ahead of us. This debate should lead us to renewing subsidies for innovation and electric transportation.

[Dominique O'Rourke, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Chair, I think this debate is critical because we need to be very clear that we stand with the auto sector of today, even through these challenging times, and we are building the auto sector of the future. We are in a trade war, a trade war that is designed to attack critical Canadian industries, including the auto sector. There are 125,000 jobs directly in assembly, with more than 500,000 in parts and ancillary, primarily in Ontario and Quebec, but it is so much more than the assembly. It is tires, rubber, seats, a number of components.

Guelph is particularly vulnerable to this. Guelph is the home of Linamar, an auto parts manufacturer with 11 plants in Guelph alone. Guelph is the fourth-highest exporter to the United States, per capita.

We have the best automakers in the world. We know that because we have efficient auto plants and we have recent global investments. They are the proof.

At the industry committee, Linda Hasenfratz, who is the executive chair for Linamar, spoke to the efficiency and the quality of our workers. Did members know that Honda is a zero-landfill facility? Did members know that Linamar drives 2% efficiencies every year? We are the most integrated market in the world. Now, not only are the tariffs in place, but also some Americans want all the assembly to be in the United States.

The members opposite on the industry committee wanted this debate. I am eager to have this conversation, but it should not be a debate between us. It should be solidarity with the sector and our workers. It should have some acknowledgement that negotiations are sensitive and should not necessarily be played out right here.

I had a conversation with Unifor this week. The workers are clear, and their leaders are clear, that no deal is better than a bad deal. We will pursue a good deal.

Budget 2025 supports the sector and its auto workers through a number of mechanisms. The first is a productivity superdeduction that would allow existing plants, as well as auto manufacturers and all of the subsidiaries that support them, to write off their investments of capital or software in the first year. We are expanding scientific research and experimental development credits for companies that want to innovate in the space.

There is tremendous leadership in the auto sector and the private sector. There will be clean-technology manufacturing tax credits. Most importantly for the auto sector, there is a strategic response fund and tariff mitigation. That is $5 billion over six years through the strategic response fund to help manufacturers respond to tariffs, adopt new technologies, and modernize their production lines.

The regional development agencies also have this. It is really important for the smaller businesses in this whole sector that the regional tariff response initiative would help offset tariff impacts. It could help with automation, new equipment and production expansion. We also have a climate competitiveness strategy which would support low-carbon technologies and indirectly benefit the EV and battery supply chain.

Earlier in 2025, the government announced a $2-billion investment to strengthen auto manufacturing, support Canadian workers and focus on job creation and skills development. We also took steps to protect Canadian auto production by adjusting import remission quotas for automakers that failed to meet domestic production commitments. That is absolutely unacceptable. We will ensure that automakers meet their commitments. There are also significant investments in the EV and battery supply chain.

I know the members opposite want to talk down EVs, but the fact is that electric vehicles were responsible for 60% of the net increase in total vehicle registrations in Canada in 2024. They accounted for one in seven new vehicles sold that year and, in some regions, one in four. Globally, it is clear that the future is electric. Canada has a leadership ability through our critical mineral strategies, through the attraction of investment in Canada through these battery plants.

If there are displaced workers, it is a tragedy, and we are there for those displaced workers. We have enhanced and increased EI. There is re-skilling, because everybody would rather just have a job. There is also work sharing. We have heard, time and time again, our Minister of Industry stand up to talk about how she is working directly with the automakers to support them.

There is hope. Two weeks ago, the Windsor Star had a headline that said, “'Now in full swing'—Mass battery production begins at Windsor's $6B NextStar Energy plant”.

Where there are displacements, we need to be looking for innovation. Where there is hardship, we need to be looking at solidarity. We need to be united in that, as one Canada, in this trade war.

We need more investments in charging infrastructure. We need those investments in critical minerals to build the auto sector of the future. Canada has the best automakers in the world. We will fight for them today. We will build the auto sector of tomorrow together. We will attract investment. We will support these sectors.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington—Tyendinaga, ON]

Mr. Chair, I have a couple of things. The member across acknowledged that negotiations are sensitive and that they should not be debated here. Let me be clear. There is no better place for this to be debated. Healthy dialogue is so important.

She was talking about the electric vehicle mandate. Do not get me wrong: I am not talking down electric vehicles, but I do not want to be forced with regard to whether or not I should buy them. We have to remember that by 2030, the Liberal government wants 100% of vehicle sales to be electric. Currently, Canada has about 37,000 public charging points. To meet this target, we would need 373,000 new chargers. That is 98 per day for the next 10 years, at a cost of roughly $300,000 each, more in rural areas like my own and in northern regions, totalling $112 billion.

Every single auto association, every company and every labour group that I have spoken with as shadow minister for Canada-U.S. trade says that the federal EV mandate is unrealistic and has put an additional strain on manufacturers already facing pressure.

Given these realities, will the member support ending the EV mandate and advocate that a pause is not good enough and that what is needed is a permanent removal?

[Dominique O'Rourke, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Chair, we have a pause. There has been a consultation with the broader auto sector and with other stakeholders, such as the investors in charging infrastructure and the supply chain. I think what the government has done is to be completely responsible, look at the changing context and say that we are going to pause, that we are going to adjust and that we are going to come back. There are a number of jurisdictions where the regulations have changed. We have an opportunity to realign. We have an opportunity to adapt. Personally, I believe that the goal is wonderful. What we are looking at now is the pace and the context.

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

Mr. Chair, I thank my colleague from Guelph. I enjoyed learning about her riding this evening. I think she is a good advocate for her riding and for auto industry innovation.

She talked about a critical minerals strategy. The problem is that there is no such strategy. If there were, it would be focused on processing.

What is happening right now? Right now, we are dependent on China, which controls 80% of the lithium market and over 90% of the market for the many strategic critical minerals needed to manufacture electric batteries. These critical minerals are currently being dumped. Instead of having a proactive mining industry ready to extract the resource for nearby processing, and instead of a sustainable and robust North American supply ecosystem for automakers using battery cells manufactured in Quebec and Canada, these resources are being sent out for export. The same applies to oil and gas; the same applies to everything. The government is choosing to export resources rather than use them to create added value here at home.

Would my colleague support the creation of a mining industry that processes resources near their extraction site?

[Dominique O'Rourke, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Chair, Canada certainly has a wealth of critical minerals that are an integral part of the supply chain for charging stations and batteries.

I think we absolutely need to explore that. That is one of the projects of national interest. I think we are going to hear even more about this. Indeed, China is a big issue, not just for dumping critical minerals, but also for steel and potentially other goods.

This absolutely needs to be explored. That is one of our strengths.

[Karim Bardeesy, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry]

Mr. Chair, I know that my colleague is working very hard in her riding of Guelph and is hearing from folks about the government's response to the unjustified tariffs. I am wondering if she could share more perspectives from her constituents about how they are responding to our government's position with respect to the United States.

[Dominique O'Rourke, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Chair, in Guelph we are leaders in auto parts manufacturing. Some of the largest in the world have operations in Guelph. We have highly skilled people. To date, the American trade war is creating mostly uncertainty in parts. I would say that the smaller suppliers have capacity. That is why some of these programs or incentives help them to diversify some of their operations to nuclear, to oil and gas or to defence. These are really critical things. I would encourage any businesses in Guelph or elsewhere to reach out to their MP, who can provide them with guidance on programs to help them if they are facing insecurity at this time.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington—Tyendinaga, ON]

Mr. Chair, nine months have passed, and there is still no deal. Self-imposed deadlines have been missed. Regardless of the political narratives, there is no question that the current tension between Ottawa and Washington is not on stable footing. For years, experts have warned that the Canadian auto sector was vulnerable to shifts in American policy and global competition. Despite this, we have seen no meaningful contingency planning or phased market expansion.

My question for the member is this: Why did the government fail to prepare the auto industry for disruptions or to open additional markets before actually getting to this crisis point?

[Dominique O'Rourke, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Chair, I absolutely disagree with the premise, because we have seen investments in Canada by Volkswagen. There were investments by Honda. There are investments by Stellantis. There is absolutely a diversification taking place. There are absolutely highly skilled people and support for the auto sector.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington—Tyendinaga, ON]

Mr. Chair, the member spoke about a long-term diversification strategy. The government speaks frequently about this need for trade diversification, yet after more than a decade in office, as the government has been there for 10 years, there has been no long-term structured plan to gradually build new markets for Canada's auto sector. Now that tensions with the U.S. have escalated, calls for diversification appear reactive rather than strategic.

Why did the government not begin developing a serious diversification strategy years ago when risks to the auto sector were already well known?

[Dominique O'Rourke, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Chair, it is not the Government of Canada that broke the relationship with the Americans, a relationship that has been enduring since the auto pact, a relationship where there are contracts, agreements, the USMCA. There may have been trade winds, but there was certainly no indication that this was going to be an issue in this moment. The member opposite likes to talk about responding to the context, but we have to acknowledge that we are in a specific context right now that I do not know was necessarily foreseeable 10 years ago.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Mr. Chair, I wonder what my colleague thinks about her party's position. It has encouraged the electric vehicle industry for many years and then the new Liberal government abandoned it just a few weeks ago. This has caused major problems for the automotive industry and for electric vehicle owners. I own one myself. The situation is not getting any easier. It takes a long time to recharge, and owners have to search for charging stations. Now they are saying there will be fewer electric vehicles. The fewer there are, the fewer resources there will be to recharge them. This is going to cause problems for everyone. My colleague's government did this. It promised electric vehicles for 2030 and then reversed its decision. It announced subsidies and then abolished them.

What does my colleague think about that? Is she proud of her party's record on transportation electrification?

[Dominique O'Rourke, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Chair, yes, there was a plan for transitioning to electric vehicles and measures were in place, not only for the number of vehicles to be sold, but also for charging stations and battery production in Canada. I believe that putting the mandate on hold is a responsible decision. Quebec and British Columbia are also doing the same thing, given the North American context. I believe it is a responsible decision during a tariff war.

This is an economic war. Our most important industries are under attack. We cannot simply pretend that everything is fine. We decided to put this on hold given the context. We will assess the situation. We have spoken to manufacturers and all stakeholders. I believe that, ultimately, the goal of electrification will not change. It is happening in Europe and in Canada. Various governments have changed their timelines and how the measures are structured. I do not know what will be presented to us—

[The Assistant Deputy Chair, Conservative, John Nater]

The 10-minute period for questions and comments has now expired.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Dufferin—Caledon.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Mr. Chair, I will be splitting my time with the member for Windsor West.

When we get into debates about issues like this, the absolute decimation of the Canadian auto sector, what we find is that Liberal members love to get up and talk about programs, funding envelopes and all these other wonderful things they are allegedly doing that are supposed to make things work, but let us talk about the facts.

The facts are pretty terrible. We have now lost 3,000 jobs at the Brampton assembly plant. We have lost over 1,000 jobs at the BrightDrop assembly plant. Honda is losing approximately $900 per vehicle it exports to the United States, so who knows how long that is going to continue.

Every time we bring this up, the Liberals get up and say that there is a trade war, as if we are not aware of that fact. However, the problem with the trade war is that the Prime Minister has stood in this chamber and said, “We have the best deal [on auto] in the world”, as if he is proud of what has happened with the 10% tariffs on auto, because that is what he is saying: “We have the best deal in the world.” It is either incredible ignorance or he actually does not care.

I have spoken with Unifor's local presidents in the auto assembly industry and with Unifor's skilled trades council, and they have told me that the Canadian auto sector cannot survive at a 10% tariff, yet we have the Prime Minister standing up in this chamber and bragging about how we have the lowest auto tariffs in the world. It is an unbelievable insult to every single auto worker in this country.

We know the results of what is happening with these tariffs: the layoffs in Brampton, the layoffs in BrightDrop and the layoffs in the auto sector in general. We also have to think of what the Prime Minister said just over a week ago when asked what the status of the negotiations with President Trump was: “Who cares?” and that is “boring”. This is the same Prime Minister who is bragging about a 10% tariff that is decimating the Canadian auto industry.

If that is not bad enough, let us talk about some of these programs the Liberals like to brag about, like the ones the member for Guelph was just rhyming off as if there is some amazing development for the Canadian auto industry. They signed a contract with Stellantis specifically with respect to the Brampton assembly plant. In that agreement, they were going to give up to $1 billion for retooling the Brampton assembly plant and another assembly plant. As part of that, there was supposed to be a jobs guarantee.

We have heard the Minister of Industry say, and I saw her say it at committee, that there is a jobs guarantee. We asked her in what section of the contract. She could not say what section of the contract, because she did not read the contract. We also heard the previous industry minister say that he did not read the contract, so we have ministers signing multi-billion dollar contracts and not reading them.

Let me tell members something about contracts, because I did go to law school and I remember taking contracts in law school. If there was a jobs guarantee, as the Liberals describe, how was Stellantis able to lay off 3,000 workers at the plant in Brampton? At the time they signed the agreement with Stellantis in Brampton, there were a total of 8,000 Stellantis workers in Canada. If the Liberals had a jobs guarantee, as they suggest, does the job guarantee allow Stellantis to lay off almost 50% of its workforce and still get almost $1 billion? It is outrageous.

The incompetence from the Liberals is stunning and staggering, yet no one gets held accountable. In fact, the minister who signed this contract, which has allowed Stellantis to lay off all these workers when there is a so-called jobs guarantee, was promoted to finance minister.

Let us talk about the zero-emission vehicle mandates that the Liberals keep talking about. When I was a shadow minister for environment, I asked exactly where we were on building out the charging infrastructure and the power generation. We are nowhere near getting it done. They are plowing ahead with the zero-emission vehicle mandate because it sounds good, but it is causing havoc in the industry. All the CEOs have asked for it to be scrapped, but the Liberals push forward with it, sign terrible contracts and have decimated the auto industry. They should be ashamed of themselves.

[Chris Lewis, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Mr. Chair, that was a great intervention. I give my hon. colleague a lot of credit. He works incredibly hard with our local union, and with all unions quite frankly, as the shadow minister for labour.

My colleague spoke about 3,000 lost jobs in Brampton and 1,000 lost jobs in BrightDrop production. That is 4,000 jobs. What is he hearing on the ground, on the shop floor, from our unions?

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Mr. Chair, they are devastated. Unionized workers in the auto industry are devastated, and they are terrified of what is coming down the pipe. I was speaking with people at GM in Oshawa, and there is a factory in the U.S. being retooled right now, the Orion plant, that is going to manufacture light-duty vehicles. Guess what GM manufactures in Oshawa: light and heavy-duty vehicles. As a result of the tariffs, what the Prime Minister thinks is the best deal in the world, manufacturing of light-duty vehicles could be transferred from Oshawa to the Orion plant, which is going to start manufacturing in Q1 of 2027.

This is a decimation of the auto industry, and all the Liberals say is “It is a trade war.” Wait a minute; the Liberals ran on the platform that they could solve the trade war. Meanwhile we are hollowing out the middle class, hollowing out the auto sector and losing lots of good-paying unionized jobs.

[Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay, Bloc, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot—Acton, QC]

Mr. Chair, I ask myself this question. What does my colleague think about the fact that trucks built here were originally duty free when they were sent to the United States, but have not been since October? What does that say about the Prime Minister's negotiating skills, which were supposed to be so extraordinary?

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Mr. Chair, it is just another example of the abject failure of a Prime Minister who campaigned on knowing the American President and on knowing how to get a deal. All we see is that the deal promised by July 21 has not happened and that every single time the Prime Minister goes and visits the American President, things actually get worse; we get more tariffs on more products, and we get higher tariffs. It is the exact opposite of what he campaigned on.

As I said earlier, the most shocking and stunning thing is that the Prime Minister has the audacity to stand in this place and brag about a 10% tariff on the auto sector. He bragged about it. He said that we have the best deal in the world, as if he should be thanked and celebrated.

As I said before, I spoke with representatives of the Unifor National Skilled Trades Council. They have told me very clearly that the auto industry in Canada, at a 10% tariff, is finished. Our Prime Minister stands there and brags about a 10% tariff. It is disgusting.

[Chris Lewis, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Mr. Chair, during my hon. colleague's intervention, he mentioned that he went to law school. He mentioned the importance of contracts and of actually reading contracts, and then he also mentioned the incompetence of the Liberals.

I did not go to law school, but obviously my hon. colleague did. How important is it to read the contracts so we know exactly what is in them and so we can secure our workforce and ultimately our business and industry?

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Mr. Chair, a lawyer who would not read a contract on behalf of their client would face a massive lawsuit, yet successive ministers are signing billion-dollar contracts but not reading them. It is beyond negligence; it is gross negligence. It is malfeasance, and it is causing devastating impacts in the auto industry.

The Liberals say there is a jobs guarantee. Can someone explain it to me? If there is a clause in the contracts that says there is a jobs guarantee, the jobs guarantee allowed Stellantis to lay off 3,000 workers in Brampton, when its total workforce at the time was a little over 8,000. Was it allowed to lay off almost 50% of its workforce? That is no jobs guarantee. If I had drafted a contract like that in first-year law school on behalf of my client, my contracts professor would have given me an F, and that is what the government has.

[Harb Gill, Conservative, Windsor West, ON]

Mr. Chair, it is always an honour to rise in the House to speak on behalf of the hard-working people of Windsor. Tonight I want to talk about something that matters to every family in Windsor, and to a whole lot of families across this country, and that is the future of the auto industry.

In my community, we do not need contracts or long reports to understand what is going on; we feel it. We hear it in our workplace and see it in the news, and we know the stakes are high. Let me lay out some simple facts so Canadians understand what people in Windsor have understood for generations.

Our auto sector puts $14 billion into Canada's economy every year. Each job on the line supports nine more jobs in the community. There is no other industry in Canada that does that, not one. We export 92% of our vehicles to the United States. That access is not optional; it is a necessity for our industry, especially when motor vehicles make up 8% of everything we export, and when our 600,000 jobs, Canadian jobs, rely directly or indirectly on auto manufacturing. One would think that the government would treat it as a top priority, but that is not what we have seen.

When the auto sector started sounding the alarm, when unions raised flags and when workers spoke up, what was the response from the Prime Minister? He said, “Who cares?” When asked about the growing trade issues with the U.S., the answer was that it is not a “burning issue”. For someone who lives in Windsor, it is not just a burning issue; it is a five-alarm fire.

Real people are being affected. We are not talking about hypotheticals; we are talking about real families facing real job losses. At CAMI in Ingersoll, 500 jobs are gone. In Oshawa, 750 jobs are gone. At Stellantis in Brampton, 3,000 jobs are gone. In Sainte-Thérèse, Quebec, 725 jobs at PACCAR are gone. These are not just numbers; they are mortgages, retirement plans and our children's futures. Workers know that once these jobs go south, they do not come back.

Windsor's workers built this country's auto industry, and they did not do it alone. They did it with unions that stood up for fair wages, safe workplaces and stability. In Windsor we know what teamwork between workers, unions and industry looks like. We have lived it for over a century. Guys like Charlie Brooks gave their life for their union brothers.

I will tell the House something simple. People can stand with unions, they can stand with workers, they can stand for strong manufacturing jobs, and yes, they can still vote Conservative, which they did this year. However, at the end of the day, this is not about slogans; it is about who is actually fighting for workers when it counts.

The Liberal-NDP coalition has offered zero leadership. The Liberals have had 10 years to prepare this country for economic shocks; instead they have made us more dependent on the U.S. They have blocked opportunities to develop and export our resources. They have hog-tied every growing industry with red tape. Now, when the U.S. plays hardball, we are left without any leverage.

The Liberals, and the NDP for that matter, will show up with slogans, take photos at rallies and promise the world, but they do not secure a single investment, do not fix a single trade problem and do not protect a single auto job. Workers are seeing through this. They need results, not smoke and mirrors.

More importantly, while the government was shrugging its shoulders, we acted. Our side pushed for emergency hearings about Stellantis. We pressed for an emergency debate. We secured committee meetings to investigate what went wrong. We did not wait. We did not shrug. We did not say, “Who cares”. We stepped up because the workers we represent deserve nothing less.

We have a practical plan to rebuild confidence, and that takes responsible government. We will fight the tariffs immediately, not months from now. We will make Canadian-made vehicles HST-free. We will clear the roadblocks that push investment out of Canada, and we will align our EV policies with the United States so manufacturers know what to do. We will build an environment where companies want to invest, not leave our country. There are no grand theories and no wishful thinking, just practical steps that will help workers keep their jobs and their futures.

Our workers do not ask for special treatment. They ask that their government have their back, and at this moment, facing the biggest challenges to their livelihoods in their generation, what do they get? They get “Who cares?” and are told it is not a “burning issue”. In Windsor we care. In our communities it is a burning issue, and we will keep fighting for it for as long as it takes to protect good Canadian jobs and secure a future where families can count on this industry the way it counted on them.