Brian Masse

[June 4th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, what is important to note is we are talking as much about a specific issue, being the profit margin of oil and gas companies, which have received record profits over the last number of years, as we are about the Prime Minister once again saying one thing and doing another. He criticized the member for LaSalle—Émard, when he was the former prime minister, for not living up to democratically held votes in the House of Commons.

How does the parliamentary secretary personally feel about that? Does he view that votes in the House should be upheld by the majority? Should we follow through on them? They are simple motions that we pass, calling for accountability with respect to the oil and gas industry. It was not radical. It has been called for by consumer groups. Canadians have asked for independent investigations and for the Competition Bureau to have the ability to investigate properly with a modernized law, something that can be done fairly for the oil and gas companies and for Canadian consumers. Canadians deserve this.

Therefore, once again, how does the parliamentary secretary feel about votes?

[June 4th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege to rise to speak to an issue to which many Canadians want answers, and that is a review of the pricing of gasoline in the country.

We have seen a series of different pilfering with absolutely no accountability on this issue. The New Democrats have been calling for a public inquiry about this issue and also for accountability for consumers.

It is important to not this. Even as the price of gasoline has been rising, statistics show that we have not had a lesser use of oil and gasoline products in the country. Until we get a reduction through principles and a program that Canadians will have for the environment, they do not need to be bled dry by the oil and gas companies, which have record profits.

It is interesting, the House passed a motion, calling on the government to amend the Competition Act, which is very important to provide the right tools to do the job. The act has not been reviewed comprehensively since 1969. When I asked a question of the minister of that time, I noted that date was the time of the Woodstock festival. This was a comment from the minister's briefing book, which I obtained from the Freedom of Information Act. The act was built upon that era in time and had not really been reviewed.

It is important to note that the motion called for a petroleum monitoring agency, something for which the New Democrats asked. We voted on that motion in the House of Commons and it passed.

Interestingly enough, since the time the motion passed, the government has done nothing. The Prime Minister, when in opposition, attacked the member for LaSalle—Émard for not respecting a motion passed by the House, calling for an inquiry into the Air-India tragedy. He said:

Will the Prime Minister respect this vote and immediately call a public inquiry into the Air-India tragedy?

Back in 2005, the nowPrime Minister said this to the National Post on May 11:

This is a corrupt party which is in the process of ruining the country's finances and which is now ignoring the democratically expressed will of the House of Commons. This government does not have the moral authority to govern this country.

He followed that two days later with this comment to Canada AM, “It would seem to me the obvious thing and, frankly, the government's lost three votes now in a row. And the fact that they won't listen to the will of the House of Commons I think is fairly disturbing from a democratic standpoint”.

In the past the Prime Minister has called for the House, the chamber, when it votes its conscience, to live up to that.

In the past, New Democrats have had motions passed, whether it be child poverty, our firefighters or seniors. Votes for a whole series of groups and organizations have been passed and the government has done nothing.

Why is the current Prime Minister not living up to his own words when he expected actions on votes in the House of Commons? Why are we not getting that action now, especially when consumers across the country are continuing to be fleeced by the oil and gas companies? He simply cannot stand by and do nothing.

[Committees of the House, May 31st, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the member for Burnaby—New Westminster a question about the Great Lakes.

One of the interesting things that was recently brought forth by the United States was to actually turn the Great Lakes into firing ranges for gunboats, which would have put lead and other types of contaminants in the water, as well as safety hazards.

The New Democratic Party was the only party to actually make a submission opposing this. I want to ask him what his confidence is in the government's negotiations because what was interesting was that the government's response was late. It was past the deadline, so it actually had no official commentary made to the United States. Luckily for ourselves, many Canadian and American organizations and groups actually opposed this, got submissions in and we had that ceased.

I would like to ask him what his confidence is in the government in terms of negotiations, when it cannot even meet a simple deadline to protect one of the most important water sources on this planet.

[Manufacturing Industry, May 30th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, it would be irresponsible for the minister to say that he adopted the recommendations. He did not even get past recommendation one of the industry committee report. As for rhetoric, about 150 families will go home tonight, people who do not have a job and a paycheque for the next week. There is no rhetoric about that.

Part of the problem is the government continues with the policies of the previous one. Right now the government is more interested in South Korea shipping cars into Canada than Canada having the same treatment.

Why is it going to protect jobs in South Korea as opposed to growing them in southwestern Ontario? Stand up for Canada for a change. Do something different.

[Manufacturing Industry, May 30th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government has failed Canadians and working class families across this country. It has failed to invest in technology for a green auto strategy. It has failed to produce an auto plan. It has failed to stop a single plant closure across this country. Jobs are outsourced, there are foreign takeovers, factories are moving to Mexico, and still there is no plan.

How many more working families have to suffer before somebody over there gives a damn and does something about it?

[Manufacturing Industry, May 29th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the member for Windsor—Tecumseh and I marched with thousands of Windsor and Essex County residents in support of the need for provincial and federal action to protect the manufacturing heartland of this country.

The “Our Jobs, Our Communities, Our Future” rally demonstrated that Canadians are concerned about their jobs and the community consequences.

Consider the following facts. In four and a half years we have lost 250,000 manufacturing jobs in Canada. Over the past 10 years we now have a trade deficit of $16 billion. Manufacturing accounts for 17% of the Canadian economy and is the highest value added sector, and trade agreements have decimated workers. Despite these facts, Liberal and Conservative policies have jeopardized this valuable industry and our national security.

Canadians want to compete, but how can we when Canada has the most open market in the world, yet places no expectations on other countries who dump into our market, have tariff and non-tariff barriers, subsidize their products through poor labour and environmental policies, and we have a dollar and energy prices that compromise our competitiveness.

The New Democrats believe it is time to show action and vision. Consider a new auto pact, challenge nations that undercut fair competition with dollar manipulation, and enhance social programs and sectoral strategies.

Consider these alternatives for a brighter future, one that proudly says Canadians are the best in manufacturing, and want and will compete in the world market, but it is government that has to provide them the tools to do so.

[May 28th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, that simply is not acceptable. Right now we have a $2.6 billion trade deficit with South Korea. Our largest export right now is wood pulp, which is 25¢ per pound, versus Korean vehicles that are shipped into Canada at $15,000 each.

It is important to note that under Liberal and Conservative auto policy we have gone from being a manufacturer with a surplus and a net export to having a deficit, and we have dropped to 10th in the world. That is unacceptable.

As well, with the shutting of the tariff, we see state sponsored Korean automotive companies like Hyundai and Kia getting tens of millions of dollars. On top of that, the government has brought in feebates that will also provide Canadian taxpayer money to these foreign state owned companies. That is unacceptable and it puts auto workers and Canadians out of work.

A prophecy that comes to the conclusion here is when the Minister of Industry himself said that the auto industry would collapse under a Conservative government.

[May 28th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise this evening and to once again raise the issue of Canada's position with respect to the trade agreement with South Korea. The trade agreement with South Korea would result in the loss of manufacturing jobs across this country and, in particular, in the auto industry.

I have been raising this issue since 2004 when the then prime minister, the member for LaSalle—Émard, entered into negotiations for a trade deal with South Korea.

We are concerned about this trade deal because of the vulnerability of the manufacturing industry. Since 2003, over 250,000 manufacturing jobs have been lost and since January approximately 50,000 manufacturing jobs have been lost, often in the automotive sector.

It is important to note that the present government has not put forth an automotive sector strategy. The Minister of International Trade, a former Liberal and industry minister at the time, promised me a number of times in this chamber, as well as at committee, that he would bring forth an auto policy but he never did. As a Conservative, he has continued the trade negotiation talks with South Korea.

I note the detriment to this, which was basically offered up by Department of Industry officials who admitted in a meeting that South Korea would be out of the deal if they did not get the automotive sector on the plate. Why South Korea wants greater automotive access into Canada is because right now it has non-tariff barriers that actually prevent the sale of Canadian vehicles in South Korea. With the trade deficit being so huge right now I do not know why the Conservative government would want to expand that and create greater problems for the Canadian manufacturing sector. It is beyond me.

We just need to look at the facts. In 2005, South Korea exported 118,000 vehicles to Canada. What did we export into South Korea? We exported 400 vehicles. What an incredible imbalance. This is unacceptable. The government continues to go down a path that will further expose the Canadian market to these vehicles. I think the government is doing it for some type of political gain to say, for example, that it might perhaps beat the Americans to a deal with South Korea.

Even though the United States has concluded negotiations, the truth of the deal is coming out. Many people in the manufacturing sector and the agricultural sector are telling the United States government not to go forward with this plan. What is interesting is the fact that at least the United States congress will have a chance to debate the deal and actually vote on it.

I am asking the government if it will allow Parliament to have the opportunity to see the deal, debate the deal and, more important, vote our conscience on this deal. We need to know how it could affect Canadian manufacturers and Canadian citizens. We should at least get the same opportunity as the United States is giving so there can be accountability. I ask the government to at least do that if it is not going to back away from these negotiations and continues to offer up the automotive sector as a sacrificial lamb at the expense of Canadian workers.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2007, May 14th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Burnaby--New Westminster has worked a lot on the trade deal with regard to the softwood lumber sellout where jobs have been disappearing across this country. The same thing has been happening in the auto sector where we have witnessed the loss of thousands of jobs across Ontario and Quebec. Recent statistics show that since January, 52,000 jobs have been lost in manufacturing alone. This has been catastrophic to families across this country who depend on the auto sector and the manufacturing sector in general to pay their bills and save for the future.

The budget has a lack of vision with regard to manufacturing. One specific thing I would like to touch on is the feebate that was introduced arbitrarily by the Conservative government. Canadian taxpayer dollars will be going to Beijing, Seoul and other places outside of Canada as these incentives will go predominantly to non-domestic auto manufacturers as opposed to a made in Canada strategy that we have been proposing. We literally will be stripping millions of dollars from this country. The Yaris, for example, will receive an injection of cash of about $34 million that will be used against our own domestic producers.

I would like to ask my colleague about a plan for manufacturing and industrial development, especially based upon his work on the softwood lumber file. Even in Windsor West, believe it or not, a very successful furniture making factory in post-end production disappeared in recent weeks because of the softwood lumber sellout.

[Business of Supply, May 8th, 2007]

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary is trying to twist the argument.

This is what the current Prime Minister said in the House when he was in opposition:

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister will know that across the country Canadians are struggling with record gas prices. Canadian businesses are being hurt. Canadian consumers are burdened with the difficulties this is causing, but the government itself is rolling in record gas tax revenue.

Members of the Conservative Party accused the then Liberal government of the day of being the real beneficiaries of high gasoline prices. That is why they promised to freeze the price at 85¢. The Conservatives never delivered on their promise. If we are going to hear that message day in and day out from members of the Conservative Party, they should remember that they were the ones who said they would freeze it at 85¢.

There is a phone book full of promises that the Conservatives made as they questioned the Liberal government of the day. The Conservatives never acted on their promises. They are the ones rolling in cash right now. If the Conservatives are really interested in returning money to consumers, why do they not give it up and let them have it back today? The government could do that though an order in council. The Conservatives do not have to stand up and say the same things that the Liberals said in the past. If they wanted to, they could actually deliver on the promises they made to Canadians.