Many have asked what my thoughts are regarding the labour dispute at Electro-Motive Diesel (EMD). Please be assured that I am committed to sustaining and creating jobs in our community.  Below are my responses to frequently asked questions surrounding the unfortunate situation at EMD.

Q:  Why are you not on the picket lines with locked-out EMD workers?

I’d like this lock-out to end as soon as possible, with both sides coming to the bargaining table to reach an amicable solution.  However, this could be jeopardized if I were to provide public opinion or comment condemning either side of the negotiations.  As opposed to providing empty rhetoric, I want the workers at EMD to be back at work as quickly as possible providing their second-to-none skills.  I strongly support continued EMD operations in London and I remain hopeful that an amicable solution can be found that benefits EMD employees and their families.

Q:  Why is the federal government not intervening?

The Federal government does not have jurisdiction over this dispute.  The Government of Canada holds jurisdiction over federally-regulated workplaces, Crown Corporations, and the federal Public Service.   Many have pointed to the example of recent labour disputes at Canada Post and Air Canada (one a Crown Corporation, the other a federally-regulated workplace) as examples of federal intervention. Unfortunately, EMD is a private company and not a federally-regulated workplace.  It falls under the jurisdiction of the Province of Ontario.  Thus, the Government of Canada cannot intervene in this labour dispute.

Q:  But EMD received federal Government tax-breaks. Why was this done?

Our Conservative Government is squarely focused on what matters to Canadians – jobs and economic growth.  Only a few weeks ago, the IMF praised Canada’s “macroeconomic management and financial sector oversight, which have enabled Canada to weather the global crisis well.”  It has been suggested that EMD was given direct financial benefits from the Government of Canada.  This is not the case.  A few years ago, an announcement was made at the EMD plant highlighting tax changes that would benefit the clients of EMD and other related manufacturers.  Both the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology and the Standing Committee on Finance recommended an increase to the Capital Cost Allowance (CCA) rate on rail equipment.  Budget 2008 increased the CCA rate for railway locomotives to 30 per cent from 15 per cent. This change ensured that the CCA rate for railway locomotives better reflects the useful life of these assets. It also encourages rail operators to acquire a newer, more fuel-efficient fleet of locomotives (e.g. hybrid locomotives), which provide a more environmentally-friendly mode of transportation.  This change is effective for new locomotives acquired on or after February 26, 2008, as well as for reconditioning and refurbishing costs incurred on or after February 26, 2008.

The tax incentives highlighted during the Prime Minister’s visit to the EMD plant have allowed manufacturers, including EMD, to invest in much-needed manufacturing equipment to improve productivity and keep jobs in Canada.

This has been an extraordinarily successful part of our tax plan for jobs and growth.  The NDP and Liberal reckless approach of higher taxes would have a deleterious effect on jobs and the economy.

Q:  Why did the federal government not negotiate assurances when Caterpillar bought the company?

The Investment Canada Act did not apply to the transaction of EMD due to the small size of the transaction.  It is important to note that, since the 1930’s, the EMD plant has been under American ownership.

Creating and sustaining jobs in our city is a serious priority.  I know that this situation is exceptionally stressful for the workers, their families, and our communities.  I remain hopeful that both the Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) and EMD can return to the bargaining table and find an amicable solution as soon as possible.

Thank you to my colleague Susan Truppe for her collaboration.