Erin Weir

[International Trade, October 5th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, this morning, Statistics Canada reported that our country has lost 24,000 manufacturing jobs over the past year. Among the factors depressing Canadian manufacturing employment are American tariffs on our steel and aluminum exports. The new free trade deal with the U.S. should have ensured tariff-free access to the U.S. market.

Does the government have a plan and a timeline to remove American tariffs from Canadian metal?

[Finance, September 28th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday Statistics Canada reported that average weekly earnings dropped by 0.4% nationally and by a a full percentage point in Saskatchewan, which is now tied for the slowest earnings growth among the provinces. Governments can help boost employee earnings by enforcing fair and minimum wages. Unfortunately, Canada still does not have a federal minimum wage.

When will the government enact a federal minimum wage of at least $15 per hour?

[The Environment, September 27th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary has certainly spoken quite eloquently about the Trans Mountain expansion project. What he has not done, and what I and people in Regina are looking for, is to see a clearer commitment to honour the existing contract to procure most of the steel for the project from the EVRAZ mill. I think the sense is that the project would continue on that basis, but it would be nice to hear the government give a clear yes to that question. I hope it will come during the parliamentary secretary's final minute.

Similarly, I would hope that the government would provide some sort of commitment and some kind of indication as to how it intends to ensure that the remaining 25% of the steel in the Trans Mountain expansion will be procured as much as possible from Canadian steel mills.

[The Environment, September 27th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, when the government nationalized the Trans Mountain pipeline in May, I asked whether the new Crown corporation would honour the existing contract to buy 75% of the steel from EVRAZ in Regina and make every effort to source the remaining 25% of steel from other Canadian mills. I welcome the opportunity this evening to further elaborate the case for using Canadian-made steel in the Trans Mountain expansion project.

At the outset, I should state that Kinder Morgan decided, on purely commercial grounds, to buy most of the steel pipe from EVRAZ in Regina. What I would like to speak to are some additional reasons to give preference to Canadian-made steel now that the project is under public ownership, and I would like to address three topics. The first is jobs. The second is the environment. The third is trade.

The main argument advanced in favour of the Trans Mountain expansion is that the project will create jobs for Canadians. Of course the extent to which it creates jobs depends critically on where the materials are sourced. Importing steel pipe from offshore obviously does not create jobs in Canada, whereas buying the steel from Canadian suppliers clearly does create jobs and economic activity in our country.

The EVRAZ steel plant has the potential to be the largest private sector employer in Regina. It is a pillar of the local economy and would make a very important contribution to employment in our city. Certainly the order to make pipe for Trans Mountain is the largest order that facility has and is really keeping it going.

I also want to talk about the environment, because that is often invoked as the main argument against this project. It is important to note that one of the key advantages to using Canadian-made steel is that it has a much lower carbon content than steel imported from offshore. Manufacturing a tonne of steel in China and shipping it here emits about five times as much carbon as manufacturing it at EVRAZ in Regina. Therefore, if our concern is to reduce carbon emissions, one of the solutions is to manufacture the steel right here in Canada.

Another environmental concern has to do with the possibility of spills. A key advantage of Canadian-made steel is that we have the opportunity to rigorously inspect it throughout the manufacturing process, whereas with imported steel, we sometimes cannot be as sure exactly what we are getting.

Therefore, from an environmental perspective, there is a strong argument to manufacture the pipe and other materials for the Trans Mountain expansion in Canada.

The final thing I want to talk about is trade. Some would suggest that despite these advantages of using Canadian-made steel, we need to honour free trade obligations. What I would emphasize is that other countries, such as the United States, already have policies in place to favour domestic suppliers with their federal procurement. We think of the famous buy-American provisions.

All I am saying is that now that the project is being carried out by the federal government, it makes sense to apply the same sorts of provisions in Canada to give preference to Canadian-made steel and the case for doing so is particularly strong in the face of American tariffs currently applied to Canadian steel. If we cannot sell south of the border, all the more reason to use the steel here.

[Carbon Pricing, September 20th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate that the member across the way may not have come here prepared to discuss the fiscal stabilization program. It is somewhat of an arcane topic.

I will suggest two of the key problems with it. Currently, it is limited to only $60 per capita for a province that qualifies. That is a very low amount. It contrasts with the current equalization program, which amounts to about $500 per capita. I think there is room to lift that cap on the fiscal stabilization program.

A second challenge with the current formula is that to qualify for fiscal stabilization, a province needs to experience more than a 5% drop in its non-resource revenues. That happened to Alberta in 2016, but it is a fairly extreme occurrence. What I would suggest is that we might be able to have a compromise whereby we include half of natural resource revenues in the formula for the fiscal stabilization program, much as we already do for equalization.

[Carbon Pricing, September 20th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, in June, I had the honour of asking the last question before Parliament adjourned for the summer. I asked how the government would ensure that provinces retained the revenues from carbon pricing given that if carbon pricing were included in the renewal of equalization, it would count against each province's equalization entitlement and thereby be clawed back.

The Prime Minister did not really answer this question on that day, but the next day the government clarified that it intended to renew the existing equalization program, which of course does not include carbon pricing. So it will not be clawed back, at least for the next several years. However, I must report that many of my constituents are not thrilled with the renewal of the existing equalization program. In both Saskatchewan and Alberta, there is a widespread view that the program is taking money from taxpayers in our province while we struggle to recover from the downturn in commodity prices and transfers it to provinces currently enjoying better economic times.

There have been some proposals to modify the equalization formula. One of them is to change the way in which hydroelectricity is traded. That might be a good proposal. It would certainly change the distribution of equalization transfers between recipient provinces that have hydroelectricity and those that do not. However, it actually would not make any difference to Saskatchewan and Alberta because neither province qualifies for equalization at all given that our provinces still enjoy relatively strong per capita incomes despite the downturn in commodity prices.

Another proposal we have heard on equalization is from Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe. It is essentially a proposal to cut equalization in half and then use the other half of the money to increase equal per capita transfers to all provinces. I certainly support increasing equal per capita transfers to all provinces. I have advocated for improvements to the Canada health and social transfers ever since I was elected, but I do not believe Premier Moe's plan can really be presented as a reform to equalization itself. As well, I do not actually believe the underlying issue is that Alberta or Saskatchewan need equalization or should qualify for the program. The real issue is that our provinces would benefit from fiscal stabilization in the face of extremely volatile commodity prices.

The Government of Canada has had a fiscal stabilization program since 1967. However, it has never paid anything to Saskatchewan. In 2016, Alberta was able to qualify for $250 million under this program, but that was really a drop in the bucket compared with billions of dollars in lost resource royalties.

What I would like to submit to the House is that rather than arguing so much about equalization, what we might look at doing is improving and enriching the existing fiscal stabilization program so that it would provide much more robust support to those provinces vulnerable to volatile commodity prices. I hope this is something the government will look at as it formulates the 2019 federal budget.

[Impact Assessment Act, June 20th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the CCF agrees to apply and will vote no.

[Carbon Pricing, June 20th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, the federal government has repeatedly stated that provinces will keep their revenues from carbon pricing. However, next year is a renewal of equalization. If carbon revenues are added to the formula, then each province's carbon tax base would count against its equalization entitlement, effectively clawing back the money.

Will the government include carbon pricing in equalization and, if so, how will it ensure that provinces actually keep the revenue?

[Youth Action Now, June 18th, 2018]

Madam Speaker, we were saddened last week to learn that Paul Dewar, the former MP for Ottawa Centre, has terminal cancer.

I met Paul in 2005, shortly after coming to Ottawa to work in the public service. He was a first-time NDP candidate fighting to hold Ottawa Centre after Ed Broadbent retired. I volunteered on the campaign and saw Paul's kindness, generosity, and effectiveness. We were proud to have helped elect him and even prouder of his work as an MP. Paul was a champion for the local community he represented, but also took a much broader view, including a global perspective as foreign affairs critic.

Paul gave real meaning to the expression “think globally, act locally” and is doing so again by organizing Youth Action Now to promote grassroots change driven by young people. Please support this initiative by attending the launch at 5:00 p.m. tomorrow at the National Arts Centre.

[International Trade, June 12th, 2018]

Mr. Speaker, everyone in the House supports the Prime Minister standing up to President Trump. The government has announced retaliatory tariffs targeting sensitive American electoral districts. Unlike previous American presidents, Trump has made himself vulnerable by not divesting his personal business interests. To apply further pressure, has the government considered retaliatory sanctions targeting the Trump organization rather than the American people?