“Unfair foreign tariffs are hurting our steel industry and threatening jobs. We are spending billions of dollars to support steelworkers and protect Canadian steel from unfair foreign trade. We are also looking at legal options and penalties to force the company to keep its promises to its workers, and I want the opposition to support us in this.”

“Mr. Speaker, I very much appreciate the intervention from my colleague from Edmonton Strathcona on this very important and very timely topic at this important and timely moment for Canada’s steel sector. As I think the member acknowledges, in part at least, that what we are seeing right now is a result of unjust, unjustifiable and illegal tariffs on the sector, affecting not just workers but Canadian communities across the country. These tariffs have undermined our workers by raising production costs and prices that have threatened their livelihood, and, yes, if unanswered, those impacts would result in fewer jobs and lower wages. We cannot allow that to happen, because these products are not just important for their communities; they also anchor crucial manufacturing clusters around the country that employ hundreds of thousands of Canadians. We just cannot stand by while our workers and families remain exposed to the impacts of these illegal tariffs. There are things we cannot control, but there are many things we can control. We cannot control the actions of foreign governments, but we can control our actions. The hon. member refers to some of the tools under the Investment Canada Act. Indeed, we are looking at all those options: the forced divestiture of assets, financial penalties, and requirements that the company honour its undertakings that it made sacredly through the Investment Canada Act provisions to every worker, to the government and, in fact, to the entire country. I want to encourage the hon. member to walk with us as we take a very strong and committed line with the company to say that it must honour its undertakings and that we are looking at all available steps under the Investment Canada Act. I would also add that the member referred to the visit by Premier Ford today. I just want to highlight the really significant measures that were in today’s announcement with the Prime Minister, ministers, and the Premier of Ontario. There is a joint steel action fund, with five-year funding commitments of $3.55 billion from Canada and an additional $1.67 billion from the Province of Ontario. The hon. member mentioned the buy Canadian policy. We intend to leverage the buy Canadian policy and the buy Ontario policy to prioritize Canadian steel and public procurement and strengthen domestic demand, a measure that was not mentioned in the hon. member’s remarks but I know is important to the United Steelworkers and is important to her. We are strengthening protections against foreign steel dumping and unfair subsidizing, through enhanced enforcement by the Canada Border Services Agency and tighter trade remedy practices and compliance measures. We have a new Canada-Ontario steel task force to coordinate the implementation of measures to support the steel sector and improve its competitiveness. The steel sector is fundamental to our economic competitiveness. Steel is a product we have been making in Canada for a long time. It is something we will continue to make and continue to turn into the kinds of products that are needed by manufacturers not just in Canada but around the world. The hon. member referred to innovation and progress in the sector and government partnership. I will just point her to the very innovative partnership we have made with Algoma Steel to help it improve and refine its production. When it comes to workers, I would point to the many tariff relief programs we have brought forward, the many tariff relief programs that are applied to business, and the specific protections for workers through Employment and Social Development Canada, with $70 million over three years allocated for steelworkers through labour market development agreements with the provinces to retrain and upskill up to 10,000 steelworkers. We have also committed $382 million over five years to create six workforce alliances, working in partnership, hand in hand, with workers, unions, Canadian businesses and those who are standing for a strong Canadian economy. What is being done to the workers at Stelco is a betrayal of those workers. We will not stand for it. The Hamilton caucus members on this side have been very active in working in partnership with us to defend them. We want the company to honour its commitments.”

• Little substance
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Signal 39 of 100

  Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

  See full analysis →
• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 95 of 100

  Of this reply, 97% addressed the question or point raised.

  See full analysis →

“We will make sure companies keep their promises to workers. For Stelco and Cleveland-Cliffs, we are looking at legal actions like fines or forcing them to sell assets. We will use every tool we have to support workers hurt by tariffs.”

“Mr. Speaker, we fully intend to be behind those workers who have built this country, in the way the hon. member mentioned, by ensuring the commitments made by companies, whether through the Investment Canada Act, through subsidy programs or other contribution agreements we make with them, are honoured to the letter. In the case of Stelco and Cleveland-Cliffs, we are looking at all our legal options and the potential remedies, including forced divestiture of assets, financial penalties and a requirement that the company honour its undertakings. We are standing side by side, walking with workers and with Canadian businesses to make sure we have the appropriate reactions, the appropriate supports and the appropriate approach, which states very strongly that we are going to use all policy levers at our disposal to make sure that those workers, not only in Hamilton but across Canada, who are affected by these tariffs and who can benefit from a more forward-thinking approach are embraced by our approach and that we are there for them.”

• Vague
  ?

  Reply to a comment in debate

  Clarity 19 of 100

  Much of this statement used imprecise wording, lacked details on timing or responsibility, or made broad claims without support.

  See full analysis →