Debates of Dec. 3rd, 2025

Canada's Auto Industry

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

Mr. Chair, the member raised some interesting points. He mentioned that he is there to support workers and to support the industry for years to come. There are 1.3 million vehicles built by the hands of Canadians every year. We have been battling this trade deal for close to a year now. I hope that we can both agree that this very reciprocal relationship with the United States is very integral, especially when it comes to autos. Week after week, year after year, we are seeing more layoffs, and the lack of action is giving me very little confidence.

Industry and labour have warned about the risks that this industry is facing. Why did the government fail to act sooner? What could the government have done differently to prevent these job losses?

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Chair, our government is working on developing new economic relationships with the United States, in addition to diversifying our economy through various partnerships around the world. On the issue of the United States, I believe that, yes, we need a new agreement with the U.S., but one that truly meets the needs of our industries and the interests of Canadians and workers. We must not sign an agreement at any cost.

In the meantime, our government is there for all workers and affected businesses. As I mentioned in my speech, we have set up a $5-billion strategic response fund that will enable affected sectors to pivot, adapt and diversify. We are here during this period of economic uncertainty to truly support the hardest-hit sectors, whether it be the automotive sector we are discussing tonight or the softwood lumber sector, which affects my riding of Madawaska—Restigouche in particular.

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Chair, I wonder if my colleague could speak directly to workers and tell them what they can expect from our government in the coming weeks and months.

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Chair, our government is determined to protect every worker in our country. We have already put measures in place to do just that. We hope to protect every job. In the unfortunate event that job losses do occur, we have recently made adjustments to the EI system. For example, we have extended the waiver of the one-week waiting period for EI until April 2026. We have invested in people who want to change careers.

We are also here to protect businesses, to help them access liquidity so that there are no job losses. We want people to be able to keep their jobs. For example, there is the strategic response fund, which allows businesses to access liquidity in order to keep their operations going while we weather this turbulence.

I want to reiterate that in our negotiations for a renewed trade relationship with the United States, we do not want an agreement at any cost. We want an agreement that serves the interests of our businesses and our workers.

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

Mr. Chair, the member has acknowledged that businesses are trying to access funding and that the Liberals are providing funding for businesses. However, Canadians want to be self-sustainable and self-reliant. Nine months have passed, self-imposed deadlines have been missed and there is still no deal. Communities are continuously feeling the impact every single day, and there is no road map. How does the member justify the delay?

Furthermore, I have two pretty specific questions. First, why has the Prime Minister taken such an inconsistent approach towards the American administration? Second, what explains the Prime Minister's contradictory approach and his unwillingness to follow through with things? He does a flip-flop.

[Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Liberal, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Mr. Chair, I would say that our government's guiding principle from day one has been perfectly clear: We were elected to strengthen the Canadian economy and make it more resilient. That means diversifying our markets. It means supporting key sectors of the Canadian economy. It means providing targeted support for the sectors hardest hit by U.S. tariffs.

I would remind the House that we did not ask for this tariff conflict. These tariffs are completely unjustified and illegal. Nevertheless, they exist, and our government is determined to help the hardest-hit sectors, including the automotive sector. We created a strategic response fund offering billions of dollars to help businesses and workers, because our government understands that, in order to have a strong economy, we must support all sectors of the Canadian economy and all Canadian workers.

[Carlos Leitão, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry]

Mr. Chair, the automotive industry is a key sector of the Canadian economy and, as several of my colleagues have already mentioned, it generates billions of dollars in economic activity. It accounts for 8% of Canada's manufacturing GDP.

It is important to note that the sector includes five world-class automakers that are supported by a network of 700 parts suppliers. Automotive companies directly employ more than 125,000 Canadians, primarily in Ontario, and support hundreds of thousands of additional jobs across the country.

Our automotive plants are internationally renowned for their high quality, thanks in large part to Canada's exceptional workforce. The Honda plant in Alliston and the Toyota plant in Cambridge both won the J.D Power Gold Plant Quality Award in 2024. On top of that, Toyota Canada won 22 awards between 1991 and 2024.

The auto industry is one of Canada's largest manufacturing sectors, and it is facing unfair, unjustified and inexplicable U.S. tariffs that are increasing production costs and threatening good jobs in this highly integrated market on both sides of the border. Since the signing of the auto pact in 1965, this industry has become increasingly integrated.

However, on April 3, 2025, the United States completely changed course and imposed a 25% tariff on all Canadian vehicles that do not comply with the rules of origin under the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement, or CUSMA. The U.S. also imposed a 25% tariff on the value of non-U.S. components in CUSMA-eligible vehicles.

Additionally, on May 3, 2025, the United States imposed a 25% tariff on non-CUSMA-compliant auto parts. While not currently in force, the threatened tariff on auto parts remains. It is the uncertainty that is causing the biggest headaches for the industry. More recently, imports of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles were also targeted by an inexplicable 25% tariff.

Given that over 90% of vehicles manufactured in Canada are destined for the U.S. market and 40% of vehicles sold in Canada are assembled in the U.S., the impact of these tariffs is monumental.

Our government recognizes these significant challenges, and we will work closely with the industry, but I want to be clear: We will not sign just any agreement at any price. The agreement that will eventually be signed must benefit the industry. Our American friends need to understand that this industry is highly integrated and that any attempt to split it up will cause the industry to collapse, which will not be to anyone's advantage.

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

Mr. Chair, since my colleague is very familiar with this issue, I would like to know what he considers to be the most important and urgent measures to support the automotive sector and workers.

I would also like him to tell us why it is so important to explore new avenues for the automotive industry of the future and to explore new markets. I would also like him to talk to us about support for SMEs.

[Carlos Leitão, Liberal, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Mr. Chair, that is indeed a very important question. I would say that there are two parallel components to the government's strategy, and both are important.

On the one hand, we need to support the industry, which is affected by these tariffs. It needs liquidity and emergency support. We are doing this with the programs available at the Department of Industry.

At the same time, we also need to continue to think more strategically about diversifying markets. Above all, we must always think about the industry of the future. I know our friends across the aisle do not like electric vehicles very much, but electric vehicles are part of the future. Going forward, this Canadian industry will also have to be at the forefront of electric vehicle production.

[Jacques Ramsay, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety]

Mr. Chair, I would very much like my hon. colleague from Marc-Aurèle-Fortin to give us his analysis of why some companies perform better than others, namely American companies in Detroit.

If it is the tariff situation that is at issue, I would like him to clarify this difference for us.

[Carlos Leitão, Liberal, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Mr. Chair, the Government of Canada and the Government of Ontario have been working with the automotive industry for decades. My colleagues from Ontario have mentioned that. We have been working with this industry for decades.

We are quite surprised.

We will not forget the companies that are now turning their backs on Canada and fleeing to the United States. We will not forget that. We will not forget the other companies that are remaining here, maintaining their production facilities here and continuing to contribute to the Canadian economy.

We will remember that.

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

Mr. Chair, companies are not turning their backs out of choice; companies are turning their backs out of consequence.

I would like to ask the member to talk about the CUSMA review and the preparations for that. The U.S. has already begun hearings in preparation for the CUSMA review, and Canada, from my perspective, cannot be caught flat-footed. Right now, there is so much inconsistency, frustration and concern because we do not know whether the government is going or coming.

Could the government speak to what specific steps it is taking to prepare for Canada's role in the CUSMA review? Which stakeholders in the auto sector has the government contacted to ask questions about that so far?

[Carlos Leitão, Liberal, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Mr. Chair, as I said earlier, there are five automobile assembly operations in Canada and hundreds of parts manufacturers. We are in constant contact with the industry. We know where they stand. We know what they require.

Yes, we are engaging in that process of revising and reviewing CUSMA. It is very important. We will not negotiate in public, and we will not cave in. We will not panic, and we will not cave in.

[Amarjeet Gill, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Mr. Chair, I rise today on behalf of the people of Brampton West and on behalf of thousands of auto workers across this country whose livelihoods have been thrown into crisis.

On October 14, Stellantis announced it would move Jeep Compass production from Brampton to the U.S. There are 3,000 direct jobs at risk and another 12,000 supply chain jobs threatened. Up to 15,000 families in Peel face economic uncertainty. All of this happened after billions in subsidies from the Liberals, with no enforceable job guarantees.

In Brampton, the frustration is real. The hurt is real and the fear is real. People ask how the government could allow this to happen. Over three years, Stellantis received over $1 billion in direct grants: $520 million federally and $513 million from Ontario.

I also would like to mention that I will be splitting my time with the member for Kitchener South—Hespeler.

Retooling was promised from 2024 to 2025, but after the money flowed, production left. The Windsor battery plant received up to $500 million in federal support, and $260 million has already been paid. Then the government signed a $15-billion performance-based subsidy deal: $10 billion federal and $5 billion provincial. In total, Stellantis has access up to $16.5 billion in support, and no real protection for workers, no job guarantees, no production clauses and no clawbacks.

The Parliamentary Budget Officer warns EV subsidies now total $52.5 billion and that it may take a decade to break even, if companies stay in Canada.

Then came the tariff failure. The Prime Minister promised a U.S. tariff deal by July 21. The deadline passed and there was no deal and no protection. After the October 7 meeting with President Trump, the U.S. kept its tariffs. President Trump said that he would attract trillions in Canadian investment. Weeks later, production left Brampton. Families are devastated. I have with met them with our leader at the Chrysler plant in Brampton. They are worried about mortgages. Workers cannot sleep. Moms and dads fear Christmas will be unaffordable.

In Brampton West, one Stellantis income supports an entire household. When that income disappears, the family suffers. The Prime Minister's response is, “Who cares?” I care and Conservatives care. Canadian workers deserve a government that fights for them.

Conservatives forced the release of the Stellantis contract. On October 22, the industry committee unanimously adopted a Conservative motion to investigate the Stellantis commitments. Witnesses, including Unifor and the Automotive Parts Manufacturers' Association, raised serious concerns about the government's weak agreements and the absence of a coherent industrial strategy.

The government responded with a tariff restriction, which only will raise costs for Canadians. Brampton does not need theatrics; Brampton needs jobs. Conservatives have a plan: Cut the GST on Canadian-made vehicles while U.S. tariffs remain, create a keep Canadian working fund to support workers hit by U.S. trade actions, and maintain clean auto incentives but with real job guarantees, transparency and accountability.

Brampton built Canada's auto industry. Its workers built vehicles for the world. They deserve respect and they deserve protection. We will work every single day to rebuild Canada's manufacturing strength so that no community ever suffers what Brampton is facing today.

[Carlos Leitão, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry]

Mr. Chair, I have one simple question for my colleague. On the fact that the auto industry is severely affected by those unjustifiable U.S. tariffs, what is the Conservative plan? I still cannot visualize how the industrial carbon tax will address the issue of U.S. tariffs.

[Amarjeet Gill, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Mr. Chair, because the government has no industrial strategy, it makes announcements not results. While the U.S. fought for its workers, the Prime Minister was busy making excuses.

Conservatives will fight to bring those jobs home by securing fair trade deals, cutting taxes on Canadian-made vehicles and restoring confidence in our manufacturing sector.

[Fred Davies, Conservative, Niagara South, ON]

Mr. Chair, after billions of taxpayer dollars and countless promises, 3,000 jobs at Stellantis were lost, leaving workers out of work.

The Prime Minister said he was the man with the plan. I wonder if my hon. colleague would comment on what he thinks that plan actually might be.

[Amarjeet Gill, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Mr. Chair, we all know how the auto sector is being impacted. The Prime Minister's plan is failing families across Canada, and his so-called negotiating skills have cost Brampton workers their jobs. For years he boasted that he knew how to get deals done, but when it mattered most, he delivered nothing.

Conservatives will restore real leadership, real strategy and real negotiation that protect Canadian workers, not political branding exercises that fail families.

The so-called man with the plan had no plan at all. When it came time to negotiate real protection for Canadian workers, he failed. He simply did not negotiate. He gave away billions without securing jobs guarantees, production commitments or real accountability. That is not leadership; that is incompetence.

Conservatives will protect workers, not abandon them with empty slogans.

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

Mr. Chair, I sympathize and I empathize, because it must be extremely challenging for the workers in Brampton West and the workers across Canada who are impacted by tariffs.

I would ask the member opposite this: Have the automakers in his riding benefited from the strategic response fund, from liquidity and from the regional tariff response initiative? Has he shared that with some of the parts manufacturers who would benefit? I am just curious whether, when workers are concerned, the member is sharing with them that the Liberal government has, in the budget, expanded EI access and protections.

[Amarjeet Gill, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Mr. Chair, the member opposite's questions were wonderful, and I really appreciate the concern she has for auto workers in Brampton as well.

We all know that the auto sector has been hit hard because of Liberal trade policies for years. When we are giving $10 billion without any jobs guarantees, that is a clear indication that government is not doing its due diligence, and it is impacting people. This is exactly what happened in Brampton, where due to the lack of the government's ability, we have lost 3,000 jobs.

People are suffering because of the job losses. Thousands of Brampton families face an uncertain Christmas this year. They did everything right; they worked hard, paid taxes and built this country's auto industry, but the government let them down.

Conservatives will never abandon Brampton families. We will fight for them.

[Matt Strauss, Conservative, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Mr. Chair, the debate tonight should not be necessary. The Prime Minister of Canada called an election saying that he needed a mandate to take action to stand up against Trump and to build Canada strong. It has now been nine months, and he has not taken those actions.

Many people took the Prime Minister at his word, but we all saw him nodding meekly in the Oval Office while President Trump threatened to take every last one of our auto sector jobs. Today, the President is making good on that threat, and the Prime Minister is failing to live up to his promise.

When we ask the Liberals what they are going to do about it, they say, “Who cares?” and that they cannot control Trump anyway. No kidding, we knew that. We were not the ones who called an election saying that we were going to solve the problem by gesticulating with our elbows somehow.

When I was knocking on doors, people would ask me what to do about Trump, and I would be honest with them. I would say then that we cannot control him. We can only do in this country what we can do in this country, which is a lot, but the Liberals are not doing those things.

I sat here during the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry's speech to kick off this debate. It was a bizarre, ChatGPT history of the auto sector in Canada. Conservatives did not call this debate to talk about the auto sector's history; we came here to talk about its future and how we can secure that future with concrete actions tonight. Do the Liberals even believe in the future of the auto industry in this country? If they do, why were they eulogizing it?

I have six concrete actions that Conservatives are proposing that the Liberals could take tonight.

Number one is to have countertariffs. It was the core of the Liberals' election platform, and it makes sense. Here is the math: Ford Motor Company is an American car company. After 10 years of failed Liberal industrial policy, it barely makes any cars here anymore, but it does make 150,000 F-150s in the United States and ships them up here, where zero tariffs are paid. Conversely, the Toyota plant in my riding makes 500,000 vehicles, of which it ships 400,000 to the United States, and it is getting killed on tariffs of, on average, 15% of the purchase price. Why does the government not keep its promise, put tariffs on the F-150s and use the money it gleans to offset the tariffs Toyota is paying to protect our auto sector?

Number two is to get rid of the ridiculous EV mandate. For those following along at home, Toyota makes awesome, low-emission hybrid vehicles in this country and it gets no credit for it. Under the Liberals' mandate, Toyota has to buy EV credits from Tesla, which makes no autos in this country. It is a cash transfer from the Canadian auto worker to Tesla. It makes no sense and should end tonight. The Liberals could end it tonight.

I had representatives from Toyota in my office last week explaining that, even if it is paused, they still cannot invest in their people and in their plants if they do not know if they are going to be punished by the radical, woke, nonsense caucus of the Liberal party.

Number three is to get clarity on the strategic response fund. It was in the Liberals' platform. They announced it in the spring and re-announced it in the fall. No auto manufacturer knows where that money is going or what the Liberals are doing with it. Auto manufacturers cannot make investments until they find out.

Number four is to get rid of the HST on Canadian-made vehicles. It is simple.

That ties in to number five, which is to just ask Canadians to buy Canadian. Why is it left to the Premier of Ontario to be Captain Canada pouring out a bottle of Crown Royal because one bottling plant was moved down south? The Prime Minister has never asked Canadians to step up and buy Canadian. Why will he not be Captain Canada?

The math is simple. In this country, we buy 1.8 million vehicles a year, and we only make 1.3 million vehicles a year. If we would all commit, with the leadership of a Prime Minister living up to his promise, to buy the vehicles that we make, it would help those families that are worried about their jobs and about buying presents for their kids this Christmas.

Number six is to get rid of the industrial carbon tax. It makes no sense. Let me explain something very simple: Global warming is a global problem. When we put in taxes that drive manufacturing down south, where gas-powered vehicles are made that could have been made in Canada, it does not reduce carbon emissions globally. It is a nonsense policy, and the Liberals should get rid of it today.

I look forward to the Liberals explaining to the House, and to all Canadians, why they will not take these concrete actions, which, by and large, they promised in their platform. Why will they not take them tonight?

[Carlos Leitão, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry]

Mr. Chair, there are several things.

Perhaps we should start with the fact that 90% of automobiles made in Canada are sold in the United States. Therefore, the key to this whole thing is to continue to have access to the U.S. market. There are other issues, but the fundamental issue is access to the United States market. That access is threatened by U.S. tariffs and the U.S. desire to block the entry of Canadian vehicles into the U.S.

Does the hon. member believe that, just by caving in to U.S. demands and signing any deal, it will solve the problem?

[Matt Strauss, Conservative, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Mr. Chair, I respect the honourable gentleman very much. I am very concerned that he did not listen to a word of my speech. We are in a trade war. I am asking the government to fight the trade war, to take actions on the trade war. We do not win a war by lying down and going to sleep. We do not win a trade war by going to the Oval Office and promising the President $1 trillion of Canadian investment for nothing, and then nodding meekly and saying nothing when he promises to rob us of every single Canadian auto job. That is not winning a trade war. That is not what the Liberals ran on. That is not what they promised. I am asking them to take action.

[Fred Davies, Conservative, Niagara South, ON]

Mr. Chair, a few minutes ago, one of the members opposite asked my colleague here if he had mentioned to the auto workers who have lost their jobs that the government has set aside some money for them and if he had mentioned to them that the government has extended EI in response to the 3,000 lost jobs. It seems to me that the Liberal government's response to everything is to spend more money, throw money at a problem instead of looking at the core issues.

I wonder if my colleague might comment on that.

[Matt Strauss, Conservative, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Mr. Chair, Canadians do not want handouts when they lose their jobs; they want their jobs back. The Liberal solution to every single problem is to take tax money and then throw it at the wall. We want our jobs back. We want to work. We do not want EI. It is the opposite of what the Liberals ran on. It is the opposite of what the Prime Minister promised. After 10 years, it is still not going to work.