House of Commons Hansard #98 of the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was workers.

Topics

line drawing of robot

This summary is computer-generated. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.

Procedure and House Affairs Members present reports from the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs concerning committee membership and election candidate criteria, while debating proposed measures regarding "longest ballot" organizations and nomination signature limits. 700 words.

Petitions

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto Pact Conservative MP Kyle Seeback moves a motion criticizing the Liberal government’s handling of the auto industry, citing declining production levels and job losses. Conservatives propose a 'tariff-free auto pact' to double production via GST exemptions and a one-for-one sales rule. Liberals oppose the motion, arguing the plan is outdated and ignores current global trade realities. Meanwhile, the Bloc Québécois rejects it, highlighting concerns regarding climate goals and regional interests. 47900 words, 6 hours in 2 segments: 1 2.

Statements by Members

Question Period

The Conservatives condemn the government’s immigration mismanagement, citing an Auditor General report on student permit fraud and calling to fire three ministers. They highlight declining auto production and aluminum tariffs while proposing a tariff-free auto pact. Finally, they criticize the failing pay system and its backlog of transactions.
The Liberals emphasize restoring integrity to immigration by reducing student visas and temporary resident numbers. They defend their auto strategy and Northern investments while addressing aluminum tariffs. Additionally, they focus on reducing pay backlogs, implementing lawful access measures for police, and protecting the judicial appointment process.
The Bloc defends Quebec’s state secularism law, demanding the government withdraw its arguments at the Supreme Court. They reject federal authority and call for provincial control over judicial appointments to end partisan selections.
The NDP condemns the government for cutting funding for accessible housing for wheelchair users. They also call for an end to arms exports to ensure Canada is not complicit in the civilian killings in the Middle East.

Supplementary Estimates (C), 2025-26 First reading of Bill C-23. The bill appropriates specified sums for federal public administration for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2026, advancing through the House of Commons for final approval on division. .

Interim Supply Members move and carry a motion on division to grant interim supply totalling $86.4 billion to fund government operations until March 31, 2027, as part of the budgetary process for the upcoming fiscal year. 600 words.

Interim Supply First reading of Bill C-24. The bill receives first, second, and third reading in the House of Commons, is reviewed clause-by-clause as a committee of the whole, and is ultimately passed on division for federal public administration funding. .

Amendments to Bill C-8 Laila Goodridge argues against the government’s challenge to amendments made by the Standing Committee on Public Safety regarding Bill C-8, asserting that the committee’s changes are procedurally sound and within the bill's scope. 1300 words, 10 minutes.

Respecting Families of Murdered and Brutalized Persons Act Second reading of Bill C-235. The bill increases, at a judge's discretion, parole ineligibility periods to 40 years for offenders convicted of abduction, sexual assault, and murder. Supporters, primarily Conservatives, argue it prevents the retraumatization of victims' families. The Bloc Québécois opposes the measure, citing constitutional concerns regarding Supreme Court rulings on cumulative sentencing and potential wasted parliamentary resources, but the motion passes and proceeds to committee. 4200 words, 30 minutes.

Adjournment Debates

Employment data and economic performance Garnett Genuis criticizes the government for significant job losses, particularly among youth, while dismissing ministerial excuses as inaccurate or logically inconsistent. Leslie Church defends the government's economic record, citing strong foreign direct investment projections and new training investments under Budget 2025 to support workers impacted by trade disruptions.
Economic performance and cost of living Kevin Waugh criticizes the government for Canada's shrinking economy, high inflation, and job losses, arguing that families need jobs rather than handouts. Leslie Church defends the administration's economic plan, citing new grocery benefits and targeted funding to support affordability, while blaming trade wars for recent economic challenges.
Benefits delivery modernization costs Sébastien Lemire criticizes significant cost overruns in the government's Cúram-based benefits delivery system, demanding an independent inquiry. Leslie Church defends the project as necessary to modernize outdated infrastructure, stating that the migration of OAS was completed under budget and is essential for reliable, secure service delivery to millions.
Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

Conservative

Kyle Seeback Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON

Mr. Speaker, I listened to the fantastic speech my colleague gave. He talked about EVs. The Liberal government says it has an EV manufacturing strategy. How can we have an EV manufacturing strategy when we do not really manufacture any EVs in Canada, only about 700 Dodge Chargers, and the government is going to let in a flood of Chinese EVs, which will undercut any domestic Canadian EV industry? It may not sound like a lot, but 49,000 Chinese EVs makes up about 30% of the entire EV purchase market in Canada.

Can my colleague explain the absolute incoherence of the Liberal policy on EVs?

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

Conservative

Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague, first and foremost for his passion to fight for Canadian workers in the auto industry. This is a great example that we shall follow each and every time we want to fight for an issue we believe in, as he is doing with auto workers.

What we have seen in the last 10 years is that it is only the Liberals who let the car industry crash. In the last year, they did everything to crash the electric vehicle market here in Canada. This is why we have the worst result in the world for EVs.

Today the Liberals are trying to explain to us that, no, this is the future, and they are the only ones who can do it. The Conservatives are not opposed to it. No, we are all open to a free market, open to letting the people decide by themselves, and we are also open to helping the future and not helping friends.

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1 p.m.

Conservative

Kathy Borrelli Conservative Windsor—Tecumseh—Lakeshore, ON

Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to rise today in strong support of today's Conservative auto strategy.

For far too long, Canadian and Windsor auto workers have been tossed aside because the government is subsidizing foreign electric vehicles and standing by as thousands of Canadian auto jobs vanish, all while prioritizing everyone but our own workers. Despite this, I have good news. Today's Conservative auto strategy is simple. It is about auto workers and their families in Windsor and across our beautiful country.

For generations, Windsor has been the beating heart of our auto industry. It is not just a manufacturing region; it is the place I proudly call home. Thousands of families do as well because they want to build their lives around stable, well-paying automotive jobs. Today, unfortunately, those workers are watching their livelihood slip away, not because they failed but because the Liberal government failed them.

In 2016, Canada produced approximately 2.4 million vehicles. Today that number has collapsed to 1.2 million vehicles, nearly cut in half. Over the same period, production in competing countries has remained stable or even increased. Meanwhile, here in Canada under the Liberal government, our industry has been gutted to fill the needs of foreign manufacturing, and workers in Windsor, Oshawa, Brampton, Ingersoll and Sainte-Thérèse are being expected to watch.

In fact, employment in vehicle assembly has declined significantly over the last decade. In 2015, roughly 32,700 Canadians worked in assembly plants. By 2024, that number had dropped to about 23,700. Last year alone, nearly another 6,000 jobs were lost in our auto sector. That means that during the 10 years that the Liberal government has been in power, it has managed to decimate our auto industry by nearly half.

That is not a transition. That is a failure of Liberal government, yet what has been the government's response? Instead of defending Canadian workers, it has doubled down on failed policies that subsidize foreign production. My Conservative colleagues and I will never stand for this, and I promise I will always defend and stand up for our auto industry.

Today nearly 90% of vehicles sold in Canada are imported. Canadians are buying cars, but we are not building them. Now, under the current government, Canadians are being asked to use their tax dollars to subsidize the purchase of those imported vehicles. That is not an industrial strategy. That is an industrial surrender.

Conservatives are not and never will be willing to back down from this fight, so why is the government ready to lie down when our workers most need its support?

I am begging for the Liberal government to adopt our motion today, because we know it would work. In 1965, Canada entered the Canada-United States auto pact. That agreement tied production to market access. If a company wanted to sell vehicles in Canada, it had to build vehicles in Canada. The results were transformative: Auto production in Canada grew from roughly 700,000 vehicles annually in the mid-1960s to nearly three million vehicles by the late 1990s. That was not an accident. It was because Canada had a strategy that ensured that Canadian workers benefited from Canadian demand.

Today we have the opposite: a government that has accepted tariffs as permanent; a government that has failed to secure access to our largest market, the United States; and a government that is actively subsidizing foreign-built vehicles while Canadian auto jobs in Oshawa, Brampton, Ingersoll and Sainte-Thérèse disappear. Families and auto workers in Windsor are worried they will be next.

Windsor is not just another city; it is one of the most auto-dependent regions in the entire country. Tens of thousands of jobs in Windsor-Essex are directly and indirectly tied to the auto sector. When a shift is cut in Windsor, it is not just a factory issue. It also affects spinoff jobs, restaurants, small businesses, suppliers and entire communities.

These Canadians, who once had a promise that if they worked hard they would have a stable life, are now experiencing mass job losses in Brampton, Oshawa, Ingersoll and Sainte-Thérèse. Supply chains are unstable, and livelihoods are at risk. My community and workers across Canada should not have to wake up every day wondering if they are next.

Auto workers are asking this simple question: “Who's fighting for us?” Our Conservative auto strategy answers that question. First, it supports a plan that would make it affordable to buy Canadian vehicles by removing the GST on Canadian-made cars, putting our workers first. Second, it would restore balance to production by ensuring that if a company wants to sell in Canada, it must build in Canada on a dollar-for-dollar basis.

Third, it would protect North American supply chains by maintaining a 75% North American content rule under CUSMA, which would ensure that production stays here and not overseas. Fourth, the plan would stand firm against unfair trade by aligning with our North American partners to confront state-subsidized Chinese electric vehicle imports that will undercut our industry.

Finally, it would strengthen our national security by ensuring that vehicles operating on Canadian roads are not connected to the software systems of foreign companies. Let us be clear: The Liberal government knows that these modern vehicles are not just machines but also data systems. They collect location data, behavioural data and infrastructure data. Allowing vehicles connected to hostile regimes into our market is not just bad economics but also a national security risk. If members will not take my word for it, they should ask why the Minister of Industry will not say that she would drive a foreign-made car. It is because she knows it is a major security risk and threat, not just to herself but to every Canadian.

This is the difference between a Conservative government that believes in Canada, and our current Liberal government, which has given up. The Liberals' approach not only welcomes but subsidizes foreign production, accepts tariffs and pushes a false narrative that this will benefit Canadians.

Our approach is simple. We build here, we buy here and we protect our communities. We will bring back production by taking Canada from 1.2 million vehicles per year back up to two million vehicles, not just restoring our auto industry but also restoring the promise that Canada is a place for opportunity. It is about giving Windsor workers not just hope but a future.

I would say to the auto workers across Canada that Conservatives see them. We understand what is happening, and we are fighting for them. They are not alone. I, alongside my Conservative colleagues, will always stand up for our auto industry, and let me be clear: This is not just about an industry. It is about the thousands of families and other Canadians who depend on this sector's prosperity. A country that cannot build its own cars, maintain its production and create more jobs is a country that has lost control of the future.

Canada can be a manufacturing powerhouse again. We have the workers, the resources and the history. What we need now is the leadership. That is what the motion represents, that is what the plan would deliver and that is why I urge all members of the House to support our motion, not only for my community but for our workers and the future of Canada's auto industry.

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:10 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, in order to accelerate investment in Canada's automobile manufacturing industry, the government is investing $3 billion to ensure that we can continue to see some growth in that area.

My question for the member is this: Does the Conservative Party support that more than $3-billion investment?

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Kathy Borrelli Conservative Windsor—Tecumseh—Lakeshore, ON

Mr. Speaker, if the Conservative Party starts making deals with other companies for production, we are going to tie those companies to agreements that will support workers. We are going to tie those agreements and that money to jobs. We are not going to just make contracts with companies without assurances that our workers will have jobs.

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Bloc

Mario Beaulieu Bloc La Pointe-de-l'Île, QC

Mr. Speaker, once again, with this motion, the Conservatives are prioritizing oil and Ontario's auto industry above all else, at the expense of Quebec. They are even proposing to eliminate EV subsidies and to lower environmental standards to please Mr. Trump.

Does my colleague think such a motion will be welcome in Quebec?

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Kathy Borrelli Conservative Windsor—Tecumseh—Lakeshore, ON

Mr. Speaker, any improvement to the auto industry will affect any province across Canada that builds for the auto industry. In Quebec, they build for the auto industry. More cars being made means more work for those companies in Quebec and provinces across Canada that are producing parts for the auto industry, whether they do assembly in that province or not.

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Kyle Seeback Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON

Mr. Speaker, I thought that was a fantastic speech by my colleague.

What we continue to hear from the Liberals during this debate is our plan does not make sense, or this, that and the other thing, but we have actually seen no plan from them. We have seen production go from two million vehicles a year to 1.2 million, and then they talk about these programs, yet exports of autos are down 55% over the past year.

I cannot figure out what the Liberals' plan is. Canadians cannot figure out what their plan is. Auto workers do not know what their plan is. Does the member have any clue what the Liberals' plan is? I really have no clue.

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Kathy Borrelli Conservative Windsor—Tecumseh—Lakeshore, ON

Mr. Speaker, honestly, I agree with my colleague. I do not understand the Liberals' plan either.

It benefits a foreign, hostile country by accepting imports of its vehicles and it gives an incentive to buy other foreign-made cars. When Canadians, who are not getting the jobs to build cars, need a car, they are going to dig deeper into their pockets to buy an electric vehicle that is being incentivized.

It just does not make any sense to me whatsoever. We need to build cars and car parts in Canada.

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux Liberal Winnipeg North, MB

Mr. Speaker, could the member indicate whether or not she supports the Government of Canada's countertariffs on auto imports coming from the United States, where they are warranted? Does the Conservative Party support those countertariffs?

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Kathy Borrelli Conservative Windsor—Tecumseh—Lakeshore, ON

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure about those tariffs the member is talking about. What I do know is that we should not have any tariffs. We have enjoyed free trade between Canada and the United States for many years. We need a strong leader to go to bat and do those negotiations in Washington, which will bring about a free trade situation again.

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:15 p.m.

Marc-Aurèle-Fortin Québec

Liberal

Carlos Leitão LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Kingston and the Islands.

I am pleased to rise in the House of Commons today to speak to the future of the Canadian auto industry and the measures our government is taking to ensure its long-term success.

The Government of Canada fully understands and recognizes the importance of our auto industry, a key driver of our economy that relies on thousands of dedicated workers and generates $16 billion in economic activity every year. This sector is and will remain an important part of the Canadian economy.

With a world-class workforce, Canada's auto sector is building the vehicles of today and will help build the vehicles of tomorrow. It provides quality jobs that define communities and make Canada a trusted partner in global manufacturing.

The auto sector is facing very strong headwinds. The industry is under immense pressure. Let us be clear: This pressure stems from the U.S. tariffs on vehicles, which are driving up costs and creating uncertainty in the North American market. That market is deeply integrated, by the way.

Let us be clear. This is happening as a result of policies put in place by the U.S. administration, which has very clearly indicated that it wants to bring all car manufacturing back to the United States. No, we are not going to sign any old agreement with the United States. We are going to ensure that we secure an agreement that will minimize tariffs and ensure the long-term survival of this industry.

Since the government fully recognizes how important this sector is to the Canadian economy, it reacted quickly to the tariffs, which are obviously unjustified, illegal and, more importantly, counterproductive, even for the Americans.

As I said at the outset, the industry is highly integrated in North America. U.S. tariffs are having a negative impact on American companies based in the United States. We also have retaliatory measures, countermeasures, to try to force our American friends to make some changes. This measure has been supplemented with a performance-based duty remission framework to protect Canadian production. Under this framework, Canadian auto manufacturers are able to import CUSMA-compliant U.S.-assembled vehicles duty-free, provided that they maintain production in Canada. That is very important. They have to maintain production in Canada, or they are not eligible for remission.

The Government of Canada is taking proactive steps to position the sector as a leader in manufacturing next-generation vehicles. On February 5, the Prime Minister launched a new automotive strategy to transform Canada's auto sector in the long term. This strategy aims to ensure that Canadian-built vehicles create good Canadian jobs and a strong Canadian market. This means that we need to strengthen our domestic manufacturing presence, and we need to start by investing in the transition to manufacturing EVs and connected technology. We will then need to diversify our export markets, because the future of our industry depends on EVs and export diversification.

Recognizing that the future of the industry lies in electrification, we are building on our free trade agreements with 51 countries, which give us access to more than 1.5 billion consumers around the world, to attract new investment and diversify our export markets.

We are supporting major investments in auto manufacturing and helping businesses adapt, grow and diversify by allocating $3 billion from the strategic response fund and up to $100 million from regional tariff response initiatives.

With a view to bolstering domestic production and supporting long-term competitiveness, we have launched public consultations to strengthen Canada's automotive remission framework. We have launched consultations. We are in constant discussions with the industry to determine the best way to ensure its long-term viability. We are aiming for a performance-based tool that is designed to protect Canadian workers, strengthen supply chains and position Canada as a destination of choice for automotive investment.

Our top priority is strengthening the domestic market for the vehicles of the future. The new five-year EV affordability program offers incentives of up to $5,000 for battery electric and fuel‑cell electric vehicles and up to $2,500 for hybrid cars. We believe that EVs are the future of the automotive industry. To ensure the industry's long-term viability, we must be part of this market.

We are lowering costs for Canadian families and businesses while ensuring that Canadian-made vehicles have a clear advantage in the domestic market by exempting them from the $50,000 transaction cap.

We are also providing long-term certainty regarding our path to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, because the reality is that GHGs exist and that they are harmful to both our physical health and our economic well‑being. We are introducing new, more stringent Canadian GHG emission standards for model years 2027 to 2032 to drive emission reductions in a technology-neutral manner.

In addition, we will repeal the electric vehicle availability standard and focus instead on the outcomes that matter to Canadians without placing an undue burden on Canadian industry.

This strategy is about vehicles and manufacturing, but most importantly, it is about workers. We are introducing a new work‑sharing grant to prevent layoffs and support worker retention. We are investing $570 million in employment assistance and reskilling supports for up to 66,000 workers, including auto workers who may have lost their jobs.

We are also establishing a new workforce alliance of industry, labour and training partners to address bottlenecks and catalyze private investment. Canada has a highly skilled workforce, critical minerals, abundant clean energy, and a proven track record of innovation.

Canada understands and supports the auto industry, and the future of the auto industry lies in electric vehicles.

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Conservative

Gérard Deltell Conservative Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC

Mr. Speaker, I want to say in English that the member is one of my political heroes. I want to inform this House and the people in Canada from coast to coast that this gentlemen balanced the budget in Quebec. That is great. I hope those who are opposing us now will listen, be very careful and get inspiration from the Liberal member. He is on the wrong team, because it is the team of the deficit.

I want to say this to my colleague: He is a man who knows how to do the math and who has a vision for the future. However, what we have seen over the past year is anything but sound policies regarding electric vehicles. The current government has failed to provide any predictability. As a result, last year, we had the worst EV sales on the entire planet.

Does the government realize that, with this dismal track record, its current plan lacks credibility?

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Liberal

Carlos Leitão Liberal Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his kind words.

To come back to the deficit, when a country is going through a period of turmoil and economic crisis triggered by a neighbouring partner that is no longer reliable, the government has to step in on a massive scale. That is what the government has done. That is what must be done. We are proud of that.

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:25 p.m.

Bloc

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

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary made a compelling case for electric vehicles. I must commend him for that, but I still cannot help but point out that his government basically gutted the transportation electrification industry over the past year, with disastrous results for the industry. Now, the government is trying to patch things up, but it is going to be difficult to turn this situation around.

My question for the member is this. I am already convinced, but if he is so certain that the electrification of transportation is the way of the future, then why is his government still investing more in oil than in electrification? It seems to me that if the government believes that something is the way of the future, then that is where it would put the money. It would not be putting more money in the past than in the future.

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Liberal

Carlos Leitão Liberal Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC

Mr. Speaker, there is a saying about being able to walk and chew gum at the same time. That is what we are doing. Right now, with the war in the Middle East causing fuel shortages, it is increasingly important for Canada to produce oil. We do produce oil, but we can also transition to EV-related technologies at the same time. We are doing both at the same time.

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Liberal

Dominique O'Rourke Liberal Guelph, ON

Mr. Speaker, given that my hon. colleague is the former finance minister for the province of Quebec, I would like to ask him whether eliminating the GST on vehicles manufactured in Canada could increase the deficit.

I would also like him to comment on the government's plan for the automotive sector and on the importance of investing in that industry, both now and in the future.

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Liberal

Carlos Leitão Liberal Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC

Mr. Speaker, I do not think I will have enough time to answer all of these very important questions. I will answer the question about the GST.

That makes no sense, and everyone is well aware of that. The GST cannot be applied selectively. Certain products cannot be subject to the GST while others are not. It does not work like that. A value-added tax like the GST cannot be applied in that way. Come on. I think everyone should know that.

On top of that, it would be expensive. The folks proposing this measure are advocates of fiscal restraint. No, it would be very expensive.

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Mr. Speaker, this opposition motion and, quite frankly, the entire Conservative plan around the auto industry in Canada come down to one thing. They come down to denialism. I am going to demonstrate that by talking in particular about three things that they are denying the reality of. They are denying the reality of the auto sector and what exists today. They are denying the reality of the trade situation that we have with the United States, and they are denying the reality of the emerging EV market.

I will start with the auto sector. The reality here is that the auto sector that the Conservatives are trying to harken back to is one from the 1960s, when the auto industry sector in North America was completely different. For example, back in the 1960s, there were primarily just three auto manufacturers in North America: Ford, Chrysler and, I believe, GM. Now there are literally dozens. This is one of the key reasons why it would not work.

There is one other major difference between the 1960s and now. I cannot believe I have to explain this to the Conservatives, but when we consider the fact that they live in the past, it makes sense. The reality is that supply chains are different now from back then. What they are talking about is a fundamental shift to the reality of the sector that we have right now, as it relates to auto. Do not take my word for it, because I am certainly not an expert when it comes to the auto industry. Instead, let us listen to what some of the experts are saying.

John D'Agnolo was referring to the Leader of the Opposition when he said, “He looked at a pact from 1965 and he tried to put details in there”. He went on to say, “Today, the industry is totally different.” He continued, “So, they put out these numbers, and unfortunately, they didn’t do their homework”. That was from the Unifor Local 200 president and auto council chair.

Now the member for Dufferin—Caledon and a number of Conservatives have gotten up to say, “Well, you're just cherry-picking. That's just what one person said. You're talking about one quote.” Well, then, I will not stop there. I will go further. Lana Payne, the Unifor national president, talked about the Leader of the Opposition. This is what she said—

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:30 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

March 24th, 2026 / 1:30 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Mr. Speaker, I know members opposite would love to drown out her words, but I would like to repeat them in the House. She said:

I have concerns and questions with some of what your party has presented. We are encouraged by your effort—

That is good news, guys, that you get an A for effort.

—but skeptical that this plan can restart idled Canadian facilities. In fact, we fear it may prevent potential future growth....

Again, that was from the Unifor national president, but I will not stop there, because I know the members opposite want more.

This is from Tom Venetis, an industry expert, who said, “I think some of these ideas are sort of reviving an aspect of the old 1965 Canada-U.S. auto pact.” He went on to say, “They don't seem very well thought out. It's an argument that I don't think he understands will not work.” An auto expert said that the Leader of the Opposition, in his words, does not understand that it will not work. That should not surprise anybody except Conservatives, who are living in the 1960s, quite literally, as it relates to this motion.

However, the other issue about the auto sector today, versus the 1960s, leads to the second denial of reality from the Conservatives, which is about the trade relationship that exists with the United States. I do not know if they have not been paying attention or have had their heads in the sand for the last year, but I would like to explain in as clear terms as I possibly can to my friends across the way about the reality of what is going on in the United States. I am about to use an economic term, so I want them to really focus on this. The United States right now are relying on something called protectionism. This happens periodically throughout history as different countries look to internalize, resist and shut off all trade coming and going from their country. The United States of America is currently in a period where they are employing and putting forward and bringing in protectionist policies. These policies are meant to prevent trade. They are meant to bring jobs back home.

Now, economists around the world will argue that it is a horrible policy, and I completely agree with that. Our party agrees with that, but the fundamental fact here is that Conservatives are denying the fact that it exists. They are saying, “Hey guys, here is our plan. We have this great plan for how we are going to kick-start it,” but what does that plan rely on? That plan relies on the Americans actually wanting international trade. Now, I think I clearly laid out that they do not, and that is the reality, so the Conservatives' plan is genuinely a non-starter. This is why we decided, since we are a country that still believes in trade, that we will find partners that also want to participate in trade, rather than denying the fact that this is the world we live in.

Nostalgia is great. Let us be nostalgic. I remember what my life was like back in the 1990s. I recently shared a post about it, but that does not mean I think I am still that person today, because things change, and nostalgia is not a strategy, even though the Conservatives tend to think it is.

It is interesting that the Conservative member for Oshawa said earlier that she had been listening the whole day and that we have to know what the person we are negotiating with wants. The Conservatives literally do not understand what Donald Trump wants. He does not want trade. That is why he has tariffs. Tariffs are meant to prevent trade. By the way, it is not just with Canada. It is with just about every developed and developing nation throughout the world. The U.S. administration has put tariffs on trade. Why are the Conservatives hell-bent on trying to insist on something that is never going to happen?

I will go to my third and final point about denialism with respect to the Conservatives. I have given this speech so many times in the House, but they deny the fact that our entire auto industry is on the way to being completely electrified. One in four cars sold in the world right now is an electric vehicle. If the Conservatives want to think that somehow North America, in particular just two countries, are going to form a coalition that hives themselves off from the rest of the world, it is absolutely ludicrous. We are electric.

The member for Dufferin—Caledon, who talks about this, should look at what is called the “innovation curve”. He will see along the innovation curve that once we get to one out of four, which is 25%, of penetration of a new technology into the market, we are going to eventually get to the point where that technology fully and completely makes its way into the market.

Conservatives can use this idea of nostalgia to dictate everything they do, but I would caution them that maybe it is time for self-reflection. Maybe they should think about why it is they are where they are, and I mean that both metaphorically and physically speaking, in the House of Commons. It is because they do not have foresight. It is because they insist on using all political tactics in terms of rage-baiting and looking for opportunity, rather than really dedicating themselves to finding solutions that will benefit our country well into the future, which is what the Prime Minister is doing.

The Prime Minister is looking for the solutions that will benefit Canada, not just in the next month or two months or three months, but into the future, so that when we look back at this generations from now, when our markets have diversified, we can say, “At that particular moment in time, we did the right thing. More importantly, Canadians did the right thing, and that was not listening to Conservatives.”

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Conservative

Kyle Seeback Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON

Mr. Speaker, there was so much incoherence and drivel in that speech that I do not know where to start.

I will start with this: Is it really the Liberal government's position that the United States wants no trade? Is that what the member thinks its position is? If the U.S. wants no trade, we understand why the Liberals are getting no deal on trade, if that is what they think the position is.

Second, the member talked about the future as electrification and said that when we get to 25%, it is some kind of curve. That explains what the Liberals' EV policy is. However, 49,000 Chinese EVs are 30% of the EV market in Canada. I guess the Liberals' plan to create good jobs in the auto sector is to create good jobs in China for Chinese EVs, because let us be clear, the only EV we manufactured in Canada was a Dodge Charger 700. Is this really their plan?

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Liberal

Mark Gerretsen Liberal Kingston and the Islands, ON

Mr. Speaker, listening to the member say things like, “Once we get to 25%, we get to some curb,” it underscores his lack of understanding of some basic, elementary economic principles of supply and demand. The reality is that it is not even 25%. The member for Dufferin—Caledon should know that the chasm point is actually 7.5% market penetration of a new technology. That is the tipping point. It is not even 25%.

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh!

Opposition Motion—Tariff-free Auto PactBusiness of SupplyGovernment Orders

1:40 p.m.

The Assistant Deputy Speaker John Nater

Order, please. We will have a chance for the back—