Bill C-39

Building Canada Strong Act

An Act respecting certain measures to strengthen the economy

Part 1 implements certain measures in relation to project evaluations.
Division 1 of Part 1 amends the Impact Assessment Act to, among other things,
(a) provide that the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission is to conduct the impact assessment of a designated project that includes activities that are regulated under the Nuclear Safety and Control Act ;
(b) authorize the Minister of the Environment to grant certain federal authorizations that are required in respect of a designated project at the same time that the Minister issues a decision statement in respect of the project;
(c) ensure that a decision statement in respect of a designated project for which the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada conducts the impact assessment is issued within one year after the proponent provides the required information or studies;
(d) provide for the coordination of the impact assessment of designated projects and the review processes for certain federal authorizations that are required in respect of those projects; and
(e) provide for the coordination of consultations with Indigenous groups.
Division 2 of Part 1 amends the Building Canada Act to, among other things,
(a) establish, for certain types of projects located within a region of national interest, a similar framework to the one applicable to national interest projects;
(b) allow the minister designated under that Act to add, remove or amend any condition in respect of an authorization that was granted for a national interest project before the name of that project was added to Schedule 1 to that Act;
(c) ensure that obligations to make information public associated with decisions made under that Act are administratively feasible; and
(d) authorize the Governor in Council to add the name of a region to a new schedule to that Act if the Governor in Council is of the opinion, having regard to certain factors, that the designation of that region is in the national interest.
Division 3 of Part 1 amends the Canadian Energy Regulator Act to, among other things,
(a) ensure decisions in respect of pipelines, designated power lines and offshore renewable energy projects are issued within one year of receiving the required information and studies;
(b) provide for the coordination of consultations with Indigenous peoples of Canada in respect of pipelines, designated power lines and offshore renewable energy projects;
(c) provide for the coordination of federal authorizations in respect of pipelines, designated power lines and offshore renewable energy projects with federal authorities;
(d) provide that the Commission is the sole assessor of applications in respect of pipelines, designated power lines and offshore renewable energy projects;
(e) provide authority for the Commission to
(i) make decisions in respect of applications relating to pipelines, designated power lines and offshore renewable energy projects, unless otherwise specified in the Act,
(ii) exempt certain pipelines or branches of or extensions to pipelines from the application of certain provisions, and
(iii) integrate a detailed route hearing into an ongoing hearing; and
(f) provide that the Governor in Council is to determine whether certain pipelines and designated power lines are in the public interest.
It also makes consequential amendments to the Federal Courts Act and the Northern Pipeline Act .
Division 4 of Part 1 amends the Canadian Navigable Waters Act to require the Minister of Transport to, among other things, take into account the feasibility of the terms and conditions in respect of an approval relating to certain works. It also transfers to that Minister the power to exempt bodies of water from the application of certain provisions of the Act if that Minister is satisfied that it would be in the public interest. Finally, it allows the Governor in Council to make regulations to exclude structures, devices or other things from the definition “work” to avoid duplication with other Acts and regulations.
Division 5 of Part 1 amends the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 to, among other things,
(a) ensure that environmental protection compliance orders may be issued with respect to any thing to which that Act applies and to non-continuing offences, including with respect to contravening imports;
(b) broaden the scope of such orders by permitting an enforcement officer to direct a person to take additional measures, such as managing contravening imports in the manner specified in the order, returning them to their place of origin or removing them from Canada; and
(c) provide that certain permits issued under that Act may, in certain circumstances, be valid for more than one year.
Division 6 of Part 1 amends the Species at Risk Act to, among other things, require the competent minister to take into account the feasibility of the terms and conditions in respect of certain agreements and permits.
Division 7 of Part 1 amends the Fisheries Act to, among other things,
(a) modify the fish habitat bank regime to allow for the use of habitat credits by third parties;
(b) authorize the making of regulations respecting the circumstances in which a person who is authorized to carry on a work, undertaking or activity may pay a fee to offset adverse effects on fish and fish habitat and provide for these fees to be credited to the Environmental Damages Fund; and
(c) transfer certain regulation-making powers from the Governor in Council to the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans.
Part 2 implements certain measures in relation to supply chains.
Division 1 of Part 2 amends the Department of Transport Act to provide the Minister of Transport with the power to establish a transportation project office that coordinates review processes for federal authorizations and consultations with respect to transportation projects.
Division 2 of Part 2 amends the Canada Transportation Act to, among other things,
(a) provide that the Minister of Transport may designate geographic areas as trade corridors and establish the National Trade Corridors Council, whose mandate is to monitor the movement of goods in trade corridors, analyze disruptions that may affect trade corridors and make recommendations and provide advice to that Minister;
(b) provide that Minister with the authority to make regulations to give effect to international standards or ensure compliance with Canada’s international obligations;
(c) expand the purposes for which that Minister may request that federal departments and agencies provide information that has already been provided by regulated entities to those federal departments and agencies;
(d) clarify the application of the requirement to notify that Minister of proposed transactions involving transportation undertakings;
(e) reduce the threshold for the requirement to notify that Minister and the Commissioner of Competition of proposed transactions involving transportation undertakings situated in a “port”, as defined in section 5 of the Canada Marine Act ;
(f) provide that that Minister may, for any purpose related to transportation security or safety, to the integrity of the national transportation system or to public safety or for any purpose specified by order, grant, suspend or cancel security clearances;
(g) authorize, for the purposes of administering and enforcing the security clearances regime, certain individuals or entities to collect information from and disclose information to each other;
(h) authorize the Governor in Council to make regulations respecting security clearances;
(i) expand the exceptions to the requirement to obtain the Canadian Transportation Agency’s approval for the construction of railway lines; and
(j) establish, for a period of four years, a zone in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta in which any interswitching that occurs is subject to the rate determined by the Canadian Transportation Agency.
Division 3 of Part 2 amends the Canada Marine Act to, among other things,
(a) authorize the Governor in Council to allow a port authority to enter into joint-liability arrangements and to create entities other than wholly-owned subsidiaries to undertake activities within or outside the limits of the port;
(b) authorize the Minister of Transport to appoint certain directors of a port authority;
(c) add principles that a port authority must observe when fixing port fees and expand the grounds on which a fee-related complaint may be filed with the Canadian Transportation Agency;
(d) authorize the Governor in Council to appoint, in certain circumstances, an administrator for a not-for-profit corporation that has entered into an agreement in respect of the St. Lawrence Seaway;
(e) authorize that Minister to terminate such an agreement or any part of one and provide for a dispute resolution process to deal with any disputes arising from the termination; and
(f) authorize that Minister to require that any of the following persons take measures to prevent or mitigate certain threats or stop any activity that would contribute to such threats:
(i) a port authority,
(ii) a person in charge of a port facility,
(iii) a person responsible for the management and operation of all or part of the St. Lawrence Seaway or for any works, undertakings or property used in the operation of the Seaway,
(iv) an occupier or person in charge of any federal real property, or any federal immovable, that is subject to being administered under Part 3 of that Act.
It also makes consequential amendments to the Port Authorities Operations Regulations .
Division 4 of Part 2 amends the Marine Liability Act to, among other things,
(a) modify the definition “receiver” to refer to the person who physically receives bulk hazardous and noxious substances carried by sea as cargo and discharged at a port or terminal in Canada; and
(b) harmonize the inspection and enforcement provisions relating to that person.
It also makes related amendments to the Safeguarding Canada’s Seas and Skies Act .
Division 5 of Part 2 amends the Coasting Trade Act to allow foreign ships or non-duty paid ships to engage, without a licence, in activities in response to a declared emergency.
Division 6 of Part 2 repeals the Shipping Conferences Exemption Act, 1987 and makes a consequential amendment to the Access to Information Act .
Division 7 of Part 2 amends the International Bridges and Tunnels Act to allow the Minister of Transport to make certain decisions that were previously made exclusively by the Governor in Council.
Division 8 of Part 2 enacts the Enabling Digital Trade Act which, among other things,
(a) sets out the rules for the use of electronic trade documents as the functional equivalents to paper trade documents that are related to trade in goods;
(b) eliminates the requirement to provide information to the Government of Canada in physical form in relation to the importation or exportation of goods; and
(c) permits a federal minister, or an officer or employee of a department or agency of the Government of Canada, to disclose information that is related to the importation or exportation of goods if the receiving minister, department or agency of the government is permitted by law to collect that information.
Part 3 implements certain measures related to the work force.
Division 1 of Part 3 amends the Canada Labour Code to, among other things,
(a) establish new requirements and timelines related to collective bargaining;
(b) provide for the transfer of certain rights in the context of certain contractors being replaced by new contractors;
(c) establish new requirements and authorities in relation to entering into first collective agreements;
(d) provide that the Canada Industrial Relations Board may certify a trade union as the bargaining agent for existing bargaining units in certain industries in certain geographic areas on application of two or more employers, on referral of the Minister of Labour or on that Board’s initiative;
(e) confer on the Minister of Labour the power to appoint a special mediator to assist parties in settling a dispute that arises in connection with the entering into, renewal or revision of a collective agreement; and
(f) establish new requirements for that Minister to direct the Canada Industrial Relations Board to take measures under section 107 of that Act.
It also makes consequential amendments to certain regulations.
Division 2 of Part 3 amends the Canada Labour Code to, among other things,
(a) authorize the Head of Compliance and Enforcement to issue a settlement enforcement order requiring an employer or director of a corporation to pay any outstanding amounts that are to be paid under a settlement with an employee; and
(b) permit an order to debtor to be issued, in certain circumstances, before a settlement enforcement order or payment order has been issued.
Division 3 of Part 3 provides that Division XIII of Part III of the Canada Labour Code does not apply to an employer and employees who are parties to a collective agreement that confers rights and benefits at least as favourable as those conferred by that Division XIII with respect to medical leave of absence with pay.
Division 4 of Part 3 amends the Wage Earner Protection Program Act to, among other things, define the term “former employer” for the purposes of that Act and to specify that the Minister may confirm, vary or rescind a determination of eligibility even without a request for review.

Building Canada Strong Act

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should be reminded that we are talking about Bill C-39, the build Canada act for major projects across the country of major significance. The current government has done none of that. It has not put a shovel in the ground. It is all talk and no action.

The Prime Minister is flying all over the world, making agreements and signing things. He brings nothing into the House to be discussed and there is no debate whatsoever in committee, yet, here we are now talking about Bill C-39, a rehash of Bill C-5 of 18 months ago. I commend the member for his question and I hope that he actually does see some action in his riding.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the speech my colleague gave on the headlines but no deadlines bill. He mentioned that the bill was called “building Canada”. We had that bill ourselves, as I recall, under Harper. Would he make the distinction between this new bill that they call “building Canada strong”, but is actually the headlines without deadlines bill, and the bill that we put in after 2008 that actually got things built very quickly?

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the colleague for recalling a time when the government actually took these projects seriously and when a minister took action.

Minister Baird, at the time in charge of infrastructure, sat down with his colleagues in the ministry. He gave them a directive to fast-track the approval process down to a one-page application and that resulted in 23,500 projects being built. The current government and this Prime Minister have built 14 new offices. Can members believe it? They built 14 new centres for people to make decisions, just bloating and bloating the democracy with zero results for Canadians and not a single shovel in the ground.

[Alexis Deschênes, Bloc, Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine—Listuguj, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his contribution. I hold him in high regard. I would like to hear his perspective on the idea that the minister could conduct regional assessments and then designate a region as being of national interest. Once that happens, authorizations would be deemed to have been granted.

Under Bill C‑39, all the minister would have to do to designate a region as being of national interest is conduct a regional assessment. The minister will set the terms of reference, select the members and constitute the regional assessment committee himself. Does my colleague consider this to be a rigorous approach?

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Aurora—Oak Ridges—Richmond Hill, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the hon. member's very intelligent and informed question.

What this bill would do, as we have seen in previous bills that the tired Liberal government has brought forth, is centralize more and more power in the hands of the minister and the Prime Minister. What we have seen from the current government is a lack of respect for the people's voice, a lack of respect for Parliament. Arbitrarily, the Liberals can make decisions, and we know where we will find out about it: in news stories and news headlines.

It is totally wrong. As parliamentarians, we have no confidence that the government should be given the full authority to make these decisions and then simply inform us through the media. This is the place to bring the legislation in and debate it properly in committee and in the House of Commons.

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Minister of Jobs and Families and Minister responsible for the Federal Economic Development Agency for Northern Ontario]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise in the House to highlight the labour components of Bill C-39. Today, I will outline the labour components of the bill and how they would strengthen labour relations in federally regulated sectors.

We know that a strong economy depends on a strong workforce and strong relationships between workers and their employers.

Workplaces with healthy labour relations have the stability and the confidence to invest and grow. The labour components of the bill are designed to strengthen good-faith bargaining and worker protections in Canada's federally regulated workplaces. The Canada Labour Code is a framework that supports workers and employers in federally regulated sectors, such as interprovincial transportation, banking and telecommunications. The framework and the tools within it help 95% of federally regulated workplaces renew their collective agreements without labour disruption. For the other 5%, getting to a renewed agreement is much more difficult and some present cycles of an inability to conclude agreements without labour disruption.

This cycle is often self-reinforcing, as relationships between workers and the employer often remain strained. The inability to resolve their disputes together further places the next collective bargaining process at risk. This is unfortunate, because all parties agree that the best deals are the ones that they arrive at together.

We asked employers, workers and Canadians how to improve the tools of the federal government that are offered to parties and that can help them get to agreements in a better way. We heard that, for the most part, Canada's labour relations system works well. We also heard that existing tools do not always help resolve the most complex and contentious disputes. That is why Bill C-39 focuses first and foremost on strengthening the tools, supports and processes to help workers and employers find solutions together.

The bill focuses on three priorities.

First, we would be modernizing collective bargaining with strengthened tools and additional supports. This means earlier engagement, helping to rebuild labour management relationships following disputes, adding supports for first collective agreements, providing more time for parties to reach an agreement and laying the groundwork for expedited grievance arbitration and an administrative monetary penalty regime for bad-faith bargaining.

Second, the bill would strengthen workers' protections. We would increase our government's capacity to protect workers from wage theft, misclassification and workplace accidents, and we would make it easier for the conclusion of a first collective agreement. We would also protect airport workers by preserving their union representation and collective agreements when contracts change hands.

Finally, we would be clarifying section 107 of the Labour Code and defining clear requirements for the use of this last resort tool. It bears repeating that 95% of federal collective agreements are renewed without labour disruption. The new tools in Bill C-39 are designed to help parties in high conflict focus on transparent solution-focused bargaining. The bill would also place clear guardrails around the use of section 107, which permits a minister to refer a dispute to the Canada Industrial Relations Board.

The use of section 107 would move to a tool of last resort, only usable once parties had gone through an intensive, transparent process to resolve their differences and only usable after a strike begins. First, a special mediator would be appointed to work intensively with the parties and help them reach an agreement. The parties would then have five days after the receipt of the report from the mediator to get to an agreement. If the parties were still not able to resolve their differences, the special mediator report would be made public. Second, an assessment of national interest would be made that considers economic impact and social impact, and balances the constitutional right to strike. Third, importantly, a strike would actually need to have commenced. This new guardrail would prevent the pre-emptive use of section 107, strengthening workers' rights to strike.

The overwhelming majority of collective bargaining negotiations will proceed as usual.

Canada's workers are the foundation of a stronger Canada.

Every major project, every infrastructure and every opportunity to grow our economy depends on Canadian workers. A stronger workforce means a stronger economy. A stronger economy means a stronger Canada.

These labour measures would help build Canada strong.

[Cheryl Gallant, Conservative, Algonquin—Renfrew—Pembroke, ON]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday morning, I woke up and I thought there was an air raid going off. I heard sirens. I did not feel any bombs drop. I looked out the window and did not see any buildings on fire nearby. These sirens kept on going. This morning, I walked down Sparks Street on the way to West Block, and I heard these sirens again. It was members of the public service striking, and they had this siren that sounded like an air horn or an air raid.

If the workers, for whom this legislation is supposed to be so beneficial, are opposing it so vociferously, how is it going to be good for them? Why are they so opposed to it?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we worked extensively with employers and labour unions, and of course Canadians, who all told us that it is very important to uphold a collective right to strike. It is in our Constitution. That is exactly what this legislation would do. It would address the challenges that workers are having in their workplaces, in particular around those first collective agreements, which can also be very difficult to arrive at. Importantly, it would strengthen workers' rights to be able to pursue a strike without the pre-emptive interference of the government.

Finally, it would put the onus on the parties themselves to get to an agreement by using new tools, especially in high-conflict relationships. That is a very important new process that I believe will help parties get a deal at the table where it ought to be made.

[Alexis Deschênes, Bloc, Gaspésie—Les Îles-de-la-Madeleine—Listuguj, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for her contribution to the debate, and I want to draw her attention to an issue that goes beyond Bill C-39: the centralization of power.

In several sections of the bill, authority that previously rested with cabinet, for instance, will be delegated to a minister. This will result in fewer and fewer people being involved in decision-making. When it comes to the regional assessments that will lead to the creation of regions of national interest, this is exactly what will happen. As a result, it will be the minister who sets the terms of reference to determine which types of development projects will be pre-approved in a region.

Is my colleague not concerned, as I am, that all this centralization of power could open the door to abuses?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Labour does have the responsibility and the right to use the Canada Labour Code to foster industrial peace. Section 107 is not the only tool that ministers have used in the past to end labour disruption because of national economic interest. As the member would know, this House has been used to pass back-to-work legislation, which is obviously a worst-case scenario for everyone, including the employers, the employees and certainly the government.

The legislation that we are proposing today in Bill C-39 would actually bring the responsibility back to the table, between the employers and the workers, where that decision ought to be made, to form collective agreements to help workers and companies into the next—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

Questions and comments, the hon. parliamentary secretary to the government House leader.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, over the last 18 months, whether it has been a minister or the Prime Minister, we have heard about how we are going to build a stronger and healthier Canada. A major component of that is unionized labour.

We constantly hear about the government's desire to encourage, promote and get unionized labour involved in the building of a stronger Canada because we cannot do it without it. We have excellent programs such as the Red Seal program, and the enhancement and promotion of it.

I am wondering if the member can provide her thoughts on that aspect of labour.

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has risen many times and talked about the importance of good union jobs as an outcome of build Canada strong. In fact, that is why the Building Trades Unions stood with the Prime Minister a year ago or so as we announced the creation of the Major Projects Office. It is why it has been so supportive of the team Canada strong approach to ensuring that young people choose the trades and that apprentices can complete their studies, resulting in full Red Seal certification.

I will say, as a proud mother of a Red Seal crane operator, this is something that I know is very important, and we have these incredible professionals across the country who can help build Canada strong.

[Heather McPherson, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Mr. Speaker, of course, we have heard from unionized labour. We have heard from the Canadian Labour Congress. We have heard from Unifor, CUPE, ILWU and USW, and these unions have been very clear: this is a red line for them. In fact, the CLC did a legal analysis and found that this would give more powers to the Liberal government than any legislation in any other G7 country.

How does the minister feel when she says that this would enable more rights for workers, yet every single union that has told her that they cannot support this says the opposite?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I would point out that section 107, a contentious part of the Canada Labour Code, has been used pre-emptively two times in the past. In fact, we are responding to unions' concerns that this particular part of the code could be used to pre-emptively prevent a strike from occurring. We have said that is unconstitutional, so we have put guardrails around this particular piece of the code, which must, in my opinion, remain there as an emergency piece of the code for when parties are at an impasse and a strike has no end.

The point is that we will be there to support employers and workers in getting to those collective agreements, and we will respect Canadians' right to strike.