LP_468x60
ontario news watch
on-the-record-468x60-white
and-another-thing-468x60

 

In the wake of General Motors (GM) announcing that no new product would be allocated to its facility in Oshawa, Ontario, in 2019, nor to four other facilities across the U.S., much of the blame rightfully went to GM itself.  The company is far behind on investing in electric and autonomous vehicle innovation.  Competitors such as Toyota and Honda have begun to dominate market for sedans, which are what the Oshawa plant built.  The perception of the GM brand is one of low reliability, corporate welfare suckage, and local economic devastation.  This closure was, perhaps inevitably, a matter of when, not if.

Don't expect any of this to comfort the nearly three thousand Oshawans who will be out of a job, to say nothing of the plant's suppliers and other businesses depending on the local workforce.  GM has finally faced up to its failure to justify their continued employment.  It's now up to others, specifically others in government, to answer the first question that came to their minds: "What's next?"  Some answers have been worth hearing; others are simply a waste of breath.  Let's recap.

Best: Ontario Premier Doug Ford

Ford's term has shaped up to be much more action-oriented than I once predicted.  He accepted GM's declaration that the government could do nothing to help, and immediately shifted his focus to unemployment insurance and retraining.  One does wonder if he would have shoveled more subsidies onto GM if they'd claimed it was necessary, say, for retooling the facility to build electric vehicles.  Luckily, even they aren't that shameless.

Worst: Ontario Opposition Leader Andrea Horwath

It seems Ford's opposite number definitely would have, accusing Ford in a statement of refusing to make the "investments" needed for Oshawans to build "the vehicles of tomorrow."  She is absolutely correct that the laid-off workers would rather have jobs than extended EI benefits; nobody is ignorant of this.  But GM has determined that some of its facilities are suitable for the vehicles of tomorrow, and none of the five being closed are among them.  If they were committed to keeping Oshawa open, they would have retooled the plant accordingly, with or (preferably) without another government check.  By pretending this is not the case, Horwath is offering nothing more to Oshawa than false hope.

Worst: Unifor president Jerry Dias

But at least Horwath's economic advice isn't pure poison.  For that, we turn to self-appointed labour czar Jerry Dias, calling on the federal government to give "the middle finger" to GM by slapping tariffs of up to 40 percent on any cars the company manufactures in Mexico.  His sole concern here appears to be retaliation; were he genuinely concerned with GM's willingness to pay more workers, he would recall that existing tariffs on GM's supply chain may have sped up the shutdowns, if not caused them outright.  That he doesn't puts him squarely in the company of . . .

Worst: U.S. President Donald Trump

We shouldn't expect Trump to change the habits of a lifetime and accept even partial or possible responsibility for an outcome he doesn't like.  But you'd think, when he spoke to GM CEO Mary Barra, that he would at least pay lip service to the fates of laid-off workers in Ohio, Michigan, and Maryland.  Maybe you think "I love Ohio" counts.  "You're playing around with the wrong person" meaning himself, he who has probably never so much as changed a tire in his life does not.  And what action might he take if GM doesn't open a new plant in the Buckeye State?  A 25 percent tariff on all auto exports, except for those from Mexico and Canada.  Some people never learn.

Best: Prime Minister Justin Trudeau

Trudeau's responses have been as predictable as possible: He has expressed his disappointment, discussed options for workers with Ford, met with Unifor, and talked on the phone with Trump, all without announcing any specific actions on the federal government's part.  It's not much, but he's keeping a cool head, possibly positioning himself as the mediator in future talks between all parties.  Not being actively unhelpful counts for more than it may seem.

Worst: Opposition Leader Andrew Scheer

It's one thing to suggest that a federal carbon tax might hurt Canada's business investment climate.  But Scheer is eager to have us believe that, had Trudeau offered GM a carbon tax exemption, they might have kept Oshawa open.  When Ford said GM told him that no policy change would make a difference, does Scheer think he was lying?

(UPDATE: As this column was going to press, CBC published an article headlined "Doug Ford blames Trudeau's carbon tax for GM plant closure."  A closer read of his comments indicates that he blames the carbon tax for a dire outlook for Canadian manufacturing, but not the GM closure in particular.  However, he does draw a direct link between GM and business-unfriendly policies, such as high taxes and hydro rates, implemented by former Premier Kathleen Wynne: "If I'd been here for five years, they probably wouldn't have left."  Oh, Doug.  You were doing so well.)

Written by Jess Morgan

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


Monday was something of a black day in Southern Ontario, as General Motors announced it would be closing its manufacturing plant in Oshawa.

It's catastrophic, in the sense that GM wasn't just closing the Oshawa plant, but one in Ohio and another Michigan.  This is a signal the plant is gone, there is no bringing it back.  Not any time soon, at least.

So, it was with more than a little interest I watched Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer stand up in the House of Commons this week.  What would he say?  What message would he push?  What does he want done?  What would Scheer's vision for the future look like?

He rose Tuesday* and the first question out of his mouth was, "Can the minister confirm if any of the support programs being contemplated for GM workers were factored into the fall economic statement, or can we expect the deficit to be even higher?"

Woof.

Question Period is mostly a farce, a theatrical spectacle meant not to get to the bottom of anything, but to show off, with a rigid delivery that hints at moral drama, what a politician's priorities are.

And so when the Tory leader stood up to ask his first question to the government, to signal what his very first priority was on this black week, he went to the deficit and whether it might be growing.  Grim stuff, but not out of type.

If you've seen the Conservative leader, or perhaps any other right-wing Canadian politician, lately, you might have some idea where things headed from there.  Yes, of course, Scheer was wondering if the government would drop the carbon tax, or at the very least give the auto sector an exemption.  At least give them a fighting chance!

This line of questioning may have made some sense if GM had only closed the Oshawa plant.  But the auto giant wasn't just closing this Canadian plant, it was also closing a pair of factories in the U.S.  Our southern neighbours, you might have heard, don't have a carbon tax.  In fact, the current administration down there is taking a slash, and slash again strategy to not just taxes, but environmental regulation as well.

If dropping the not-yet-in-force carbon tax was going to keep the Oshawa plant open, how do you explain that?

Well, you can't.  Not really.  Not in any intellectually honest way.

So, you could perhaps dismiss this as just part of the theatre of question period.  But the carbon tax led off the round of questions Scheer asked Wednesday, too.  This is the tack they are taking, that Canada's regulations and taxes are what are closing the assembly plant in Oshawa.

What Scheer is asking for is a new tier of handouts for a company that is obviously not swayed by them.  It wasn't that long ago that federal and provincial governments were handing GM oodles of cash, in the form of $60 billion in loans, to keep it out of bankruptcy.

That wasn't enough to stop a transmission plant from closing in Oshawa in 2009 and another assembly plant in Windsor in 2010.  When the Oshawa plant closes at the end of this year, GM will have two left in Canada, one in Ingersol. the other in St Catherines.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford says he was told by the company there was nothing to be done, but let's assume for a second Scheer's demands were met and GM decided to keep the Oshawa plant open.  How long would that last?

General Motors has made it clear they can be bought for a time, but they make no commitments to the future.  How much money should be thrown at this corporation, only to watch it vanish?

If your answer is more, you've obviously not been paying attention.

Scheer doesn't have the answer to this problem, but he needs some kind of solution.  Why not make it the same case he's been making all this time anyway?  After all, if the talking point fits, spout it.

All of this ties back to this ongoing feeling I have when it comes to the Tory leader.  There's always this suggestion there's something more to Scheer.  Some greater depth, or insight, or even tactical ability.  But every time he shows the same self, the same plan.

He's against deficits, against the carbon tax, against regulations, against being against pipelines, against this, against that.  He has a pithy line for all sorts of situations, but ask the guy to get down to details, to reveal something about what he wants to do â€” not just undo — and he's got nothing.

His priorities for the people for Oshawa are to keep the deficit down.  To stop a carbon tax that wouldn't have kept their jobs anyway.

There is no depth, there is no more.  Andrew Scheer has showed us who he is.  This is his best.

***

*He wasn't in the Commons on Monday.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.