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

[Dan Albas, Conservative, Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for Essex for not only his speech but also his constant steadiness at the transport committee. His community is well served by him.

I would like to ask him about something that is causing a lot of ruckus in Ontario: the Alto project. Bill C-39 would allow ministers to authorize early works. We saw in the Liberals' last omnibus bill that they basically gave expropriation powers, incredible bulldozing ability, to the Alto project to expropriate lands. Now they are going to have it where a minister can direct early works so they can get a project started, despite opposition in the communities, particularly in the rural areas of both Quebec and Ontario.

Could the member comment on whether he feels those people are being respected and whether the government could be more transparent about what it wants these powers for?

[Chris Lewis, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, to the hon. member, my very dear colleague, quite frankly, no, there is not enough transparency from the government. We continue to fall short. Every time we ask for a study, it is usually blocked at committee. When we get answers from the government on behalf of all of our constituents across many ridings in Ontario specifically, they always fall short.

The answer is that we need way more transparency. We are here as the official opposition, and we will continue to work for that transparency.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to understand the Conservative Party's position on Bill C‑39 and compare that with its position on Bill C‑5. Let us keep in mind that Bill C‑5 was passed under a gag order with the Conservative Party's support and that its purpose was to fast-track the development of major projects of national interest.

Today, we are considering a bill that makes it possible to circumvent certain environmental laws, not for five years, as set out in Bill C‑5, but indefinitely.

I would like my colleague to explain to me why he supported Bill C‑5, but today, he seems to think that Bill C‑39 still does not go far enough when it comes to projects of national interest.

[Chris Lewis, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Mr. Speaker, there was a bit of a delay, but I believe I got the majority of the question from my colleague down the aisle. I will do my very best to answer it.

Over the next three weeks, 6,400 people in Windsor-Essex will face being out of work right before Christmas. That is 6,400 people who can forget about a Thanksgiving dinner, because that is long gone, and who are going to have to figure out what it will look like under the tree.

We can talk all day long about the national projects that, quite frankly, never get started, and I respect my colleague, but I am really concerned about those 6,400 workers.

[Chi Nguyen, Liberal, Spadina—Harbourfront, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in this chamber to speak to Bill C-39, the building Canada strong act.

Over the past year, our government has been hard at work for Canadians at one of the most pivotal moments in our history. We continue to respond to the threats against our economy and to the social vulnerabilities that Canadians face every day. The trade war with the United States and recent tariffs have worsened many of these challenges, and as the world continues to rapidly change, Canadians expect us to act.

Our government was elected with a mandate to build a stronger, more resilient economy. For the past year and a half, we have been working hard to deliver on this mandate. We have strengthened the economy by cutting taxes for the middle class. We have eliminated the GST on new homes valued up to $1 million, helping first-time homebuyers save up to $50,000. We have partnered with the Government of Ontario to eliminate the full 13% of the HST on new homes valued up to $1 million, saving up to $130,000 for all buyers in Ontario.

We are seeing early and fast results. Our economy continues to show resilience, growing by 3.3% in Q2, the fastest in the G7. This summer, our government posted a record high of non-U.S. trade at $25.6 billion, with productivity rising by 4% in the second quarter, the largest increase since 2020. We have also introduced measures to address affordability for Canadians. Canadians expect us to continue this work.

The building Canada strong act is nation-building legislation. It is about how we invest today in Canadian infrastructure to shape our strength and resilience for generations to come. The building Canada strong act would bring greater speed, certainty and predictability to strengthen our economy, attract investment, create good union jobs and position Canada for long-term success in the 21st century.

As the Prime Minister has stated, Canada is a country of high standards, but high standards should not mean slow decisions. This legislation is one of the most ambitious reforms in recent history and is built knowing that in one year, with one consultation, we can come to one decision on some of the most critical projects in Canada's history. Our government knows that we cannot build a resilient economy without protecting the rights of workers and all Canadians who work hard every day to keep this country together. We will do this while upholding Canada's environmental standards and respecting indigenous rights.

Canada's long-term economic success depends on reliable and efficient transportation networks that connect businesses to domestic and international markets. My riding knows this very well. Spadina—Harbourfront lives at the intersection of trade, transportation and economic growth. From the port of Toronto to major rail corridors and regional transportation infrastructure, residents see how much of Canada's prosperity depends on our ability to move people and goods effectively. Bill C-39 would strengthen Canada's trade corridors and ports, helping Canadian goods move more quickly, unlock new markets and build more resilient supply chains.

For those who call our waterfront home, these waters are an integral part of our community and our economy. Our government has also made record investments to decarbonize our trade. The green shipping corridor program, with a total funding budget of nearly $150 million, is removing barriers to the adoption of emissions-reducing equipment and infrastructure.

We are introducing measures to embed indigenous representation in Canadian ports, amending the Canada Marine Act to establish indigenous advisory committees to enhance dialogue with indigenous communities. Indigenous consultation is essential to building the projects that Canada needs. Beyond ports, we cannot now or ever build without respecting indigenous rights and ensuring that indigenous communities are engaged as true, meaningful partners throughout this process.

This legislation builds on the important study undertaken by the transport, infrastructure and communities committee earlier this year through its study on Canada's ports. We heard from witnesses across the sector about the urgent need to improve supply chains, reduce bottlenecks, modernize port infrastructure and improve Canada's competitiveness as a trading nation. Bill C-39 responds directly to these challenges. It would create the conditions for a more reliable, resilient transportation system.

Our government knows that we cannot build a resilient economy without protecting the rights of workers and all Canadians who work hard every day to build this country. I am proud to come from a family of union workers. My riding also includes a strong union presence, including IATSE Locals 58 and 822, CUPE Local 79, USW Local 1998, SEIU, the Public Service Alliance of Canada, ACTRA, and the Canadian Media Guild, among many. Workers are critical to a strong Canadian economy.

The building Canada strong act would modernize the federal labour framework and strengthen protections for workers in federally regulated sectors, helping to support good jobs for a growing economy. The legislation would introduce greater transparency and accountability around the use of section 107 by requiring the minister to consider an independent special mediator's report and assess the national interest impacts of a dispute before exercising these authorities.

The special mediator is to ensure that disputes are approached through dialogue and negotiated solutions that reflect both the interests and needs of workers and the broader public interest. These changes would reinforce the central role of collective bargaining, encourage parties to resolve disputes at the bargaining table and fully protect the right to strike. Strong labour relations contribute to a stronger Canada.

Our government knows that we cannot build fast without ensuring we maintain high environmental standards. These projects, including transmission lines, hydro, renewables projects and critical minerals are necessary for our future and will also deliver good jobs and investment.

As a waterfront community, Spadina—Harbourfront understands that economic growth and environmental stewardship are not competing priorities. We all rely on clean water and healthy ecosystems. We all benefit from strong economic growth. Canadians want to see major projects move forward, but they also expect strong environmental safeguards. Our goal is to build faster where we can while continuing to preserve our environment for future generations.

Protecting these resources is a shared responsibility, which is why I welcome the work of my colleagues, the hon. Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, who just announced our new oceans protection plan, and the hon. Minister of Environment and Climate Change, who recently launched public consultations to inform Canada's first national water security strategy, soliciting input from Canadians from coast to coast to coast. This builds on the work we have already committed to, such as the Pacific salmon strategy initiative and the freshwater action plan.

Our government understands that in order to strengthen our ports, we need to also protect our waterways. These efforts go hand in hand. Our government understands that how we respond to climate change will shape our economy, our communities and our global standing for generations to come. Canada is rising to this challenge.

One bill does not capture the full scope of the work our government is doing. Bill C-39 is part of a broader strategy being taken to accelerate the development of nation-building projects. We must take a whole-of-government approach and consider how these measures, along with the actions we have taken over the past year, connect together.

We are creating jobs, strengthening trade and growing our economy while continuing to uphold Canada's high environmental standards. This legislation would also establish clearer, simpler and more predictable processes for project proponents and indigenous groups participating in project consultations, giving investors the clarity they need to put capital to work and build in Canada.

No efforts we make happen in isolation, and if we are to work together towards the shared ambition of building Canada strong for all, we must start with understanding how we can rebalance our systems. Before I was an elected member of this House, I worked on building system solutions to our most intractable challenges, such as affordable housing, gender-based violence and social financing. These experiences reinforced for me the importance of ambitious public policy.

Governments have a responsibility not only to respond to challenges, but also to help shape the conditions for long-term prosperity. Bill C-39 recognizes that government has a role to play in helping Canada build, compete and grow while ensuring that the benefits of that growth are shared across the country. As Professor Mariana Mazzucato at University College of London describes, we must believe in our power to shape markets, direct innovation and lead social transformation. An element she defines as critical for achieving the common good is this idea of access for all and reward sharing.

This is a moment that calls for ambition. Bill C-39 would help Canada build faster and compete in a changing world. I will support it, and I encourage all members of this House to do the same.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I heard my colleague say in her speech that Bill C‑39 would uphold high environmental standards. Under the bill, it is possible to start a project without even conducting environmental assessments. Where are the high environmental standards? A minister can decide to circumvent all laws currently on the books.

Where are the high environmental standards? Can my colleague briefly explain that?

[Chi Nguyen, Liberal, Spadina—Harbourfront, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as a mom of two kids, I am often thinking about the future that we are building for this country. I strongly believe that we are finding an approach and a process that allows us to move more quickly while still putting the work in place to do the assessments and make sure that the rigour is in place for us to move forward on these major projects.

[Will Greaves, Liberal, Victoria, BC]

Mr. Speaker, like the member, I represent an urban riding, but also a waterfront riding. It is one of the defining features of our communities and really underscores the tremendous importance to our constituents of ensuring the protection and preservation of our incredible freshwater resources in this country. That is why one of the pieces of this bill that I personally have found encouraging is the fact that it is not a one-year timeline to get to “yes”. It is a one-year timeline to get a determination on whether or not a project will go forward, and a timely period for proponents to know whether or not their projects will go ahead.

I wonder if my hon. colleague could speak to whether or not that timeline, and the possibility of projects that are not in the public interest and would not serve my constituents nor hers, is a sound part of her support for this bill.

[Chi Nguyen, Liberal, Spadina—Harbourfront, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I think this approach of making sure that we put the steps in place to get to the right decision, but knowing that the work, the assessments, all of those pieces are still there as part of the process, allows us to move with the speed and the efficiency that we are looking for in order to make the investments that we need for our future.

[Maxime Blanchette-Joncas, Bloc, Rimouski—La Matapédia, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out that my colleague has not answered my question. She spoke of high environmental standards. Project assessments must take less than a year. Regardless of the project of national interest in question, the government alone determines what constitutes national interest. Those are not high environmental standards.

The simple question I am asking my colleague is this: Can she explain how conducting botched environmental assessments within a single year, regardless of the project, is consistent with the “high environmental standards” she talked about in her speech?

[Chi Nguyen, Liberal, Spadina—Harbourfront, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I think it is really important to recognize that the bill would address changes in governance as well to the ports and other parts of the ecosystem. In terms of making sure that those assessments are done appropriately and well, we are getting to a decision point about whether to move forward. This does not mean that all of the work is completed, but all of those efforts are going to be in place.

[Karim Bardeesy, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Industry]

Mr. Speaker, at the end of my colleague's speech, she made a reference to Mariana Mazzucato's work around a state that has the capacity to do things. I wonder if she could add a reflection about why it is important to have a state, the officers of government and the departments of government, with the ability to move in a coordinated fashion to achieve big things, as Mazzucato writes.

[Chi Nguyen, Liberal, Spadina—Harbourfront, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I might have a slight obsession with Professor Mazzucato's work. I think the emphasis on real principles around how we operate toward the common good is really critical: transparency, co-design and collaboration. She has a new book that has just been released. It sends some signals to me about the ways we can use government to catalyze the best interests of us all.

[Caroline Desrochers, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Housing and Infrastructure]

Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise this evening and speak on behalf of the constituents in my riding, Trois‑Rivières.

Trois‑Rivières has been a port city since 1634 and will soon be celebrating its 400th anniversary. It is a city of trade, industry and workers. Canada's first iron ore plant opened in Trois‑Rivières nearly 300 years ago. Trois‑Rivières was long the 20th century's paper-making capital of the world. It holds a central place in Canada's industrial development, even thought it has had to reinvent itself now and then, successfully, as technology and geopolitics evolved. The resilience and adaptability shown by Trois‑Rivières over the years are really the focus of what I want to talk about today. The global situation facing us now demands that we exercise that resilience and adaptability.

Ten years ago, a trade war like the one we are experiencing today would have been unimaginable. We did not ask for this war, but we will continue to stand our ground, come what may. Families, workers and businesses are feeling the effects of this trade conflict every day. That is why we cannot just keep doing things the way we always have. We need to rethink how we invest in, develop and build the infrastructure underpinning all of this. That raises a simple question: How do we re-envision the future and how do we ensure we have the means to achieve our ambitions? This is the reality and the drive to survive that gave rise to Bill C‑39.

Canada has what the world wants: energy, critical minerals, steel, aluminum, forest resources and world-renowned industrial expertise. The Prime Minister has been clear about our ambition to make Canada an energy superpower in both renewable and conventional energy. However, possessing these resources is not enough. We need to be able to develop them, process them and generate greater value from them here in Canada. Canadians must be able to reap the benefits of these investments and these assets.

This means we need to rethink our supply chains. What do we import and export? What can we produce and, in particular, what can we process here at home to add more value to our economy and more value for Canadians? We need to build more, and we need to build more of what we need.

That is especially important in terms of critical minerals, steel and aluminum. It is also essential for the forestry sector, which is currently going through a difficult period and remains top of mind for us. Since the spring, our government has signed more than 20 new economic and security agreements, and we have launched more than 27 nationwide initiatives. These efforts have helped support 337,000 jobs and nearly $200 billion in new investments. We need to make sure that we have the infrastructure we need to meet the expectations and respond to the opportunities we created with these trade agreements, both with our international partners and with our SMEs. The potential is even greater. The message is clear. We must create the conditions that lead to investments.

Bill C-39 proposes to overhaul the way we carry out our major projects. What we are proposing is one project, one assessment, and a decision all within one year. The goal is not to conduct fewer assessments or to be less rigorous, but rather to coordinate things more effectively, to clarify the decision-making process, and to run the processes in parallel to speed things up.

Seven provinces have already signed co-operation agreements to reduce duplication among governments, because they know that this hinders the smooth functioning and economic development of our country. Environmental standards remain rigorous, and the rights of indigenous peoples, as well as our commitment to consultation and participation, remain unchanged. This is not just about consultation, but also about the participation of indigenous peoples in these major projects.

For businesses that want to invest here, whether they are from Quebec, Canada, or abroad, predictability is essential. Every month of delay can drive up costs and delay the investments that our communities, families and workers need. That is why we are picking up the pace.

For Trois‑Rivières, this is a practical issue. The Port of Trois-Rivières is one of 17 Canadian port authorities. In 2025, the port of Trois-Rivières handled 2.6 million tonnes of cargo, 65,000 trucks, 11,000 rail cars and more than 240 ships. It is connected to 100-plus ports in over 40 countries. It is a hub for Canada's steel and aluminum trade.

Fifty per cent of the goods handled at the port of Trois-Rivières are critical minerals. The trade diversification corridors fund could help improve the efficiency of these activities with new, state-of-the-art equipment.

Bill C-39 modernizes port governance, clarifies certain rules, facilitates the digitalization of trade and reduces red tape. However, a port cannot operate alone. The St. Lawrence River remains one of our most important trade corridors, and we have to think of our network as a whole, including ports, railways, roads and airports. Their proper operation is vital to both Canada and our international partners. We must therefore identify bottlenecks and invest where it can make the biggest difference. The Churchill Falls and Contrecoeur projects illustrate the importance of this approach. We must ensure that we can move our products as efficiently as possible.

It is also a matter of productivity. A more efficient transportation system makes our businesses more competitive. Unfortunately, for too long now, Canada's transportation system has been one of the least competitive and least productive in the world. We need to make the necessary investments to improve our transportation system's productivity. We owe it to our businesses, to our families and to workers.

This potential is already clear in Trois‑Rivières. The new airport terminal, which opened last year, includes a 9,000-foot runway and increases opportunities for freight transport and aircraft maintenance. I attended the opening ceremony, and I can say that the project does a good job of demonstrating our region's potential. Trois‑Rivières brings together the maritime, rail, road and air networks; they are just a few minutes apart.

That is exactly why a bill like Bill C‑39 can help the regions position themselves well and play the role of economic lever that our country needs. It allows for the right investments to make it possible to link all the points together, facilitate trade and transport goods. We might think of our development intentions in the north, the commitments we have made to develop the north and secure the Arctic, as well as the diversification of our trade.

We have also spent a great deal of time in the House discussing Alto. My colleague may speak to that shortly. Trois‑Rivières is one of the seven stations planned for Alto's future rail link between Toronto and Quebec City. We are very eager to see this project move forward. For projects of this scale to proceed, federal processes must be coordinated and predictable.

Of course, our infrastructure is only as effective as the workers who keep it running. Longshore workers, truck drivers, railway workers, industrial workers and unions are the lifeblood of our economy. I would note that 95% of collective agreements in the federally regulated sector are concluded without a work stoppage.

Bill C‑39 seeks, among other things, to encourage earlier negotiations and greater use of mediation. Section 107 remains subject to clear safeguards. In fact, additional guardrails are being put in place. The minister must take into account the report of an independent special mediator as well as the impact on the national interest. The right to strike remains protected.

Further centralization is not the aim. The aim is to make processes more predictable and reduce duplication. Greater predictability also means fewer disruptions for our businesses and our workers. If we want to strengthen our ties with Europe, as our colleagues in the Bloc Québécois are so keen to see, we must have the infrastructure required to get our products to those markets. To my Conservative colleagues, I would say that there is no need to choose between the environment and the economy. We have said this many times. Speeding up a project does not mean abandoning our environmental protections.

Trois-Rivières has been helping to build Canada for nearly four centuries—just take look at our paper, aluminum, grain, transportation and industry. Today, we have the opportunity to help build the Canada of tomorrow. The world has changed, and our ways of doing things must evolve with it.

I call on my colleagues to support Bill C-39 so that it can be referred to committee.

[Jim Belanger, Conservative, Sudbury East—Manitoulin—Nickel Belt, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I heard my colleague say that we cannot keep doing things the way we always have and that the goal is to improve the Canadian economy. My question is this. Why did it take the Liberal government over 10 years to realize that we cannot keep doing things the way we always have?