Latest / INSIGHT TODAY / 'Public ownership' is the solution to Ottawa's Stelco problem NDP leader

Transcript

'Public ownership' is the solution to Ottawa's Stelco problem NDP leader · INSIGHT TODAY

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Workers at the Hamilton Ontario plant have already begun receiving notices,
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: some of this over the Thanksgiving weekend. Here is the
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: CEO of the parent company defending the layoffs to my
• 0:09
  Speaker 1: colleague Rosemary Barton on her show, Rosemary Barton Live.
• 0:13
  Speaker 2: There's no provision in the contract that I have to
• 0:17
  Speaker 2: keep employment. at a certain level every single day of
• 0:23
  Speaker 2: the five years. If that was an imposition of the
• 0:27
  Speaker 2: Canadian government, I would not have accepted. The layoffs are.
• 0:31
  Speaker 3: One, temporary.
• 0:32
  Speaker 2: Two, they will be reversed. Three, I did not accept
• 0:37
  Speaker 2: Canadian taxpayer money to do that, because that would be
• 0:41
  Speaker 2: completely inadequate.
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: Today, Conservative leader Pierre Pagliostedi wants the federal government to
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: sue Stelco, but also to restart trade talks with the U.S.
• 0:52
  Speaker 4: The only way to guarantee these jobs in the long
• 0:55
  Speaker 4: run is to get a good tariff-free deal. So our
• 1:00
  Speaker 4: message to the Prime Minister is get back to the table,
• 1:04
  Speaker 4: get a tariff-free deal.
• 1:07
  Speaker 1: Meanwhile, the federal and Ontario NDP leaders both offer a
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: different solution. They say the federal government should nationalize Stelco.
• 1:15
  Speaker 5: The government is now going to chase them through the courts.
• 1:17
  Speaker 5: That's going to take years. We are in an emergency
• 1:19
  Speaker 5: situation to save Canada's steel industry. The tool of public
• 1:23
  Speaker 5: ownership is available to the government, and this is the
• 1:27
  Speaker 5: time to use it.
• 1:28
  Speaker 6: This is not a call that I have made lightly.
• 1:31
  Speaker 6: We are dealing with, frankly, a CEO who is an ideologue,
• 1:35
  Speaker 6: who has supported the tariffs of Donald Trump. It has
• 1:39
  Speaker 6: been very clear that we are running out of options.
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: Okay, so Aaron, the latest we have from Melanie Jolie's
• 1:46
  Speaker 1: office is that there was a letter sent from Stelco
• 1:48
  Speaker 1: and publicly released that we saw saying we're not going
• 1:51
  Speaker 1: to meet your conditions. They now say it's with their
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: legal department to look at options. Do we think nationalization
• 1:57
  Speaker 1: would be on Mark Carney's agenda here?
• 2:00
  Speaker 7: I mean, it's hard to know what's off the table
• 2:04
  Speaker 7: at this point just because of the moment we're in.
• 2:07
  Speaker 7: I mean, I think the fact that we've gone this
• 2:09
  Speaker 7: quickly to a nationalization argument is indicative of the moment
• 2:12
  Speaker 7: we're in and the fact that these sorts of things
• 2:14
  Speaker 7: are up for discussion. I don't know that the argument
• 2:17
  Speaker 7: for nationalization is quite there yet, or at least I'd
• 2:20
  Speaker 7: like to see it spelled out a bit more in
• 2:22
  Speaker 7: terms of why that is the necessary next step. You know,
• 2:27
  Speaker 7: are there not private interests that would purchase this? Do we,
• 2:32
  Speaker 7: if you go by the CEO's comments just there, do
• 2:35
  Speaker 7: we believe this is a temporary measure? Do we believe
• 2:37
  Speaker 7: that a trade deal would restore some of these jobs?
• 2:41
  Speaker 7: I don't think, to Pierre Polyev's argument that a tariff-free
• 2:44
  Speaker 7: deal is on the table, but would some kind of
• 2:46
  Speaker 7: deal allow these jobs to come back? I think there's
• 2:50
  Speaker 7: a lot that still needs to be clarified, but I
• 2:54
  Speaker 7: think it's interesting from a political standpoint that we're talking
• 2:58
  Speaker 7: about nationalization at all, because it just seems that we're
• 3:02
  Speaker 7: in a world where ideas that a few years ago
• 3:05
  Speaker 7: people would have dismissed out of hand or been afraid
• 3:07
  Speaker 7: to even offer are coming up and being thrown out
• 3:11
  Speaker 7: rather quickly.
• 3:13
  Speaker 5: Well, yes.
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: And, you know, Supriya, you talk to anyone on the
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: Canadian side, they do not see a world in which
• 3:20
  Speaker 1: the Trump administration is around where you get to complete
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: free trade, zero tariffs on the sectoral things like steel. And,
• 3:27
  Speaker 1: you know, as Javier Lewis said, well, the government's buying
• 3:28
  Speaker 1: and building pipelines. Why not buy a steel plant? I
• 3:32
  Speaker 1: have no idea if that sells the argument or not.
• 3:36
  Speaker 1: What are your thoughts on what's being proposed here?
• 3:39
  Speaker 3: I mean, I think I'm a touch more skeptical than
• 3:41
  Speaker 3: Aaron that the PMO is going to entertain that sort
• 3:44
  Speaker 3: of argument. I would think that's something that they would
• 3:46
  Speaker 3: outright reject, and I would be surprised if somebody doesn't
• 3:50
  Speaker 3: put something out soon to reject it. But I think
• 3:54
  Speaker 3: the undercurrent of what both Avi Lewis has said and Ms.
• 3:58
  Speaker 3: Stiles of the Ontario NDP is correct. There is a
• 4:01
  Speaker 3: conflict of interest here of that CEO, right? There is
• 4:05
  Speaker 3: something to be said about you know, he's in favor
• 4:09
  Speaker 3: of the tariffs, while Stelco, they're maintaining that the reason
• 4:14
  Speaker 3: why they have to lay off so many workers is
• 4:15
  Speaker 3: largely because of the tariffs. So I don't know. Like,
• 4:19
  Speaker 3: there's very clearly only one party can be right, right? Like,
• 4:23
  Speaker 3: both Stelco and the government of Canada can't both be right.
• 4:26
  Speaker 3: One of them is very clearly misinterpreting the terms of
• 4:28
  Speaker 3: the contract. So my guess is we'll have an answer
• 4:30
  Speaker 3: in due time. But, you know, until then, there's a
• 4:33
  Speaker 3: lot of uncertainty for folks. And I was also very
• 4:36
  Speaker 3: curious about the language that the CEO of the parent
• 4:39
  Speaker 3: company there used with Rosemary on Air, because, like, of
• 4:42
  Speaker 3: course it doesn't say a contract you have to keep
• 4:45
  Speaker 3: every single person for the entirety of the five years.
• 4:48
  Speaker 3: I'm sure it's more general language. And the fact that
• 4:50
  Speaker 3: he went there with such specificity seems to me that
• 4:53
  Speaker 3: they have a losing argument on their hands.
• 4:56
  Speaker 4: Maybe.
• 4:57
  Speaker 1: I mean, I don't know, because the conditions, the fine
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: print of it all is confidential, as per the Investment Act,
• 5:03
  Speaker 1: and not necessarily public. But they're not, Amanda, giving in
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: to the demands to rehire people, though Mr. Gonsalves did
• 5:10
  Speaker 1: say this would be the last Thanksgiving where they don't
• 5:12
  Speaker 1: have work. I mean, steel is notoriously cyclical, driven by
• 5:17
  Speaker 1: economic ups and downs. But, I mean, how far do
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: you see the government of Canada pushing on this? They
• 5:23
  Speaker 1: could force divestment, I guess, if not nationalization or fines.
• 5:28
  Speaker 2: They could.
• 5:29
  Speaker 8: And certainly, actually, this is not the first time I've
• 5:31
  Speaker 8: heard the discussion argument saying this should be nationalized. Like,
• 5:34
  Speaker 8: even within the industry, let's say Stolico does go tools
• 5:38
  Speaker 8: down or continues to reduce its output, that's going to
• 5:41
  Speaker 8: have significant knock-on impacts to the Canadian economy, other areas,
• 5:45
  Speaker 8: you know. production of still roofs any kind of construction
• 5:48
  Speaker 8: work there like there's more job to play than this
• 5:51
  Speaker 8: in front of us but two of the things I
• 5:53
  Speaker 8: noticed one clearly the CEO has had some media training
• 5:56
  Speaker 8: since the last clip that I've been on the show
• 5:58
  Speaker 8: because he's remarkably more cogent than last time and Uh,
• 6:02
  Speaker 8: still fighting a losing battle in the Canadian marketplace. So
• 6:05
  Speaker 8: like if I was advising him, if they truly don't
• 6:07
  Speaker 8: care about staying in Canada, he shouldn't be showing up
• 6:09
  Speaker 8: to do those interviews. So clearly there's some bigger commercial
• 6:11
  Speaker 8: things at play than just, I'm going to take my
• 6:13
  Speaker 8: ball and go home to the U S. Uh, and second,
• 6:16
  Speaker 8: I would say the NDP, well, I don't love the
• 6:18
  Speaker 8: idea of nationalizing, uh, So the NDP has a good
• 6:22
  Speaker 8: argument here, right? It's a nice, simple argument for Avi
• 6:25
  Speaker 8: Lewis to make and the Ontario NDP leader to make,
• 6:28
  Speaker 8: which the governments candidly are unlikely to meet even if
• 6:31
  Speaker 8: they are building major pipelines. So I actually think politically
• 6:34
  Speaker 8: this is a smart play on their part, even if
• 6:37
  Speaker 8: it isn't economically maybe the best solution.
• 6:39
  Speaker 1: Yeah, look, the UK has just done this with British Steel,
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: if I've got the name of the company right. But,
• 6:44
  Speaker 1: you know, Nathan, if you look at some of the
• 6:46
  Speaker 1: comments that Mr. Gonsalves from Cleveland Cliffs has made about
• 6:49
  Speaker 1: supporting tariffs, He says he supports the tariffs against people
• 6:51
  Speaker 1: who dump steel into the United States, right? And I
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: think what, and I'm reverse engineering this, like, you know,
• 6:58
  Speaker 1: so bear with me. But, you know, acquiring Estelco to
• 7:02
  Speaker 1: marry with the Cleveland Cliffs operations is kind of hoping,
• 7:05
  Speaker 1: as the U.S. government is hoping, that Canada and Fortress
• 7:07
  Speaker 1: North America on steel tariffs, common alignment, and then could
• 7:11
  Speaker 1: dominate the North American steel market, right? But this may
• 7:15
  Speaker 1: be reaping and sowing and all of those things. They
• 7:19
  Speaker 1: find themselves in a situation that did not quite go
• 7:21
  Speaker 1: as hoped at time of purchase.
• 7:23
  Speaker 9: That's so 2024, right? Yes, it is. When the idea
• 7:27
  Speaker 9: was that we would have a continental industry. That's not
• 7:30
  Speaker 9: the plan anymore. I mean, this guy's out of central casting, right? Like,
• 7:34
  Speaker 9: he invited and welcomed in these tariffs. What is the
• 7:37
  Speaker 9: object of the tariffs? Their objective is to destroy Canadian industry.
• 7:41
  Speaker 9: He is part of destroying Canadian industry. I share my
• 7:46
  Speaker 9: colleague's view of nationalization as a big throw, but yet
• 7:51
  Speaker 9: here we are talking about a bad actor... supporting a
• 7:54
  Speaker 9: bad president whose intention has been declared over and over
• 7:59
  Speaker 9: again that he wants to destroy Canadian jobs. So I
• 8:01
  Speaker 9: don't think the federal government's response can be, we're going
• 8:05
  Speaker 9: to send you another letter if you don't follow the
• 8:08
  Speaker 9: first letter and agree to follow the agreement that you
• 8:11
  Speaker 9: signed a couple of years back to protect and maintain
• 8:14
  Speaker 9: Canadian jobs when you bought this mill. So I think
• 8:17
  Speaker 9: for Mr. Carney, I want to counter a little bit.
• 8:20
  Speaker 9: I was in Ottawa just last week sitting with senior Liberals,
• 8:23
  Speaker 9: And said, hey, nationalization would never happen. And I was
• 8:26
  Speaker 9: met by a lot of shrugs and maybes. Because what
• 8:30
  Speaker 9: are your alternatives as a federal government? Chase them through
• 8:32
  Speaker 9: the courts for years and years? What are you saying
• 8:35
  Speaker 9: to the families in Hamilton in that region? Don't worry,
• 8:38
  Speaker 9: we've got this in front of the courts with these
• 8:40
  Speaker 9: kinds of actors in play with Mr.
• 8:41
  Speaker 5: Trump.
• 8:42
  Speaker 9: In the White House, that's not going to be a
• 8:44
  Speaker 9: satisfying answer. I think the threat of nationalization or divestiture
• 8:48
  Speaker 9: is a good threat for Mr. Carney to have on
• 8:50
  Speaker 9: the table, frankly. Maybe it will help him with his
• 8:52
  Speaker 9: negotiations with this fellow who's gotten some media training, but still,
• 8:56
  Speaker 9: I don't think any of us trust his intentions. I
• 8:59
  Speaker 9: think he's looking to follow in Trump's absolute plan to
• 9:02
  Speaker 9: destroy Canadian jobs. and entire industries.
• 9:04
  Speaker 1: Well, but look, if you find them.
• 9:07
  Speaker 9: $ 25, 000 a day.
• 9:09
  Speaker 1: Yes, but then they could take that out on the workforce, right?
• 9:11
  Speaker 1: You know what I mean? If you weaken them financially,
• 9:13
  Speaker 1: you could trigger more job losses. It could have knockout
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: effects that maybe you don't want.
• 9:17
  Speaker 6: Maybe, maybe.
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: But like you, I spoke to some senior liberals last
• 9:20
  Speaker 1: week and said, would you really consider this? And they're like,
• 9:22
  Speaker 1: talk to me next week.
• 9:24
  Speaker 6: Yeah.
• 9:24
  Speaker 1: Like, oh, okay.
• 9:25
  Speaker 9: That's the response I got.
• 9:26
  Speaker 1: Yeah, but, you know, divestiture, maybe, I don't know. They've
• 9:29
  Speaker 1: not consulted me on this, Aaron. Yes, you know, because
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: I don't know anything about this stuff. But, you know,
• 9:34
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump would not react well to this, I would suspect,
• 9:38
  Speaker 1: if you were to take steps to nationalize a $ 3. 4
• 9:42
  Speaker 1: billion asset owned by a political supporter who is, you know,
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: a captain of the steel industry in the United States.
• 9:51
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean.
• 9:52
  Speaker 7: I think you always have to consider what the American
• 9:55
  Speaker 7: reaction is going to be. But I also, the flip
• 9:57
  Speaker 7: side of that is I don't know that you can
• 9:59
  Speaker 7: spend your time, if you're the prime minister, trying not
• 10:01
  Speaker 7: to make the president unhappy because I think he's going
• 10:04
  Speaker 7: to find reasons to be unhappy. And I think sometimes
• 10:07
  Speaker 7: you're going to have to do things that will make
• 10:08
  Speaker 7: him unhappy. I think, you know, so much of this
• 10:12
  Speaker 7: comes back to where do you think the future of
• 10:14
  Speaker 7: the American, the Canadian-American trade relationship is going exactly?
• 10:17
  Speaker 5: Exactly.
• 10:18
  Speaker 7: What do you think is the situation in which that
• 10:21
  Speaker 7: steel mill would continue to operate and then work backwards
• 10:25
  Speaker 7: from there? I think there are, you know, you're seeing
• 10:28
  Speaker 7: kind of, I think, two things. One is as much
• 10:30
  Speaker 7: as Canadians are geared up for this fight, there are
• 10:34
  Speaker 7: impacts of the fight and they're not all going to
• 10:36
  Speaker 7: be super pleasant. And the other piece of it is
• 10:40
  Speaker 7: trying to figure out what the long-term plan is for
• 10:43
  Speaker 7: the Canadian economy is. and then build policy around that.
• 10:46
  Speaker 7: And I think it's very hard to know at this
• 10:48
  Speaker 7: very moment what you can plan on in terms of
• 10:51
  Speaker 7: American tariffs, in terms of American trade five years, 10
• 10:54
  Speaker 7: years from now. And I think that just adds to
• 10:57
  Speaker 7: the challenge of what the Carney government's facing. I don't
• 11:01
  Speaker 7: know that that necessarily makes the case for nationalizing this plan.
• 11:06
  Speaker 7: But I do wonder whether it throws ideas like nationalization
• 11:10
  Speaker 7: on the table, where, as I said, a few years ago,
• 11:13
  Speaker 7: you would have never thought of doing such a thing.
• 11:15
  Speaker 1: Well, the Pipeline and Superior are kind of an example
• 11:18
  Speaker 1: of state capitalism. You know, like, we're getting into the
• 11:21
  Speaker 1: defense industrial policy, all of these things that is centrally
• 11:24
  Speaker 1: planned and managed and sort of, you know, risk mitigation
• 11:28
  Speaker 1: policies nonstop. But it's hard to figure out a full
• 11:31
  Speaker 1: plan picture for the Canadian economy until you know what's
• 11:34
  Speaker 1: happening with steel, aluminum, the auto sector. And we're in
• 11:37
  Speaker 1: this weird phase of we're not talking to each other formally.
• 11:40
  Speaker 1: The midterms are... couple of weeks away. And then there's
• 11:44
  Speaker 1: that January 1 tariff date where Trump is threatening to
• 11:47
  Speaker 1: nuke the entire North American auto sector, metaphorically, not literally, just.
• 11:50
  Speaker 6: To be clear.
• 11:52
  Speaker 5: I know. I know.
• 11:53
  Speaker 1: So I had to clarify what I was saying for
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: the audience. But Supriya, just your thoughts on just, you know,
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: over this weird moment in time we're in as all
• 12:00
  Speaker 1: of these things keep popping up because there's no resolution
• 12:03
  Speaker 1: to the bigger one.
• 12:05
  Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean, that's the giant question mark.
• 12:07
  Speaker 10: In all of this, right? And which is why I
• 12:09
  Speaker 10: find sometimes what comes out of the opposition leader's mouth
• 12:12
  Speaker 10: so disappointing, because when Pierre Polyev sits there and says
• 12:16
  Speaker 10: what we want is for them to get back to
• 12:17
  Speaker 10: the table and to get a tariff-free deal, it's like.
• 12:19
  Speaker 3: Yeah, bro, we all do. Like, of course, but, like,
• 12:22
  Speaker 3: how do you get back to the table with the
• 12:24
  Speaker 3: other party that's, like, fundamentally being so unreasonable, right? And
• 12:27
  Speaker 3: has said— the president has said, to Nathan's point, multiple times,
• 12:31
  Speaker 3: the entire goal— is to, like, level Canada to our knees, metaphorically, economically.
• 12:37
  Speaker 3: So it's very difficult to take those kinds of, you know,
• 12:42
  Speaker 3: suggestions or criticism seriously. But I take everybody's point that
• 12:46
  Speaker 3: we're in this very weird moment. I think the midterms, yes,
• 12:49
  Speaker 3: could possibly... change some things, although a lot of things
• 12:52
  Speaker 3: also still lie with executive authority and the president's pen.
• 12:55
  Speaker 3: And that's something we're going to have to contend with.
• 12:58
  Speaker 3: The other thing we have to contend with is that whomever,
• 13:00
  Speaker 3: you know, replaces Trump on the Republican side or even
• 13:05
  Speaker 3: on the Democratic side may not actually look at those tariffs.
• 13:08
  Speaker 7: And go, oh, you know what?
• 13:09
  Speaker 3: We need to get rid of all of them because
• 13:11
  Speaker 3: a lot of the Biden's, a lot of the Trump 1.0
• 13:14
  Speaker 3: stuff stayed consistent with Biden. And I think there's so
• 13:19
  Speaker 3: much uncertainty baked into this, which is why I think
• 13:21
  Speaker 3: somebody like the prime minister has the full faith of
• 13:24
  Speaker 3: Canadians right now, because I mean, again, like the dude
• 13:28
  Speaker 3: was like lab engineered for this specific political moment in time.
• 13:32
  Speaker 1: Yes, I remember when Joe Biden was elected and people
• 13:35
  Speaker 1: in Ottawa saying, the great thing about this is that
• 13:37
  Speaker 1: you're dealing with a conventional American president. The challenge is
• 13:40
  Speaker 1: that you're dealing with a conventional American president because, you know,
• 13:43
  Speaker 1: they're still the biggest bully on the block, even when
• 13:45
  Speaker 1: they're friendly about it.
• 13:47
  Speaker 2: We've got to leave it there.