44th Parl. 1st Sess.
December 1, 2021 02:00PM
- Dec/1/21 3:35:26 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, first and foremost, congratulations on your appointment as the assistant deputy speaker. I know that many of my colleagues enjoy seeing you in the chair.
Time and time again I hear members of the Bloc talk about health care and the issue of jurisdiction. When we look at the throne speech and some of the actions of this government today and yesterday, we see there is a solid commitment to things such as long-term care, the cost of pharmaceuticals and mental health. They are important national issues, and there is a commitment from the federal government to work with other jurisdictions to ensure these very important issues are being dealt with.
I wonder if the member could provide her thoughts on why it is important for the national government to act on these important issues for her constituents and mine.
143 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/1/21 4:21:38 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will confess that the Government of Canada had to borrow money for a very good reason. With the worldwide pandemic, in order to support Canadians and businesses alike, there was a need to be there in a very real way.
Had we not borrowed the money that the member opposite tries to portray as a bad thing, we would have seen far more bankruptcies. We would have seen many other societal issues, whether family breakups or suicides. The government made the decision to have the backs of Canadians.
Is the member saying that we should not have provided those programs that were so critical to helping Canadians through the very difficult time of the pandemic?
118 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/1/21 4:36:58 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will be selective in my question. It is related to the motion we passed, because there was a good feeling inside the House of Commons when we recognized the importance of mental health and in particular suicide.
The idea of having one line for Canada is something that is very well received in virtually all jurisdictions, but there is a considerable amount of background work that needs to take place, including working with some stakeholders, in particular the provinces, and other organizations that have these lines. I suspect that if we were to be a bit more patient, hopefully we would see that materialize.
My question for the member is with respect to the commitment from the federal government to move more on providing resources and supports in mental health and what he might have to say about that and the need to build that consensus.
149 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/1/21 5:38:25 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, many believe that in order to achieve the type of pharmacare that Canadians want, we have to have the provinces on board with it. I am sure the member can appreciate why that is the case, given the jurisdiction and the importance of the issue.
In the September 2020 throne speech, there was a commitment by the federal government to partner with willing provinces. The will is there to move forward. We saw the will to move forward with child care and the take-up. As a result, Canadians are benefiting. The national government provides the leadership and hopefully provinces will come onside to recognize that and work together.
Could the member provide his thoughts on whether he believes it is important that we work with provincial jurisdictions to make some of these possibilities turn into realities?
139 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/1/21 7:19:08 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise to share some thoughts on a very important issue. It does not matter what side of the House one sits on, we all recognize that Canada leads the world in many different industries. One of those industries is our softwood lumber industry. We have, I believe, an incredible history of providing not only the United States but also other countries a first-class product. That is recognized.
I give a great deal of thought, and express appreciation and thanks, to those who have been there over the years to protect and foster growth within that industry. It employs thousands of people. It contributes billions of dollars to our GDP. It is a major force in our economy. Whether it is its direct jobs or indirect jobs, it should matter to all of us. We as a government, and the Prime Minister himself, have expressed concern, whether it is to the President of the United States or to others. This is an industry that Canada, and in particular our government, will be there to protect.
I believe an appropriate way to start my comments would be to read what the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance stated the other day on this very important industry. The minister said:
Mr. Speaker, the softwood lumber industry is a source of jobs and pride for Canadians across our country. We are extremely disappointed by the unfair and unwarranted decision of the United States to increase the duties it imposes on softwood lumber. This issue was raised, of course, by the Prime Minister at his meeting with President Biden. I have raised it with Secretary Yellen, as have all of our colleagues, and we have pointed out that these duties are adding to the inflation tax American consumers are paying.
This is not a new issue. We can talk about what we would argue on this side of the House are unfair practices taking place in the United States at times, and they are targeted at one of Canada's most valuable industries. This is not the first time. We have seen it on several occasions in the past. As a government, it is important that we speak as one voice, that we do not capitulate and that we recognize our voice is stronger if we unite in saying what is happening is not right.
In terms of free trade and the U.S., the relationship that Canada has with the U.S., the emphasis that we put on being a good neighbour and the economic ties between provinces and states, one needs to look at groups like our interparliamentary associations. We understand the dynamic. They have industry leaders within the United States, a significant, relatively wealthy group of people who are very effective at lobbying.
Because that is the case, we once again have duties and the U.S. has taken action that not only hurts us here in Canada but hurts Americans too. The U.S., from what I understand, does not have the ability to meet the demands of its market when it comes to softwood production. Canada, over the decades, has supplemented that supply.
As I indicated earlier, we have a first-grade product that is in high demand in the United States. However, the wealthy American mill owners and other stakeholders have been effectively lobbying to get these penalties put into place.
As a government, we have approached the very top political level: the President. We will turn to the free trade agreement that we ratified not that long ago, which includes Mexico. We will take it to the World Trade Organization as a government. I know the minister is on top of this file and recognizes the importance of it. We will do whatever we can to protect that industry, which is well represented in a number of regions including British Columbia, which has been hit very hard recently with rains. The province of Quebec and my home province of Manitoba have important lumber industries also.
Regarding jobs, indigenous communities often take the lead in providing the workforce. This industry supports so many communities in rural Canada. In many ways it is incredible.
The government, the Prime Minister the Deputy Prime Minister and the minister responsible are very much aware of the issue. To individuals who are following the issue, in particular those who are working in the industry and the owners who are trying to ensure that we can maintain our market share, the Government of Canada has their backs. We will continue to work with different stakeholders and appeal to members on all sides of the House to add value to the debate we are having tonight. It should not necessarily be a finger-pointing exercise. It should be recognizing that this has gone on now for many years. It predates this government.
That is why we have trade agreements. That is why we have the World Trade Organization. That is why we build the relationships that we have. There is no doubt in my mind that Canada will ultimately prevail, as we have prevailed in the past, because we are on the right side of this issue. We might not necessarily be able to prevent it from happening, although I sure wish that we could, but we can ensure at the end of the day that the industry not only survives but thrives into the future.
We have seen growth in export markets, whether to China, Europe or others, because it is important. The minister will tell us that we look at ways in which we can expand our export markets. That is why we have progressive, aggressive trade going on with agreements. We have signed more trade agreements than any other government. We have, that is a fact. It speaks volumes in terms of how this government recognizes the value of our exports because we see that in the actions we take every day.
In particular, workers can rest assured that we will be there to support them in the coming days, weeks or however long it takes to resolve this, and we will prevail on this issue.
1032 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/1/21 7:30:04 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am unable to give a hard number, but I believe these are the types of discussions and dialogue that occur on an ongoing basis. Today, I would suggest that there is a larger interest in the subject matter because of actions that have taken place in the U.S., and there has been more engagement as a direct result.
Let us not try to politicize the issue. This is an issue that was there in the past. It is not just one government that has had to deal with this. What is important is that whoever is in government at the time takes whatever measures are necessary to ensure that we are protecting the industry. As I said, I truly believe that the Government of Canada will resolve this positively. Unfortunately, it will take time.
138 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/1/21 7:32:22 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, that is just not true. Not only has the government been there to support the industry in times of need, but we have been there consistently since 2015. We have seen growth in exports beyond the United States over the last four or five years. We continue to look for other economic opportunities and other export opportunities, which is one of the reasons why we have had a very aggressive approach to getting trade agreements.
We are not scared of standing up to the United States. I think what is important is that there is a process in place. That process will, as it has in the past, allow for Canada and our industry to not only survive but thrive. It does make it difficult, which is why the government needs to be there for the industry. We have been there, and we will continue to be.
149 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/1/21 7:34:23 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would not want to read too much into a coincidence. I believe the last time we had this issue before the House was in the late fall. There might be a timing issue. I am not as familiar with the issue in depth, in terms of why it has arisen over the past few weeks, but I do know that this issue periodically surfaces, unfortunately, and the driving force for it to surface is not necessarily a government. It is the lobbying that takes place among very wealthy lumber owners from the United States.
That is my understanding of it, and we have a responsibility to use the tools we have as a government to protect our industry. That is exactly what we are going to do here in Canada. We will prevail.
136 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/1/21 7:36:07 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, Canada is a trading nation. We need to be able to trade with the world.
By expanding our export markets we are able to improve the lifestyles of all Canadians. Export markets create jobs for our middle class. They create and contribute to our GDP. As I say, the forest industry alone contributes billions of dollars to our GDP every year.
When we can sign off on trade agreements that enable our producers and exporters to get more to markets around the world, we are better off as a nation. That is why we made it a priority. Today our emphasis has to be using the tools we have before us to protect an industry that is respected and worth the fight. This government is prepared to step up to the plate and ensure that we prevail and protect this industry.
143 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/1/21 7:38:42 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, whether in the member's constituency or my constituency, depending on the industries that are there, we recognize the jobs of all Canadians in industries that continue to make our nation prosper. We continue to support them in the very best way that we can, and at times there is a need for us to come forward in a larger way by looking at what sorts of options we can use, such as I made reference to: trade agreements, and having discussions and more dialogue with local politicians.
Remember, this policy coming from the States is also hurting American consumers. We know how important this issue is, and we will continue to have dialogue and push Canada's file and as we say, as governments from the past have done, we will prevail. It is just something that has taken place, and it is not just this government. That is why I say I do not think we do a just cause by trying to say it is all this government's fault, because that is not the case.
181 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/1/21 7:45:08 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I will make the suggestion that maybe prior to the defeat of Paul Martin and his government, there was a softening within the industry, which ultimately led to Harper getting his first agreement.
Having said that, let us go back to 2015 when there was an election. If he was so great, why did Stephen Harper not have a new deal in place when the deal was just about to expire and there was a change in government? I do not quite understand that connection. Could the member expand on how many meetings Stephen Harper had in the months leading up to the 2015 election, when the agreement actually expired?
112 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/1/21 7:58:17 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I would be interested in the member's thoughts in regards to American consumers. I have heard the Canadian supply of softwood lumber, in terms of the American market, could be as high as 30%. Please do not quote me on that. I believe it is somewhere around that. That is a lot of softwood lumber. American consumers will have to pay more for their lumber.
Would the member not agree that that would garner a great deal of attention through public awareness? It is an important point that does need to be emphasized that Americans also are disadvantaged by the recent actions of this trade bill.
109 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/1/21 8:16:10 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Chair, I am interested in my colleague's thoughts on expanding export markets beyond the United States.
We can talk about the diversification of the industry into secondary markets such as furniture or whatever else might be a wood product, but one of the biggest things the government can do is look at ways in which industry can increase the number of markets for the products we have, whether it is in Quebec, B.C. or my home province of Manitoba.
Could the member provide his thoughts on whether there are countries the Bloc believes we should be pursuing to expand those markets? I would like to hear what he has to say on that issue.
117 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/1/21 9:13:03 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, what is happening is not right and it is not fair. Unfortunately, and sadly, this is not the first time this has happened. It has happened on several occasions where the wealthy elite within the industry, stakeholders and lobbyists in the United States are successful.
Canada has been successful in terms of getting the matter resolved and being there for our industry. Once again, unfortunately, the Canadian government does have to step in, get involved and break down the barriers to take it wherever it needs to be taken. I am hoping that the members on all sides of the House will concur that, at the end of the day, this House will unite and ensure that Canada prevails on this very important issue.
126 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/1/21 9:21:45 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, I disagree wholeheartedly with what the member is saying.
The Government of Canada will in fact prevail, as we have done in the past on this issue. If we take a look at the origins of the debate, we are not going to do what Stephen Harper did and concede hundreds of millions of dollars to the Americas over this issue. No government in the history of Canada has achieved as many formal free trade agreements as this Liberal government has in the last six years. To say that we do not have that international relationship is bogus.
Would the member not recognize that, at the end of the day, the industry needs to be supported, and this Liberal government will continue to support the industry here? We will fight the battle that needs to be fought so that Canadians and Canada will in fact prevail on this very important issue.
153 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/1/21 9:52:10 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Chair, the member made reference to the 2006 deal with Stephen Harper, and I would suggest that getting no deal is better than getting a bad deal. The deal that Harper achieved saw us surrender literally hundreds of millions of dollars to the United States at the cost of the industry here.
What is important for us to recognize is that we are on the right side of this. We know that if we continue to proceed through the apparatus that is set up and established, whether through the World Trade Organization or even our trade agreements, and have the negotiations that are so critically important, we will prevail.
Would the member agree that it is better for us to push, and push hard, and be patient in order to protect the interests of the tens of thousands of jobs and the hundreds of communities that will directly benefit if we get this right and make sure that Canada does prevail on this important issue?
166 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
