SoVote

Apr/8/24 7:37:37 p.m.
Watch

Madam Chair, 42 years at the negotiating table is a long time. If I were the government, I would not be patting myself on the back or blaming another political party. Certainly, we know the Conservatives' approach did not work. Like I said earlier, it is taxing the axe, because their motto was tax from both sides of the border, which they agreed to. It was a billion-dollar hit to the B.C. lumber industry and producers in British Columbia, and half a billion of that went to lobbyists. That is what Stephen Harper negotiated. The Liberals dragged this out. There has not been a full-court press on the issue. Clearly they have not negotiated well, and we need a different approach. We need to keep as much of our fibre as we can in Canada. We need to supply our mills. We need to end raw log exports. We need to add value to our fibre. We need to retool our mills. We need to invest heavily into ensuring that we keep up with the international market and are supplying the needs of countries that do not have access to fibre, as well as with emerging markets, where there is huge opportunity. There is mass timber, which we talked about. We have seen some great models in British Columbia of small players that cannot access fibre. This is ridiculous. The federal government allows international trade and export of our fibre, and our local mills cannot get access. This is just absolutely bonkers. I cannot think of any country in the first world that is managing its forest sector like this. It is unbelievable. The opportunity is here. It is right now. I hope next week, in the budget, that the federal government is going to take a different approach and is going to look at mass timber, value-added product, retooling and putting more money on the table. Catalyst mill in my riding received the most federal money ever in the history of the riding to retool the mill so we can make food-grade paper and replace plastic paper. When one goes to Costco and gets a hot dog, the packaging is from my riding. Eight times the value per tonne is what we are getting now because of that retooling. Let us do more of that.

391 words

Mr. Bob Zimmer (Prince George—Peace River—Northern Rockies, CPC)

Apr/8/24 7:40:07 p.m.
Watch

Madam Chair, I will be sharing my time with the member for Kenora. We come forward tonight talking about the softwood lumber issue. It has been an issue I have been very close to for most of my life. My first job out of high school was working at the local pulp mill in construction in Taylor, B.C. That is where I learned to work hard, building the mill that was going to cost $150 million but provide hundreds of jobs over generations using residual fibre, which normally would just be waste fibre, from the local mills. However, what we have seen from the current Liberal-NDP government, and the provincial NDP government particularly in my province, is inaction on the softwood file. Let us put this into context a bit first, because I think folks out there wonder what softwood lumber means. For me, it means jobs. I have already said that I have worked in the softwood sector, working on one of the mills. My kids have all worked in it, whether it was for a logging company, working on trucks, or at an OSB mill. We are all very familiar with the forestry sector. However, a CBC article on January 11, 2023, reported, “‘We expect about 300 jobs in Prince George will be lost across the Canfor Pulp organization with the shutdown of the pulp line at PG Pulp and Paper Mill. This includes staff and hourly positions,’ a spokesperson for the company said in an emailed statement.” The CBC, on January 25, 2023, reported, “In an email to CBC News, Canfor said its plants in Chetwynd employ 157 people, adding that ‘where possible, employees will be prioritized for hiring and redeployment to other Canfor locations.’” This was after it was announced that Canfor would shutter that particular mill, which was absolutely the backbone of Chetwynd. I recently talked to one of the former councillors in Chetwynd, and the parent has to go work in northern Alberta now, because there is no longer a mill for her dad to work at. These were two different mills, both in my riding. Of Houston, B.C., which is slightly out of my riding, Canfor said, “it is too early in the project planning to fully understand how many of the 333 employees who work at that facility will be laid off.” Energetic City, in September 2022, reported about the mill that I worked at growing up, “In May, the company stated that the curtailment would most likely stay in place until the fall. At this time, Ward had confirmed that around 80 employees had been affected, saying the company ‘sincerely regrets its impact’” and that another 20 jobs would be lost. This all comes around to the inaction on the softwood lumber file. I was criticizing the trade minister for her lack of action. I would ask her regularly, when she was meeting with our trading partner, Katherine Tai, on the U.S. side, whether she was actually negotiating the softwood lumber agreement. I would constantly get no answer back. We know in this place that when someone is not answering, it probably means it is not being discussed. On May 16, 2021, CTV reported from Washington: Tai told U.S. senators that despite higher prices, the fundamental dispute remains and there have been no talks on a new lumber quota arrangement. “In order to have an agreement and in order to have a negotiation, you need to have a partner. And thus far, the Canadians have not expressed interest in engaging,” Tai said. This was in 2021. Now the government has come to the table, and it is finally talking about softwood lumber. That is great, but what happened about six years before? It did absolutely nothing about it, and that is why our mills were closing. This is the government's game: protecting 25% of lands and waters by 2025 and upping that to 30% by 2030. It is all part of the game to shut this stuff down with a bunch of other different excuses as the reason to do so. What we need is better forest management, and according to Jesse Zeman, “Forestry could play a critical role in mitigating the effects of wildfire by reducing fuel loads and thinning forests.” It is about time we had a government that takes our softwood sector seriously, and I hope that with this conversation we cause the government to do so.

763 words

Mrs. Brenda Shanahan (Châteauguay—Lacolle, Lib.)

Apr/8/24 7:45:01 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I listened to the speech of my colleague with great interest. Clearly, he wants to tell us that he supports the softwood lumber industry, and I know the Conservatives in general talk a big game when it comes to supporting the industry and Canadian workers, but unfortunately it is all talk and no action. We hear a lot of buzzwords, and we hear a lot of slogans, but the simple fact of the matter is that, when it came to voting for funding support for the management of the Canada-U.S. softwood lumber file, every single Conservative in the House voted against it. Therefore, I would like to know how the member can defend that vote to the companies and workers they care so much about.

129 words

Mr. Bob Zimmer

Apr/8/24 7:45:58 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, it would be funny if it were not so sad. Here is a member of a government that has done absolutely nothing, and I just proved it. The minister responsible did nothing for six years, even as evidenced by Katherine Tai, the U.S. trade secretary. It did nothing when we got it done within six months. Here is a government that has done absolutely nothing. It has been the government for almost nine years, and it is still not there. We got it done within six months. We did pretty well. My hope is that the officials get to the U.S. and negotiate a softwood lumber agreement. With respect to the mills that I talked about, I am seeing jobs being lost by the hundreds in my very own riding. Mills are being shut down by the hundreds. Is it for a lack of trees? I fly over our forests twice a week, and there are lots of trees in British Columbia. We just need to make sure that the companies have a reason to go in and log.

183 words

Mr. Mario Simard (Jonquière, BQ)

Apr/8/24 7:47:00 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, there is a fairly simple solution to support forestry companies. It was actually people in the forestry sector who came up with this solution. They have to be given access to liquidity. To get through the current crisis, with its tariffs that are totally unfair, what people in the forestry sector are telling us is that they need access to liquidity so they can invest in their infrastructure. Would my colleague agree that a federal program is needed to give forestry companies access to liquidity?

87 words

Mr. Bob Zimmer

Apr/8/24 7:47:35 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I cannot speak to what the Bloc's plan is for equity in the forest sector, but when I had my job as a 19-year-old working on a construction site where we were building a pulp mill, the company did not need the equity. It got it because there were good business cases for developing a lumber mill or using the residual fibres from a lumber mill for making paper and other products. It was not necessary. We had a great, flourishing forest sector, especially after we had our softwood lumber dispute settled in 2006. We need to get back to having a government that cares about our softwood sector, cares about our forests and wants to better manage our forests. However, what I can see with the environment minister and the fisheries and oceans minister is that it is all about shutting it down.

149 words

Mr. Gord Johns (Courtenay—Alberni, NDP)

Apr/8/24 7:48:31 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I appreciate my colleague's speech and his passion on this. Again, we need a team Canada approach, but he keeps going back to the agreement under the Harper government. That agreement gave away $1 billion U.S. of collected duties, which legitimately belonged to Canadian softwood producers. About half of that amount went to the U.S. lobby group that started the dispute. Therefore, it is an agreement that sent half a billion dollars U.S. to those who started the whole thing, and they are our opponents if we want to call them that. They are not really partners when they are taking that approach. Is that the kind of agreement that my colleague wants to reinstate?

121 words

Mr. Bob Zimmer

Apr/8/24 7:49:23 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I appreciate what the member has to say, but from my perspective, I just read many news articles talking about literally hundreds of jobs being lost in the current situation without a softwood lumber agreement. Again, when we came into government in 2006, it was done within six months. That is what we are proposing. We would get it done again, and we would bring it home.

69 words

Mr. Eric Melillo (Kenora, CPC)

Apr/8/24 7:49:51 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, it is an honour to rise on this important issue this evening. Of course, forestry is a major employer and economic driver for people in my region of northwestern Ontario and right across northern Ontario. I think about the people in Dryden, Kenora, Ear Falls and Ignace, along with a number of first nations across Treaty No. 3 that have partnered in groundbreaking partnerships and revenue-sharing agreements to find prosperity in the forestry industry. It is an industry that provides powerful paycheques to many people across northern Ontario. It is also an industry that is very environmentally positive and environmentally sustainable. I heard a few comments about that already today, that the forestry industry is one that can help mitigate the effects of climate change. It can help to mitigate the effects of fires if we are able to harvest forests and harness the carbon dioxide that has been absorbed through the trees. Unfortunately, it is also an industry that has been under attack by the current NDP-Liberal government. I want to just share one related issue of caribou in northern Ontario. The environment minister had, last year, issued an ultimatum saying that he was going to block harvesting thousands of kilometres of Ontario forests. It was through the guise of caribou protection. He was saying that and doing so without any acknowledgement of what has been happening at the provincial level or what has been happening with first nations and their local knowledge and local leadership to ensure that there is a protection plan in place for caribou. The minister was planning to move forward with that order just to block development. He seems to have this personal vendetta against development of any kind. It was very sad to see that the government was planning to move forward on that. We will see where that stands going forward. It is important that any plans that are put in place have to account for the provincial, territorial and local plans that are already in place and that are already working to help ensure that we can harvest forests in northern Ontario and across the country in an environmentally sustainable way and in a way that provides good jobs and good economic growth and, of course, is viable from an environmental standpoint as well. I share that because it is just one example of how the government has failed the forestry sector. I could go on, but unfortunately I am limited for time. Another issue is the softwood lumber issue we are dealing with right now. This dispute has had real ramifications for people in my riding. It has led to people losing their jobs. It has led to idling of the former Kenora Forest Products mill and the eventual bankruptcy of Prendiville Industries as a result of that. We are happy that GreenFirst is now involved in that operation, but these tariffs and this trade dispute continue to hang over the heads of the workers across northern Ontario. Unfortunately, it is only going to get worse because the U.S. plans to increase these tariffs from the current 8% to over 13% on our softwood lumber industry. That will bring even more economic devastation to people across northern Ontario. This has already also cost billions of dollars to our industry, Canadian companies. It is first nations that have stakes in this industry that are now without those funds as a result of the government's inaction. It was mentioned already that, under the previous Conservative government, there was an agreement reached within six months. The current government has had over eight years, yet has still not been able to come to an agreement. The best the Liberals can say is that they are working on it. They are raising the issue. They are talking about the issue. We do not know if that is even true. One thing is true. It is either that they are completely ignoring the softwood lumber issue or that they are raising this issue with U.S. counterparts and getting nowhere through two different administrations. It does not seem to matter who is in the White House as the current government has not been able to get a deal done competently. It is completely unable to fight for Canadian workers and Canadian industry. Canada's Conservatives are going to continue to stand for Canada's forestry sector and the hard-working people who make it thrive.

745 words

Mrs. Brenda Shanahan (Châteauguay—Lacolle, Lib.)

Apr/8/24 7:55:09 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I want to thank the hon. member for his speech and just say how grateful I was to hear the term “climate change” mentioned by a Conservative member. There were even a couple of other words in there, such as indigenous knowledge, and something to do with acknowledging that wildfires are an issue in this country and need to be addressed. This government has made significant investments in supporting the forest industry, especially as global demand for sustainable forest products grows. As the hon. member mentioned, the forestry sector continues to innovate, grow and support good jobs for Canadians. Why did he vote against our investments in budget 2023 of over $368.4 million over three years to renew and update the forest sector's support?

130 words

Mr. Eric Melillo

Apr/8/24 7:56:27 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, in the five years I have had the honour to represent the people in the Kenora riding in Parliament, it has been a pleasure each and every time I have had an opportunity to vote against one of the NDP-Liberal budgets because I am voting non-confidence in the government. It is a government that is tired and out of ideas. It is corrupt and has no plan to support our forest industry or to get back to a balanced budget and make life more affordable for Canadians. All of its plans have been failing, and that is why I am proud to stand with my Conservative colleagues and continue to vote non-confidence in the government.

120 words

Voting

Mr. Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay (Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, BQ)

Apr/8/24 7:57:08 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I would like to ask my colleague what he thinks of the fact that softwood lumber was not mentioned in either the minister's mandate letter, or the agenda for the WTO ministerial in Abu Dhabi. In both cases, it was a month after the announcement of new countervailing duties. The Liberals agreed to holding this take-note debate more than two months after we started talking about it. Are we witnessing a rather clear display of this government's complete disinterest in this issue?

87 words

Mr. Eric Melillo

Apr/8/24 7:57:45 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I think a very good point was raised. It is something that is urgent for people in northern Ontario, Quebec and right across the country, but the government has really been dragging its heels on this. The member points out a very obvious example. The fact that we are even here debating it all this time later, after eight years, is perhaps the greatest example of all that the government has been largely ignoring this issue and has been absent from this issue. As I said, even if we take the government's word for it that it has been working on it, then it is clearly incapable of delivering on this issue because it has had eight years to get it done. It is definitely time for change. The Conservatives are going to bring it home.

139 words

Mr. Gord Johns (Courtenay—Alberni, NDP)

Apr/8/24 7:58:32 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I want to talk about solutions. My colleague from Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing sent me a letter from the mayor of Kapuskasing, and he wanted to talk about solutions to Canada's housing crisis. He cites that they can be found in the forest. He cites that Canada can: Actively promote Canadian wood and mass timber solutions within a federal affordable housing strategy. Establish a harmonized regulatory framework for permitting processes to expedite approvals safely and responsibly. Adopt a performance-based approach and increasing tall wood building height allowances in the National Building Code. Promote nationally certified, prefabricated building typologies for wood-based structures that meet municipal standards. Offer incentives for developers using a high proportion of Canadian wood products in new construction. Support the development of a future-ready skilled workforce through standardized green education and training programs. That is something my colleague from Timmins—James Bay has been working very hard on. Does my colleague agree with those great recommendations from the mayor of Kapuskasing?

171 words

Mr. Eric Melillo

Apr/8/24 7:59:49 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I really love the community of Kapuskasing. Last summer, I had the opportunity to travel there with the leader of Canada's Conservatives. We met with forestry workers, many of whom felt left behind by the NDP-Liberal government. They were very upset with the fact that their NDP representative continues to support the Liberal government and continues to support a government that is dragging its feet on the softwood lumber deal and not delivering for the people of northern Ontario. That is what Conservatives are going to do: deliver for northern Ontario.

95 words

Mr. Randeep Sarai (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs and Associate Minister of National Defence, Lib.)

Apr/8/24 8:00:24 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, Canada and the United States are close neighbours with an unprecedented, mutually beneficial relationship when it comes to trade. That said, as we all know, even among good neighbours, irritants are bound to arise. The softwood lumber dispute with the United States is a long-standing trade irritant that, unfortunately, has resurfaced on several occasions. We are in the fifth round of the dispute since the 1980s. In past rounds, we have seen a certain pattern develop. First, unfair U.S. duties are imposed against Canadian softwood lumber products at the behest of the U.S. lumber industry. Canada then prevails in contesting these unwarranted duties in neutral international fora. Finally, a negotiated outcome providing predictability and stability to the sector is reached. Right now, we are in the second phase, a phase of active litigation to vigorously defend the interests of our world-leading softwood lumber industry. Members should make no mistake: This trade dispute negatively impacts the Canadian softwood lumber industry, which is a key component of our highly integrated forest sector. Nowhere is it more important than Surrey Centre, a riding that has the highest number of softwood lumber employees per capita in Canada, or at least in British Columbia. The softwood lumber industry provides thousands of jobs across the country and is an economic anchor to many communities, particularly in rural regions. Canada is a trading nation, and our softwood lumber industry is no different. Almost two-thirds of the total softwood lumber production in Canada is exported. The United States is our largest export market. Unfair U.S. trade measures on most of Canada's softwood lumber exports not only undermine our industry's competitiveness in the U.S. market but also affect communities and workers at home. Our government recognizes this burden; at every step of the way, we have supported our industry, our communities and our workers. Our government is mounting a strong legal defence of Canada's interests against the U.S. duties, in close collaboration with provincial governments and industry stakeholders. That is why Canada currently has a total of 13 ongoing legal challenges against the U.S. duties. The hon. Minister of Export, Promotion, International Trade and Economic Development recently announced the latest of our challenges, which contests a biased U.S. decision to maintain both anti-dumping and countervailing duties on Canadian products instead of revoking them. The government has contested every single U.S. decision that has led to the imposition or maintenance of unfair trade measures on our softwood lumber industry. These legal challenges are being heard through various venues. Most of Canada's challenges are proceeding under chapter 19 of NAFTA or chapter 10 of its successor, CUSMA. We have two ongoing challenges through the WTO dispute settlement mechanism and one that is being heard by the U.S. Court of International Trade. Through the many iterations of this dispute, Canada has consistently been found to be a reliable and fair trading partner, while U.S. duties have repeatedly been judged to be inconsistent both with U.S. law and the United States' international trade obligations. We are confident that this will ultimately be the outcome once again. In fact, we have already seen a number of decisions in Canada's favour in the current round of this dispute. We know that the facts and the law are on our side, and we will never waver in our support of Canadian businesses and our workers.

581 words

Mr. Kyle Seeback (Dufferin—Caledon, CPC)

Apr/8/24 8:04:27 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I want to thank the member for reading PMO speech number six. Where we are is that this is catastrophic for the softwood lumber industry in Canada. While these members talk about how the wheels are in motion and how the dog ate their homework, 183 companies in the forestry sector have gone bankrupt since 2016, with tens of thousands of jobs, real livelihoods. In 2016, we had the expiration of the softwood lumber agreement that was put together by former prime minister Harper. What they are doing is not working. It has been almost nine years. This has cost the sector billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of jobs. What are they going to do differently, other than talk and talk?

125 words

Mr. Randeep Sarai

Apr/8/24 8:05:30 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, we all know that the mechanism to fight these unfair duties is through legal means, through NAFTA chapter 11 or CUSMA chapter 10. We have fought those, but we can only have a favourable outcome and settlement if the other party is willing. Unfortunately, despite continuous legal victories on Canada's behalf, we need a willing trading partner who agrees to abide by those. We have seen that the Americans have been inconsistent in that regard, and it takes a long time to pressure them into doing that. I am very confident that our government and our minister of trade will continue to do those talks, and we will get to a resolution so that our softwood exports will be traded at a fair and an appropriate value, free of any trade barriers.

135 words

Mr. Mario Simard (Jonquière, BQ)

Apr/8/24 8:06:23 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, does my colleague not find it odd that at no time in the minister's mandate letter, when it talks about trade disputes, is there any mention of the words “softwood lumber”? Is that not a clear admission that the Government of Canada does not care about the softwood lumber dispute and that it is trying to use the regions of Canada that live from the forestry sector as a bargaining chip to secure the automobile sector with U.S. partners? Does my colleague interpret the absence of the words “softwood lumber” in the minister's mandate letter as clear evidence of what I just described?

112 words

Mr. Randeep Sarai

Apr/8/24 8:07:08 p.m.
Watch

Mr. Chair, I could not disagree more with my colleague. I think Canada fights equally for these. I regularly meet with stakeholders, particularly small and medium-sized sawmills and even larger privately owned sawmills that are located in my constituency of Surrey Centre. They have faith that the government is fully trying and that our trade minister is working on it; they receive regular updates in regard to that. Therefore, I am confident that there is no impropriety being done between one region and the other. When Canada speaks, it speaks on behalf of all its provinces.

97 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 295