Brian Masse

[Price of Petroleum Products, May 26th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I remember those days with my colleague as we went around this issue. He is absolutely correct. What really needs to be understood is that Canada is unique in saying that this is about market forces and there is nothing we can do. We are one of the few countries in the world that actually says and does that.

Even the United States has a system in place that President Bush has utilized to put more oil on the market to intervene directly and do what he wants, which is to lower the price of gasoline for consumers. Even in the capitalist United States, the president is willing to intervene to try to lower prices in the free market commodity system.

He does that with the knowledge that many people in the communities he represents are facing high prices. It is a very temporal thing, but at least they have a reserve system. My colleague from Western Arctic also mentioned Canada not having any of that capacity, but those tools are there and are being exercised by other nations. Whether they are weak or strong is another debate, but they are there.

We are unique in basically throwing up our hands and saying that we are sorry but we cannot help because it is too complicated, we do not understand it, and we do not care. The reality here is that the government does not want to deal with the real issue. It is an easy way to run an economy right now: to take stuff up, send it out and ship it out. The hard work happens when Canadians go to school to learn skilled trades, like they do in my riding for tool and die and mould making, but then cannot compete when the dollar has risen so fast that the plants are closing down and moving elsewhere. Canadians have done their part. It is time for the government to do its part.

[Price of Petroleum Products, May 26th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise and speak about this important subject matter.

An important thing to note in this debate is that we all agree there has to be a multitude of energy solutions for Canadians. Wind, solar, and a whole series of different proposals have been put out there and there is going to be added capacity to the market. However, there can be no doubt that we are still going to be living in a modern society that is going to be dependent upon oil and gasoline products for the foreseeable future.

As we bring new elements to the grid, we really need to debate how we are going to deal with the rapid escalation of an essential commodity that feeds our industries, heats our homes, and is required for daily living in Canada.

Coming from an automotive town, I have long been advocating for a change in the revolutionization of that industry to higher standards of fuel efficiency and less pollution. It has been very difficult to get some companies on board. Some have and some are now paying the consequences because of it. This debate today about energy pricing cannot be done without the contextual lens of what we are going to do with this commodity in our civil society.

The New Democratic Party has been calling for a public inquiry on this issue for over a year and it is consistent with what has been done in Parliament over the last number of years. Back in 2002, I was part of a panel on the industry committee that reviewed gasoline prices. It would have been good to have the industry minister speak tonight. I do not know if he is scheduled later on. Even back in 2002, there was a series of excuses that could be used for profiteering in the system and the speculative market, which costs Canadians, had no factual basis even on the price of gasoline.

When the price went up in 2002, and there was a concern, Parliament reconvened after it had recessed. The industry itself presented a series of arguments and people might remember these moments because they heard these excuses later on. At that time, the rapid escalation of prices was blamed on speculation in oil due to a looming war in Iraq. It was blamed on labour unrest in Venezuela, on the political crisis in Nigeria, on usually cold weather in northeastern North America, and on low inventory levels in North America.

There has been discussion about the bill that was changed with the Competition Act, but at that time there was a recommendation for a petroleum monitoring agency. Ironically, even to this day, the Canadian Petroleum Products Institute does not have a problem with having a petroleum monitoring agency. We wanted to shed light on the issue so that consumers felt more empowered and there would be a direct accountability of a government resource as opposed to relying on the industry itself to gather data and information.

We never saw that come to fruition. A change in the Competition Act was proposed. It came far too late in the process. We could have had it up and running at that time. Unfortunately, it did not pan out and there are some consequences.

If we fast forward to today, we hear some of the same excuses. They have come back again. I have a chart. When we reviewed this again in the industry committee, we had another kick at the can and looked at refining and market margins. It is interesting because the market operating margin is fairly consistent over a period of time with a few jumps.

What we have is refining operating margins significantly spiking with a series of events. If we look at the events: it is the Iraq invasion, the blackout, tight gasoline supplies in the U.S., hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and tighter gasoline supplies in the U.S. again.

What we exposed at that time was the lack of refining capacity, which is really interesting because the Competition Bureau said it could not find collusion in the industry but the industry does not necessarily need that. Because of the vertical integration between the companies, there does not even need to be an orchestrated plan. Things basically level out for themselves. There would be a lack of competition and, hence, a lack of accountability.

I will point to one of the most interesting cases seen in this country. In my opinion, it was when Petro-Canada closed down its Oakville operations. When it closed the Oakville operations, it could have reinvested in that refining capacity and kept more refinement of gasoline products in Canada. It is important that we recognize that this is not only for the industry in terms of driving a vehicle and so forth, it is also important for our plastics and a whole series of industrial usages.

At any rate, when it decided not to invest in that particular operation, it decided to ship into Canada gasoline from Esso from Europe. There is no real competition in that situation. When we go to Petro-Canada and we are getting gasoline that has been refined from Esso, there is no real impetus for competition.

The big change that we have seen is a continuous speculation and a whole series of stock market surges that have cost Canadians and the price has gone up. But what we have also seen is the usage of the substance, in terms of oil and gasoline, by other countries that has actually drive up the requirements. What that has resulted in, which is important to the debate here tonight, is that it has put a petro-dollar impact on the Canadian currency.

We have seen this industry's growth move really at a lightning pace, in many respects. It has moved further and faster, and we have seen the need required more elsewhere. The casualty has been on the manufacturing sector as we are basically entering into this fast-paced exportation that has driven our Canadian dollar up significantly.

What has that meant? Since January of this year, we have lost 60,000 manufacturing jobs. In the last three years, we have lost around 250,000 manufacturing jobs. That is because the dollar, which was down around 60¢ and was probably a bit too low and maybe should have been around 70¢, has been driven to over a dollar in the U.S. right now. It is a myth for us to say that all the jobs in manufacturing are moving to Mexico, China, India, or some other place without paying due attention.

I can tell members right now that I am losing jobs consistently in my community to the United States, and it is not just the wage issue, which is thrown out as an excuse from time to time. It is the fact that the dollar and our manufacturing strategy have been undermined so rapidly right now that there has not been the adjustment period necessary.

What we have is cases like we heard about today on Radio-Canada where in New Brunswick a trucking industry has decided that it is actually going to have to close down. It has 35 trucks with which it provides goods and services across New Brunswick and other parts of the east coast, and it can no longer afford to fuel its vehicles. Before, the gas companies would give it a longer period of time to recoup its operational expenses. Now they have limited it to seven days and that has cost the industry. If the trucking industry tries to get a line of credit at a bank, it cannot get it because the bank says that with the volatility of gas prices, it is not going to lend the money.

What does that mean? That means that this industry is now folding. Ironically, I am sure that the Irving empire is going to be very happy because the fact of the matter is that it will have more of a monopolistic venture because it has a trucking industry. So, we have lost out on competition, as well.

That is why we are calling for a public inquiry. We are calling for other things too, like an ombudsman office, to start things, a clearing house, so that, for example, Canadians can actually receive some accountability.

Just recently Measurement Canada actually had a study, which had to be released through a freedom of information request, that said that 5% of the pumps failed across this country and they failed across this country 75% of the time in favour of the companies. How is it possible that Measurement Canada would not even come out with that information and table it in the House of Commons for Canadians? There is no accountability whatsoever.

We do not even know if anyone has been charged because of all those pumps that were actually misleading Canadians. Interestingly, it was also identified that many of those pumps have actually not even been tested in the last seven to eight years, and these are things that are used routinely every single day.

We have an industry with record profits, as a result of a windfall from this government in terms of actually getting funds out of a budget to 2015, that cannot even keep in order the mechanisms that actually distribute its product. It is hosing Canadians, literally.

I say it is time for accountability on a couple of fronts. Let consumers get the support they need through an independent government institution and, at the same time, let us debate what we are doing with regard to our national commodity here because this is Canada's national commodity and it is costing other types of industry. We cannot pretend to ignore that. We cannot pretend this is going to go away because we are losing good value-added jobs when we do not have to.

[Automotive Industry, May 13th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, those families need jobs. They do not need adjustments.

Let me quote:

I find it breathtaking that the party members think the only thing the economy needs, and...the auto industry needs, is a 2% reduction in the GST and happiness will follow...the auto industry would collapse under a Conservative government.

Who said that? The current Minister of International Trade did, back in 2005, so I have a question for the minister. Who are we supposed to believe? That flip-flopping minister who went over to the Conservatives or the Conservative minister who says nothing is wrong right now?

[Automotive Industry, May 13th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, 60,000 manufacturing jobs have been lost in Canada this year alone. Yesterday General Motors announced the closing of a transmission plant. Fourteen hundred more workers are going to lose their jobs.

The auto industry needs help. GM closed the transmission plant because the technology is on its way out, yet the plant is not getting a replacement because a new and modern factory is not going to happen. Why? Because the Conservatives have no auto policy and it is cheaper to open a third world factory than it is to retool a Canadian plant.

Does the Minister of Industry even care about the 1,400 people thrown out of their jobs yesterday or their families?

[Business of Supply, May 8th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the member can continue to disregard economists, the banks and all those who have come forward with these facts if that is what he wants to do. He can put his head in the sand if he is comfortable with that.

Yes, some industries are prosperous right now, and that is good. We do not have a problem with that. However, that does not mean others should get left behind. That does not mean there is no collateral damage. We need to ensure the men and women who work hard in those industries should not be victims in the crossfire. They should not be the ones to pay the price.

Other countries have policies in place that cost Canada jobs. We need to have policies in place to deal with this. We cannot surrender and throw up the white flag and celebrate because some industries get ahead while some go down. Our country is not made of that. We do not leave people behind in our country. We have to ensure our policies protect Canadian jobs.

[Business of Supply, May 8th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, I know the member works hard in the House, but with all due respect, it is difficult to hear him and his party continually support these policies. The current tax cuts have basically been led by the Leader of the Opposition from day one. In fact, he called for deeper tax cuts.

Let me explain the difficulty the NDP has with regard to the current system and how the economy is hurt by this. Let me use as an example the auto sector versus the oil and gas sector, which already makes record profits. These tax cuts are going to give the oil and gas sector record windfalls.

A tax cut will not do any good to a tool and dye mould-maker in the manufacturing sector that is losing money. Companies cannot invest in new technology and new resources so they can compete. They wither on the vine, and that has been happening.

This is why the economics sector is saying this is nuts. The sector is saying this does not make any sense. Why should the banks and the oil and gas companies continue to get record windfalls at the expense of working Canadians?

[Business of Supply, May 8th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to join my colleague from Burnaby—New Westminster and to support the NDP motion on the economy and jobs in the middle class. It is worth fighting for across the country, not just in Windsor, Ontario which I represent, but in London, Kitchener, all the way along the 401 to Toronto, as well as St. Catharines, all those areas where we have seen economic devastation. It is important to fight for these jobs for the rest of the country as well. People in British Columbia all the way to Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labrador understand that when Canadians do well, we all do well together.

These policies of the Conservative government supported by the Liberals are shrinking the middle class and it will be very difficult to get it back. There is that element of Canada's history where we have had prosperity and a lot of different elements that created our great social fabric which has made us a leader in the world. That will disappear. We do not want that to happen.

I do not necessarily want to go to another election. I fought in elections in 1997, in 2000 when I was elected to city council, in 2002 in a byelection, in 2004 and in 2006. I do not need another election, but we have to go to one right now because it is necessary to save these jobs.

There are calls to my office every single day. We are witnessing people's dreams going up in smoke because there has not been the proper strategy and economic planning that should have been there during times of prosperity. The policies right now are stripping us of our capability to compete in the world. These are not nameless people. They are people in my constituency.

I have heard Conservative members say in this chamber that they believe in the mobility of work, that a person should just find a job somewhere else. That is no way to build a community. That is no way to raise a family. That is no way to develop a country that competes in the world, that people should have to move all over the place just because the proper policies are not in place.

Let us talk about specific people in my constituency. Jennifer is a 39-year-old single female who has two college degrees and skilled training in the tool and die and mould making industry. She has done everything right. She has invested in and paid for her education. She is a law-abiding citizen. She has been laid off from four different companies, two of which have actually gone bankrupt. Why would that happen when we are the best in the world at tool and die and mould making? Because our economic and trade policies subvert the efforts of workers. They allow other types of merchandise to get into this country, but we have no access to the other market. We have no supports in place.

An example is the rise in the dollar. Because the government wants to have a petrol industry as the sole provider for Canada, it escalates the Canadian dollar. No company or worker can benefit from that. The rise in the dollar cost them their jobs because it happened so quickly. That is not fair for someone like Jennifer. She has done everything right. What did she do? She went on employment insurance. She is one of the few women who can actually apply for employment insurance. That is a scandal in itself, something brought on by the previous administration and supported by the current one, where most women cannot even qualify for employment insurance.

Jennifer has tried. She has gone back to work for a number of different people. Her employment insurance is running out. What will happen now? She is on her last legs, and is selling her car and other assets. Her house is the last thing that she has. That is not fair. She is a skilled tradesperson. What has happened is not acceptable. We have led the world in that industry for many years and can continue to do so but the right policies need to be in place. This is happening at a time of indifference.

Look at the automotive industry. There have been 250,000 manufacturing jobs lost in the last number of years, and the automotive industry has taken a big hit in that: people in St. Catharines, Brampton, Oakville, London and Windsor, in southern Ontario we have seen some of the biggest losses. People are worried. They are sitting around the kitchen table looking for solutions, but they cannot do it alone. The government has to do its part.

The government wants to enter into another unfair trade agreement with South Korea and further sell out the automotive sector. Why? Because it is easy for the government to do. It is a feather in its cap. It is interesting because the government will let state owned companies that produce vehicles and subsidize them flood into our markets and cost our workers their jobs. The Conservatives are the people who brought in an eco-auto rebate program that actually sent money to Japan and Seoul, Korea and to those automotive manufacturers that got subsidies. That is wrong. We should be producing those vehicles here. We have the people with the skills and ability in the trades. They are willing to do it.

We have recently seen a number of unions put out good business plans on how to work together. They have led the charge. The CAW has always led the charge to try to bring more automotive jobs. It had to bring the previous administration and the current administration kicking and screaming to the table.

Why do we not have a national auto policy? Why do we not have proper trade policies? The United States does. It protected its shipbuilding and bus industries. It has tariffs on certain vehicles that go in to the United States. It does it because it recognizes those jobs are important, and it is hemorrhaging some of those jobs now too.

There is an opportunity right now for us to work collectively to improve human rights, labour and environmental standards that will protect Canadian citizens, provide jobs and be a better economic trading bloc, but the government wants to shut that down. It does not want to talk about that.

What are people to do in their communities? Are they supposed to all work at Wal-Mart? Is that the way it is supposed to be? It is wrong. Service jobs are fine. They are good for the economy, there is no doubt about it, but manufacturing counts. If people are interested in the real facts, they should go to www.caw.ca, the CAW website, and look at the economic studies that Jim Stanford has done. He is renowned and recognized.

Look at the TD Bank. It is no socialist think tank, but even it has recognized the fact that we are losing good jobs and lower wage jobs are now falling into their place. That is bad for everyone. It is bad when the coffers of Ontario, for example, go down.

I take pride in the fact that Ontario has been able to provide for this nation, not only for my community and province, but for the rest of the country, and build it from coast to coast to coast. We are gutting the manufacturing sector by rapidly accelerating the Canadian dollar and not having manufacturing or auto strategies when other countries have these elements. It is wrong and we lose capacity.

There is one very interesting element that has not been talked about enough in this debate and it should be. When we gut our manufacturing base, we gut our ability as a nation to have full independence. We have to rely on others to do the hard work, when our own people can do that. They can build the tools and moulds and assemble. We have the natural resources. We know that the secondary work, after natural resources, is where the real money is. Why does everything have to be about shipping it out somewhere else for the secondary work to be done? Why can we not do that here like we have in the past?

We have unfair trading practices, for example, in the textile industry, where there has been dumping. The WTO has provided a remedy for that. It had a tariff element that we could have put in place to save some of the jobs here, especially in Quebec. The United States took the WTO up on that, but we did not. We sat around and let it go by, and that is unacceptable.

Other policies are important. I just came from the transport committee. We know the government has tabled Bill C-43. In my riding, as everyone knows, is the busiest international border crossing, with 40,000 vehicles and 10,000 international trucks going through it every day. The public safety minister has tabled a bill that changes the Customs Act.

The transport department has not work with him. What happens if they do not work together? The two separate chambers create laws that add to more backlog and other issues. That is unacceptable. The lack of infrastructure spending is incredible, whether it be the railway, the airline industry or our roads.

I would not get up and say nothing has been done by any of the previous administrations or the current one. Stuff has been done, but we are choosing the wrong priorities right now. Instead of investing in Canada, we have general corporate tax cuts. To stay competitive and prosper, we have to invest. The decision for large corporate tax cuts as opposed to investing in our railway system, our roads and in air is costing us competitive advantage.

It is important to note that. As we make that choice, we lose opportunities. Other nations are making the choice to invest in those things. That is why the NDP supports motion. At the end of the day, the middle class income earners need sustainable jobs in order to raise their families with dignity and send their children for university and college educations so we can compete with the world. If we do not, we will be left behind.

[May 7th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative members from Ontario should be ashamed of themselves. They know the Premier of Ontario has ruled out the community development fund to be eligible for automotive, and they are doing nothing about that situation.

This political battle between the finance minister and the province, which goes back 10 years in political history, is nonsense and is costing Canadians jobs. Workers do not care. They want projects that are supported, which actually lead to jobs and ensure the jobs stay here.

Let us be clear, the $250 million fund is from a tax on the industry. The Conservatives have put a special tax on the industry, and that is what is generating the funds for the $250 million.

The $400 million with regard to the access way in Windsor and Essex counties is from the previous budget. We recently had an announcement in Windsor, where the Conservatives worked with the provincial Liberals, and it will create a problem with the access road, which will create further delays.

Let us have a full, developed strategy, one that looks at trade conditions, that stops free trade agreements and that has conditions for the investments and jobs related to those conditions specifically. That is what needs to be done to put Canadians to work.

[May 7th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to follow up on a question I asked the finance minister in relation to the auto industry and the budget in particular.

The budget, supported by the Liberals, that the Conservatives brought in has a detrimental effect on the auto industry. In fact, it is actually a cut to the auto industry.

The Minister of Finance seems to not even understand his own document. What is happening is that he is actually taking money out of automotive funding right now. Fact number one is that the ecoAuto rebate program that the Conservatives put in place is, ironically, a program that we have been fighting to get out of the budget. I am glad it is out of the budget but we wanted the money from that program reinvested in a good auto strategy.

The ecoAuto project, which was developed by the government and supported by the Liberals, had Canadian money going to Japan and Korea for foreign vehicles that were being made outside this country. They were dancing on the shop floors of Tokyo city when they heard this announcement because it meant jobs for their citizens, not jobs for Canadians. This $116 million boondoggle that was put in place did not have any correlation to reducing or putting vehicle purchase to the objectives of the program. It was an utter failure. The industry condemned it and the auto workers condemned it. We are glad it is gone.

However, why the Minister of Finance would not take that $116 million and reinvest it into auto right now, as we have gone from fourth in the world in assembly and manufacturing to tenth, is beyond me. It is very frustrating to see this opportunity of a real auto strategy lost.

What the Conservatives did lay out in the budget, which is all smoke and mirrors, is a $250 million program for automotive development. However, that is over five years so it is $50 million. What they have done is actually taken more money out of a program and lessened that amount for this new program allocation. What is really important is that they kept a new tax on automotive companies in Canada in place that will cost an estimated $50 million a year.

The Conservatives will keep a tax on automotive companies right now that will bring in the revenue which, later on, they will need to disburse through a program. What we have is a net loss of $116 million that the government should have given back to workers.

It is not just in ridings like mine in Windsor West. It also is in Oshawa, Oakville and a number of different manufacturing communities around this country, and all the services that we actually get as spinoffs and all the other Canadian aggregate that is necessary from steel, and a whole source of other industries that produce automotive.

Automotive investment right now is going through almost a revolution. We are seeing the industry, not sunsetting but changing. There are less jobs in it but, at the same time, it is higher tech and it is actually producing greener, cleaner vehicles. That is why it is important for us right now to have a clear automotive strategy.

We in Windsor have been pushing for the federal government to support a Ford plant so a new Ford engine can be produced in Windsor, Ontario, which is important because those jobs are desperately needed.

I have talked to Canadian citizens in my riding and other parts of this country who have gone to school, got the proper education and did everything necessary but because the government has refused to put in an auto policy similar to its Liberal cousins, we have witnessed the demise of the industry in many respects, and that is not acceptable. Canadians have done their part.

In my constituency, for example, we have a tool and die and mould making industry that is the best in the world but we are losing jobs because the government has not put in the policies. I call on the government to do so.

[Airline Industry, May 6th, 2008]

Mr. Speaker, air travel in Canada is getting riskier, not safer. Recent crashes of business aircraft are a cause for major concern.

The Conservatives are allowing private aircraft to have virtually limitless exposure in the skies and the Auditor General says the Liberals' so-called additional layer of security, the safety management system, is not working.

Will the minister admit that the Canadian Business Aviation Association, which is supposed to provide planned and structured oversight of private operators, simply is not doing its job? Will the minister do his job to protect air passengers in this country?