Mr. Speaker, obviously I am very pleased to speak today to the fifth report of the Standing Committee on International Trade. This report calls on the federal government:
—to stem the current market disruption, in specific categories, in the Canadian apparel industry, by immediately invoking Article 242 of China's accession protocol to the WTO and putting in place restrictions or safeguards on the growth of specific categories of apparel imports from China.
The report also calls on the federal government to begin bilateral negotiations with China, similar to those undertaken by the United States and the European Union, to reach an agreement on imports of clothing and textiles.
This motion, which was moved by the hon. member for Burnaby—New Westminster and which the Bloc Québécois obviously supports, was adopted by the committee on December 12, 2006 and its purpose is to invoke Article 242 of China's accession protocol to the WTO in order to prevent the complete disruption of our industry.
Although imposing quotas on imports from WTO member countries is generally prohibited, there is nonetheless an exception to this rule and that is China. When China joined the WTO in December 2001, the agreement was that WTO members could limit the increase of Chinese imports until December 2008. This safeguard helps curb imports in case of market disruption caused by the export of Chinese textiles. This is quite precisely what is happening in the clothing industry in Quebec and Canada, which has been rather disastrous in the past few years. The following are some statistics that clearly show the issues in and importance of this report.
In Canada, the number of employees went from 101,000 to 70,000 between 2000 and 2005, which is a 31% decrease. Among the employees working in production, the decrease was 37%, going from 89,000 to 57,000. Quebec has been the hardest hit: 40% of jobs in this industry have been lost and the industry has just 36,000 employees left compared to 60,000 in 2000 and 90,000 in 1998. This is the sharpest decline of all the industry sectors in Quebec.
This decline in employment was more marked in Quebec than anywhere else in Canada. Between 1987 and 2005, Quebec's share of Canada's textile labour force dropped from 56% to 47%. Between 1995 and 2005, that industry dropped from first place to eighth place in terms of all manufacturing jobs in Quebec. Employment in the textile industry in relation to the entire manufacturing industry dropped from 14% to 6%.
As we all can see, this sector has suffered tremendous losses, and this is a very important sector for Quebec. Yet, as I have mentioned, although quotas on imports from WTO member countries are prohibited, there is one important exception to this rule, and that is China.
The United States and the European Union used the special safeguarding measure to ensure that Chinese clothing imports would not destroy their industry. But so far, Canada still refuses to do so. Why? We must ask ourselves some questions.
When in power, the Liberal Party did nothing to support the textile industry. During the last election campaign, the Conservatives promised to act, but the federal government still refuses to take action.
I would like to point out that this motion was adopted by the majority of committee members. The Bloc Québécois, the NDP and the Liberals also voted in favour of this motion. Only the Conservatives, who have forgotten the promises they made to Quebeckers during the last election campaign, did not support this motion.
Not once in the past has the federal government used the safeguarding measures, although they are set out in trade agreements. Never has the federal government tried to enter into discussion with China to reach an agreement to limit the increases in Chinese imports, which can be done in the context of a bilateral agreement, as indicated in the motion.
The Conservatives, although they used to support this type of measure, finally decided, once in power, to oppose this motion. We should not really be surprised, since, for them, there is no room for government intervention.
The Standing Committee on International Trade is talking about totally free trade, with no social protection for workers affected by industry closures. That is the free market. The Conservatives, who are slightly doctrinaire about this, believe that they can fix everything and that any government intervention will only prevent the free market from producing those benefits. They are talking about protectionist measures. We are not talking about protectionist measures, but about protecting our industries temporarily to make them more competitive internationally. It is not a question of overprotecting our industries. We just want to protect certain jobs and become more competitive by taking temporary measures.
We must not forget that the Minister of Industry comes from the Montreal Economic Institute, a right-wing, doctrinaire lobby that believes the federal government should take no action to avoid having jobs threatened by Chinese competition move abroad.
Like the government, this report by the Montreal Economic Institute has seriously misjudged the serious impact of Chinese competition on the textile and clothing industries. Nevertheless, the Conservatives should understand that the safeguards are not permanent protectionist measures, as I have already mentioned, that will prevent the industries from having to modernize. They are temporary measures designed to prevent the industries from crumbling before they have time to modernize. Unfortunately, the former Liberal government and the current Conservative government have not understood the purpose and importance of these measures.
I believe that if Quebec had been a sovereign nation, it would have protected its workers. But, as things stand, it is the federal government's responsibility to speed up the modernization of the industry and create the market conditions conducive to modernization. It has the money. It is responsible for these international agreements, but it is not doing anything.
The decline of the textile and clothing industries is not inevitable, but the business environment in which these industries operate has changed so rapidly that they need help to modernize more quickly. Left to their own devices, they will not be able to keep up and will continue declining. The government must help them modernize and convert more quickly with assistance programs, new equipment, research and development, and design services.
At the same time, the safeguards provided in trade agreements to give the industries the few years of respite that they need to change their focus have to be enforced.
That is precisely what this report approved by the Standing Committee on International Trade is all about.
We have to call on the federal government to take action to support our apparel and textile industry, as promised during the last election campaign. It is important to recall this because, so far, the ministers of Industry and International Trade have never taken action or used the safeguards provided in trade agreements, which are available to them.
Moreover, at no time has the government endeavoured to improve the aid packages to speed up the industry's modernization. The support program made up of the CATIP and the CANtex is simply insufficient. We did put many questions to the government during the last Parliament, as we are doing today, to bring about some improvement. The allowable maximum of $100,000 is not even enough to allow industries to renew their production equipment.
The solutions to these many problems are known to and recognized by everyone who is concerned about the future of these industries. All that is missing is the will of the government.
In fact, the Bloc Québécois has repeatedly suggested solutions and prompted Parliament to discuss issues that the government would rather have kept under wraps.
I would like to take a moment to discuss a few of these proposed measures.
Introducing incentives to encourage the use of Quebec and Canadian textiles is a simple measure that could enable the textiles sector to keep jobs and could help the apparel sector too.
We have to help workers whose employers close up shop. The older workers assistance program everyone talks about so much must be universal and must help all workers in Quebec and Canada. People who lose their jobs at 54, 55 or 56 are not in a position to retrain. Often, those who do retrain retire soon afterward. Today's question period was enlightening on that subject.
We could also increase transfers to Quebec to fund job training for younger workers who would also benefit from new employment opportunities because of that training. We could use the safeguards in the trade agreements by putting quotas on imports from China under that country's WTO accession protocol.
As I said earlier, when China joined the WTO, there was a provision allowing countries to limit the increase in Chinese imports by implementing temporary quotas to keep their industries from being decimated by the industrial giant.
The United States and the European Union had talks with China and agreed to cap increases in Chinese textile and apparel imports.
In Canada, both Liberal and Conservative governments sat idly by, which explains the results we are seeing today.
Today we are talking about textiles and apparel, but we could just as well be talking about the entire manufacturing sector—the automobile sector, the aerospace sector, the furniture sector—which the federal government has abandoned.
Let us look at what is happening: last week, Saint-Étienne-de-Lauzon's Shermag and Disraeli factories closed for good. Today, Canadel, one of Quebec's largest furniture manufacturers, which operates in my constituency, let 46 workers go.
In the last five years, the number of employees in the furniture sector has fallen from 1,200 to 700.
According to the company's general manager and owner, Mr. Devault, the 15% decrease in sales is due to Asian competition.
I mention this because the government's lack of action in the textile sector should not cross over to the furniture sector. I believe we should take action on behalf of the textile industry as well as many other manufacturing sectors to counter Asian competition.
According to some articles, Mr. Devault of Canadel stated that a standard piece of his company's furniture sells for US$2,298 while a similar Chinese offering sells for $497. How can you compete?
We must modernize, improve our technologies and give our industries a chance to gain a competitive edge, even in the Asian market. We could even capture a portion of that market because there is an emerging middle class in those countries and there are some who would be interested in buying our furniture. We must support our industry. It is the ineffectiveness of the current government that makes it seem like no one cares that 50,000 jobs have been lost in the textile sector. In the past few years, 5,000 jobs have been lost in the furniture sector. The same goes for other sectors, such as the aerospace and automobile industries.
We have the means to support our companies. For this reason we are supporting the motion submitted to the Standing Committee on International Trade to support the textile industry. I am urging the government to support other sectors as well.
