Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join in this debate to speak to the motion presented by the hon. member for Joliette that an assistance program should be made available to our softwood lumber industry and its workers until we resolve our trade dispute with the United States.
The federal government has been working closely with the provinces to determine how the workers, communities and companies will be affected by the U.S. ruling. A number of options are currently being considered by the federal government. The Department of Natural Resources is working with the Departments of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, Industry and Human Resources Development to look at all possible options.
We must look at not only short term support but also long term support such as stronger political advocacy to the American public, market diversification to make us less dependent on the U.S. market and more research and development to help deal with the issues, including the mountain pine beetle infestation in northern British Columbia.
As we get closer to the time when companies will be required to pay the U.S. duties, we as a government are devoting all of our time and energy determining how best to support workers, communities and the industry. Over the past number of weeks I spent a great deal of time speaking directly to workers and companies in sawmill communities about the impacts of the softwood lumber dispute. I visited Port Alberni two weeks ago and met with first nations representatives from 14 municipalities and representatives of workers. I visited Prince George where I met with a number of mayors.
At the end of April I attended, along with the Minister for International Trade, the softwood summit in Vancouver organized by the premier of British Columbia. I was again presented with the seriousness of these issues and a broad agenda of measures the federal government could undertake to help the sector deal with this crisis. This is a national problem that affects many parts of Canada.
I want to emphasize today the impacts this dispute will have in my province of British Columbia. It represents 50% of the industry. Over the next three years it is estimated that at least 20,000 direct and 30,000 indirect jobs will be lost. The province put together a compelling map for us to view at the summit. It showed us just how dependent communities are on the forest industry. From 1997 to 2001 there have been 20 prominent mill closures on the coast and 11 in the interior. Up to 20 additional mills are at risk in 2002.
The coastal lumber industry is already facing problems of overcapacity and high cost of production by going through a broader restructuring. The effects of these tariffs and subsidies will be devastating. In B.C. 90% of the lumber comes from the interior and 10% from the coast. Western red cedar is 4% of the total Canadian volume shipped into the U.S. The value of this product is five times that of the Canadian average. The value added products are unique to Canada and do not compete with the U.S. construction products. It is ridiculous that the U.S. has included these value added products in the dispute with us.
To add to the tragedy first nations have finally built strong partnerships with the coastal forest industry. In a pre-treaty environment the chiefs and councils have worked in their traditional territories to create economic opportunity for their people. Now because of the U.S. ruling on softwood these economic opportunities that they worked so hard for will be lost. The coast will be hit the hardest with an estimated 27,000 direct and indirect jobs being lost over the next couple of years.
The question for us as a federal government is, what is the best way to help? Through all of these discussions many common themes emerged that could help mitigate some of the effects of the softwood lumber dispute. These include the need to diversify our markets beyond the United States and the need for research which will help develop new products and processes to help our industry stay competitive.
The Government of Canada is currently doing many things to develop new markets and conduct forest products research. A few months ago I launched the Canada-China wood products initiative. Through Natural Resources Canada, the program would invest in eliminating the barriers facing Canada's exports of wood products into the Chinese market. This initiative responds directly to a need identified by the federal government advisory bodies such as the Forest Sector Advisory Council and other industry groups. It would provide opportunities for all regions of the country and would support a full range of primary and secondary wood products including softwood lumber.
The federal government is committed to forestry research in Canada. Natural Resources Canada maintains five research laboratories across Canada and provides credible and scientifically validated information for the development of effective forest policies, regulations and management strategies. It also enhances Canada's capacity to respond to strategic issues, facilitates the development of national standards for the production of forest health and biological diversity, and contributes to the resolution of national and international disputes involving natural resources.
Our federal expertise allows Canada to evaluate scientific information from independent sources. Natural Resource Canada provides Canada with a long term, continuous forest science capacity and encourages research partnerships with provincial research institutions, universities, industry and model forests.
A specific example of this partnership is our work with the government of British Columbia in helping to combat the outbreak of mountain pine beetle in northern British Columbia. We are working to develop forest and management techniques to control and/or manage the mountain pine beetle as well as providing decision support tools to incorporate predictive capacity into higher level planning. This is an example of where federal government research is helping a softwood lumber species.
We are all sensitive to the impact that the U.S. duties are having on our Canadian industry. We are working closely with the industry and the provinces to evaluate the effect that the unfair U.S. duties have on Canadian workers and communities, and are keeping all options regarding worker assistance open.
There are a number of programs currently available to provide assistance to workers and communities through difficult periods. We are looking at whether the existing safety nets are sufficient to help dislocated workers and communities, or whether there may be a need to examine possible options for further assistance. However as the Minister for International Trade has said, we cannot be precipitous on this. Sometimes there are needs that go beyond existing programs. The government is approaching the situation with an open mind.
In response to the opposition's suggestion last week that the government is not doing anything to defend our industry, I respond to those critics by saying that we are continuing to challenge the U.S. trade actions in all legal venues open to us. Aside from last Friday's action where we launched WTO challenges of the U.S. final subsidy determination, we are launching other challenges of U.S. softwood lumber decisions at the WTO and NAFTA. Moreover the Prime Minister has raised the issue with President Bush at every opportunity. We continue to consult with Canadian industry from every region of the country and are in touch with all provincial and territorial governments on a regular basis.
The Government of Canada, with the provinces and industry, pursued a two-track softwood strategy, and continuing that two-track strategy is exactly what industry, the provinces, and the Government of Canada have agreed to do. We are taking every action possible to defend the interests of Canada's softwood lumber industry, and we are doing it with every tool we have available.
Before I conclude my remarks I wish to say that I will be sharing this time with the member for Etobicoke North.
I know this industry. I have had family involvement in the industry. My grandfather worked in the industry back in 1906. My father worked in the industry, and I as well worked in the industry during the summers to pay for my education. I know the pain this will cause our communities. That is why we must ensure we do everything possible and that we are keeping all the options open to us. We must ensure a close analysis, evaluate what the effects are and ensure we can keep communities working and keep businesses going. That is what we are determined to do right across the country.
We will be exploring all the options available to us to ensure we protect and support our communities and individuals.
It is in the interests of both countries to come to the table to resolve this issue. We have been urging the U.S. administration to play a role in this so the issue can be resolved fairly for both Canadians and Americans.
