Building Canada Strong Act

An Act respecting certain measures to strengthen the economy

Sponsor

Steven MacKinnon  Liberal

Status

In committee (House), as of Oct. 8, 2026

Subscribe to a feed (what's a feed?) of speeches and votes in the House related to Bill C-39.

Summary

This is from the published bill.

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.

Elsewhere

All sorts of information on this bill is available at LEGISinfo, an excellent resource from Parliament. You can also read the full text of the bill.

Bill numbers are reused for different bills each new session. Perhaps you were looking for one of these other C-39s:

C-39 (2023) Law An Act to amend An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying)
C-39 (2017) An Act to amend the Criminal Code (unconstitutional provisions) and to make consequential amendments to other Acts
C-39 (2014) Law Appropriation Act No.3 , 2014-15
C-39 (2012) Law Restoring Rail Service Act

Votes

Oct. 8, 2026 Passed 2nd reading of Bill C-39, An Act respecting certain measures to strengthen the economy

Debate Summary

line drawing of robot

This is a computer-generated summary of the speeches below. Usually it’s accurate, but every now and then it’ll contain inaccuracies or total fabrications.

Bill C-39 proposes coordinated federal reviews with targeted timelines for major projects, changes to transportation corridors, ports, trade digitization and security, and amendments to federal labour rules concerning bargaining, dispute resolution and worker protections.

Liberal

  • Supports faster project approvals: Supports a coordinated “one project, one review, one year” process to attract investment and build infrastructure faster, while maintaining environmental standards and Indigenous rights and consultation.
  • Modernizes trade corridors: Would designate national trade corridors, improve port governance and coordination, and digitize trade processes to reduce bottlenecks, strengthen supply chains and diversify exports beyond the United States.
  • Protects workers and bargaining: Supports earlier bargaining, mediation and stronger workplace protections to improve labour stability, while affirming workers’ right to strike and adding guardrails to exceptional government intervention.

Conservative

  • Supports building projects: Conservatives support faster construction, investment and jobs, but will judge Bill C-39 by measurable results rather than announcements, and say the previous Bill C-5 has delivered little.
  • Questions timeline guarantees: They argue the one-year approval promise is not binding: preparation occurs before the clock starts, and officials or cabinet can pause or extend it, leaving investors without certainty.
  • Wants deeper deregulation: Conservatives call for repealing Bills C-69 and C-48 and the industrial carbon tax, with one project, one review and firm approval deadlines instead of more bureaucratic workarounds.
  • Demands scrutiny of labour changes: Members warn that changes to section 107 could weaken collective bargaining and workers’ right to strike, and demand thorough committee study, consultation and safeguards before decisions are made.

NDP

  • Opposes bill C-39: The NDP argues the bill concentrates power in ministers, weakens workers’ rights, risks environmental safeguards and Indigenous rights, and transfers decision-making away from communities and independent experts.
  • Protects the right to strike: The party opposes codifying and expanding ministerial powers to end legal strikes, saying this undermines constitutionally protected rights, weakens workers’ bargaining leverage and discourages employers from negotiating fairly.
  • Safeguards environment and Indigenous rights: The NDP warns that fixed approval deadlines, weakened project conditions and accelerated consultation could harm ecosystems and compress Indigenous rights; it says meaningful consultation and environmental review are essential to responsible development.
  • Builds fairly and together: The party supports building housing, clean energy and infrastructure, but says nation-building must create good union jobs, respect Indigenous rights, protect the environment and include communities rather than prioritize speed and corporate rewards.

Bloc

  • Opposes Bill C-39: The Bloc will vote against Bill C-39, arguing that it uses the trade crisis to justify permanent changes that weaken environmental protections, workers’ rights and democratic accountability.
  • Environmental safeguards: The Bloc warns that rushed assessments, project pre-approval and shifting reviews to energy regulators undermine scientific independence, public consultation and the ability to prevent environmental harm.
  • Right to strike: The Bloc says the bill gives ministers broad discretion to end lawful strikes based on undefined national-interest criteria, weakening collective bargaining and shifting power toward employers.
  • Executive power and Quebec: The Bloc objects to concentrating authority in ministers and the Prime Minister, circumventing Parliament and laws, and intruding on Quebec and provincial roles in managing natural resources.

Green

  • Opposes rushed project approvals: The Green Party warns that Bill C-39 could direct billions in public money to projects without basic cost-benefit analysis, risking economic waste and serious environmental and Indigenous-rights harms.
  • Demands evidence and transparency: The party rejects the premise that speed is inherently beneficial, arguing that weak planning, political pressure and cabinet discretion without transparent evidence make major projects more likely to fail.
  • Protects environmental conditions: The Greens oppose amendments that make project approval conditions subject to tests of economic feasibility or practicality, warning proponents could challenge binding safeguards and weaken environmental laws.
  • Defends collective bargaining: The party supports the Canadian Labour Congress’s concerns about part 3’s threat to collective bargaining and the trade union movement, and calls for substantial amendments.
Was this summary helpful and accurate?

Building Canada Strong ActGovernment Orders

September 24th, 2026 / 11:15 a.m.

Conservative

Richard Bragdon Conservative Tobique—Mactaquac, NB

Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague from Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley. What a great representative he is for his people in standing up for hard-working Canadians, farmers and resource workers.

One expression comes to mind. There's a song that has words that say that we need “a little less talk and a lot more action”. It is time for action now to get results for Canadians.

Building Canada Strong ActGovernment Orders

September 24th, 2026 / 11:15 a.m.

Liberal

Kody Blois Liberal Kings—Hants, NS

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. During the debate, the hon. member for Tobique—Mactaquac, which I believe is his riding's title, highlighted the importance of projects being real and proper. Therefore, I am seeking the opportunity to table a picture of the work that is actually happening between Nova Scotia and—

Building Canada Strong ActGovernment Orders

September 24th, 2026 / 11:15 a.m.

An hon. member

No.

Building Canada Strong ActGovernment Orders

September 24th, 2026 / 11:15 a.m.

The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec

I heard a no, so there is no unanimous consent to table any documents.

Resuming debate, the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Innovation.

Building Canada Strong ActGovernment Orders

September 24th, 2026 / 11:15 a.m.

Vancouver Granville B.C.

Liberal

Taleeb Noormohamed LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Artificial Intelligence and Digital Innovation

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Pickering—Brooklin.

I rise today in support of Bill C-39, the building Canada strong act. I want to begin with a word that I think sits at the heart of the debate, or at least should sit at the heart of the debate for all of us, and that is the word “trust”. It is not trust in any one government or trust in a political party, but trust in our institutions, trust that our processes work, trust that when Canadians participate in these processes, their voices matter, and trust that government is capable of making good decisions in a timely fashion.

When I think about the conversations that I have had over the course of the last summer with businesses, workers, indigenous partners, community leaders and families, I find that most people are asking for exactly the same thing. They are asking for predictability. They are asking for stability. They are asking for clarity. Perhaps most importantly, and I think this demonstrates the popularity of our Prime Minister, they are asking for competence.

Canadians are reasonable people. They understand that governing is complicated. It is not something that one does on social media or on Twitter in a hundred and something characters. It is done through hard work. They understand that major projects have consequences. They understand that consultation can and should take the right amount of time. They expect good decisions to be made. They expect these decisions to be fair, and they expect decisions to be made in a reasonable amount of time. That is why this legislation deserves the consideration and support of the House.

At its core, this bill is trying to answer a question that is increasingly important to the future of the country in an incredibly unstable global environment: Can Canada move with the speed and certainty required to build the future we want in a way that respects the urgency of the moment and the need to preserve and protect that which we care about?

The world around us continues to change at a rapid pace. Supply chains are shifting, investment is moving and countries are searching for reliable partners. Workers are looking for security. As new markets are opening and new infrastructure is being built, Canada is being presented with a once-in-a-century opportunity, but opportunities do not become outcomes on their own. They require decisions. They require institutions to have the trust of investors, have the trust of workers and have the trust of Canadians. The reality of that trust is in people understanding how decisions will be made. Workers deserve that confidence. Communities deserve that confidence. Indigenous partners deserve that confidence. Investors deserve that confidence. Government must earn that confidence.

People may not always agree with the outcome; that is the nature of democracy, but they should know that there is a process that can be trusted and relied upon, that their voices will be heard and that they will get answers in a timely fashion. In my view, this is one of the most compelling arguments underpinning the legislation. We must give people answers, and those answers should demand high standards. High standards should not mean endless uncertainty. A thorough review should not mean permanent delay. It should be very clear that if projects do not meet the standards that Canadians expect, government should have the confidence and capacity to say no.

As the Prime Minister has said, if a project does not meet the standards that Canadians demand of it, government should have the capacity to say no. If the project does meet those standards, government should be able to say yes. To say no quickly and to say yes on time should not be hard. That does not mean we compromise on the things we care about. It does not mean that we compromise on our standards, not one bit.

We must make sure that this conversation does not meet the fate of so many others. We must not look at things as binary, as if there is one right answer and one wrong answer, as if we cannot do two things at once and as if we cannot chew gum and walk at the same time. Canadians expect of governments today the ability to do many things at once, to do them well and to do them properly. That is why this legislation matters for building the country strong. It matters for protecting our workers. It matters for protecting our environment. It matters for protecting the investments people are making in the country. It matters for protecting the things that we need to do in this moment.

We have heard from many of our colleagues that these are challenging times. We all know that the trade war has shifted how we look at things in the country and what we are called upon to do.

As we diversify trade, as we expand new markets, as we do all of the heavy lifting Canadians expect all of us from all parties to do, we have to protect our supply chains. We have to protect our projects. We have to accelerate our projects, but we have to protect safe workplaces for our workers and continue to protect our natural environment.

The thing that seems to be lost in this conversation is the fact that a tremendous amount of consultation has gone into this process, into the refinements and into what we are seeing in this legislation today. Spring and summer were spent listening to stakeholders and responding. Whether it was with unions, employers or indigenous partners, the conversation was about worker supports and the labour relations framework, and those inputs have directly framed how this bill is in front of us today.

We all know that about 95% of disputes in federally regulated workplaces are resolved without a work stoppage. Knowing this, most of the stakeholders we spoke to cautioned against broad structural changes that would undermine a process that works well in most cases. We recognize that it does not work in all cases, and we will come to that, but as Canada works to build a stronger economy to advance major projects and strengthen the infrastructure we all know we need, and that I know the opposition certainly should care about as well, we also need a labour framework that can meet this moment and that protects Canadian workers so they can thrive and prosper.

Bill C-39 proposes to put forward a balanced approach that would add tools and supports to ensure that more parties were able to reach agreements at the table, creating a more transparent process for the few disputes that remain difficult to resolve. These changes underpin Canadians' request to us: get things built, protect workers and do not backtrack on our standards. This is why dispute resolution is important.

In this bill, we are proposing mandatory dispute resolution remediation for parties that have experienced a work stoppage or had a binding method of resolution imposed on them. Doing so within six months of reaching a collective agreement would help mend relationships and reduce the risk of future labour disruptions.

The code does not currently prescribe when parties must begin direct bargaining. It allows parties to start their negotiations as early as four months prior, but the start date is really up to them. This bill now proposes that those conversations must begin six months before the collective agreement expiry, and be supported by federal mediators, increasing the odds of resolving differences before positions become entrenched. There is a provision that discusses conciliation. When there is an impasse at the table, the government may now appoint a federal conciliator to work with them for 60 days. This bill proposes to extend that to 90 days.

Perhaps what is most important is addressing where there is concern, and that is around section 107. One of the misperceptions is that this bill would somehow incentivize the use of section 107, but it is quite the opposite. Section 107, as we know, has been in effect for approximately 50 years in this country. It is used on an exceptional basis. For the first time, this bill would put guardrails on the use of section 107. It would ensure that, for the first time, there would be requirements placed upon the use of this provision, and that is particularly important to workers in this country. It is about making sure that the right to strike is never taken away from workers. It is about ensuring that their rights are protected, but it is also about making sure that we are bringing forward solutions quickly.

What it seeks to do is simply clarify section 107 by adding the two guardrails that are important. The first is the appointment of a special mediator and the subsequent report submitted to the minister. The second is a national impact assessment following the special mediator's engagement and report. Together, these would strengthen workers' rights and strengthen certainty. Ultimately, they would ensure that when we are looking to build big things in this country, how it all comes to pass, what goes into it and what people can expect on the other side would be certain and clear.

By setting down clear rules, we would be enabling ourselves to build this country strong. We would be protecting workers. We would be protecting the rules and regulations that matter to Canadians, but we would also be making sure Canadians, businesses and workers know that decisions come quickly, they come responsibly, and they come with two things top of mind: building our country and protecting workers. This is what Canadians care about.

Building Canada Strong ActGovernment Orders

September 24th, 2026 / 11:25 a.m.

Conservative

John Barlow Conservative Foothills, AB

Mr. Speaker, in his speech, my colleague talked about consultation, predictability and making hard decisions, but this is clearly the same old Liberal government. As part of this bill, for the third time, Liberals would be making extended interswitching just a pilot project. They have not been able to make the hard decisions of doing the right thing or they clearly have not consulted.

Why would they not be making extended interswitching permanent? Why would they be limiting it to just the Prairies, avoiding or excluding critical grain corridors like B.C. and northern Ontario? Why are they not listening to shippers and grain growers and including interswitching as a permanent change to the transportation corridors in Canada?

Building Canada Strong ActGovernment Orders

September 24th, 2026 / 11:30 a.m.

Liberal

Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC

Mr. Speaker, there are two things the member opposite must remember. First, there will now be an opportunity at committee for him to add these important questions, to put them on the table. This is an important reality of Parliament. There is an opportunity at committee for the member to raise those issues.

I would suggest the member remember that the Premier of Alberta said there has never been a better time to be a Canadian and to work with the government. These are things that the Government of Alberta and governments across this country from coast to coast are recognizing: that our government is working to ensure these problems are solved and that we work with provinces to ensure that it is not just the Prairies but the entire country that benefits from what we are trying to put forward today.

Building Canada Strong ActGovernment Orders

September 24th, 2026 / 11:30 a.m.

Bloc

Luc Thériault Bloc Montcalm, QC

Mr. Speaker, parliamentary democracy is a daily challenge. It involves a delicate balance between the executive and legislative branches. Bill C-39 is a step backwards for democracy. It further centralizes power in favour of the executive branch by reducing the role we play here in Parliament. The Prime Minister is exploiting the tariff crisis to impose permanent rollbacks that will have no impact during Donald Trump's presidency.

Does the member not think that Bill C‑39 sets a dangerous precedent?

Building Canada Strong ActGovernment Orders

September 24th, 2026 / 11:30 a.m.

Liberal

Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC

Mr. Speaker, the reality is that this is a difficult time for Quebec and Canada. It is a very dangerous time for our country and for Canadians and Quebeckers.

Of course, there are things we need to do right now, but Bill C-39 contains measures that protect workers, protect the environment and even protect the rights of Parliament. We believe we must work together to protect the citizens of our country.

To say that this limits or curbs Parliament's powers is inaccurate, and furthermore, it creates uncertainty.

Building Canada Strong ActGovernment Orders

September 24th, 2026 / 11:30 a.m.

Liberal

Ginette Petitpas Taylor Liberal Moncton—Dieppe, NB

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Vancouver Granville for the overview that he gave of Bill C-39, which is extremely important legislation for our country and Canadians during this time.

During the member's summary, he talked about the consultation that took place over the summer. I am wondering if he would be able to elaborate for Canadians listening the type of consultation that has taken place to ensure that we got this bill right.

Building Canada Strong ActGovernment Orders

September 24th, 2026 / 11:30 a.m.

Liberal

Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC

Mr. Speaker, the consultations were widespread, with unions, big and small businesses, indigenous communities and investors, folks who are helping to build this country. Those consultations, whether in small or large groups, were ones that mattered. They are reflected in this bill. That is a really important consideration because as we go through these processes, making sure those voices are heard and the feedback is reflected is a reflection of how this place works and should work.

Building Canada Strong ActGovernment Orders

September 24th, 2026 / 11:30 a.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, keeping it short, I am sure my hon. friend from Vancouver Granville will agree with me that the lawyers at West Coast Environmental Law based in Vancouver are hard-working and very skilled. They have named this the “bulldoze nature bill”. I agree with them.

Is the member prepared to listen to the advice of expert environmental lawyers who give this bill an F?

Building Canada Strong ActGovernment Orders

September 24th, 2026 / 11:30 a.m.

Liberal

Taleeb Noormohamed Liberal Vancouver Granville, BC

Mr. Speaker, I respect my hon. colleague and the organizations working hard to protect our natural environment and to ensure that our natural environment is well protected.

Part of the provisions in this bill do put the guardrails that are required to ensure that ministers would not be using provisions without due consideration. In fact, if we look at the provisions that have been made in British Columbia to protect our natural coast, the tanker ban and other provisions that are being made to protect whales and salmon are provisions that are going to ensure that our natural environment on the west coast that I know she loves, as do I, will continue to be protected.

Building Canada Strong ActGovernment Orders

September 24th, 2026 / 11:30 a.m.

Liberal

Juanita Nathan Liberal Pickering—Brooklin, ON

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-39, the building Canada strong act, is a critical piece of legislation that would make Canada's transportation system work better for Canadians and for our economy. It is about keeping Canada moving by strengthening trade corridors and ports, providing regulatory certainty, achieving red tape reduction and modernizing transportation security clearances.

Canada's prosperity has always depended on our ability to move goods across vast distances and deepen trade relationships with countries near and far. However, the world has changed. The global trading system is being reshaped. Supply chains are being reorganized. Businesses are looking for reliable markets and reliable partners, while competition for investment is intensifying. For decades, Canadians benefited from a stable and increasingly integrated trading relationship with the United States, one built on growing market access and shared understanding of the rules governing our trade. Today, that environment has fundamentally changed and been replaced with a new reality, one where tariffs are being treated as leverage and supply chains are vulnerabilities.

The recent tensions with Canada's largest trading partner have underscored the importance of building greater economic strength and resilience here at home, started by building Canada strong and united as one Canadian economy. Since last year, the government has been working to advance nation-building projects faster and more responsibly, diversifying our industries and trade relationships, and creating high-paying jobs for generations. Bill C-39 would unlock more of Canada's economic potential by strengthening our economy at home and expanding opportunities for Canadian businesses abroad. To achieve this priority is to deliver generational investments in our trade and transportation infrastructure. The proposed measures in Bill C-39 would strengthen our transportation supply chain by modernizing our transportation policy and strengthening our trade corridors and ports to get products to market more efficiently and affordably.

Importantly, the bill also proposes measures to modernize Canada's marine governance structure. Given that 85% of Canada's non-U.S. trade moves through our marine ports, without them there is no trade diversification. The bill would also provide certainty and stability and achieve red tape reduction to get major projects built faster to help Canada's businesses save time and money, and make Canada an attractive place for investments. It would support trade digitalization. Together, the initiatives in Bill C-39 would reduce cost, improve administrative efficiency and improve the security of goods that move across our border by mitigating fraud. They would also strengthen our labour relations framework which would create more reliable supply chains and greater economic resilience.

This bill is also part of a much broader economic plan. In the Speech from the Throne, the government set an overarching goal to build the strongest economy in the G7. The government is committed to removing barriers that hold back trade and investment, getting major projects built faster and strengthening Canada's relationships with reliable trading partners all around the world.

The government has already moved quickly to launch a new $5-billion trade diversification corridor fund to put investments behind the ambition into action to build our infrastructure, strengthen our supply chains, attract private capital and grow Canada's economy. These are significant investments that would connect Canadian products to domestic and international markets and would support our government's goal of doubling Canada's non-U.S. exports over the next decade. Bill C-39 is the next piece of that work. However, infrastructure investment is only part of the solution.

Measures in Bill C-39 would also address some of the structural issues in the transportation supply chain. The bill would modernize the regulations, policy and governance structures that determine how our transportation supply chain operates and international trade is processed. By strengthening transportation networks, the government would build more reliable supply chains and give investors and trading partners greater certainty that Canada is a stable place to do business and invest.

When there is a bottleneck at a port, a shortage of rail capacity, a shipment held up by administrative or paperwork issues or a disruption anywhere along the way, the costs are ultimately borne by Canadian businesses and workers. Delays are costly for our businesses and for Canada's reputation as a reliable trading partner.

When we strengthen Canada's supply chains, we are not simply moving goods more efficiently within Canada. We are helping a business in Quebec, Vancouver or Toronto reach a customer halfway around the world. That is how Bill C-39 would strengthen trade, investment, jobs and economic growth.

This bill is about much more than modernizing Canada's supply chain. It is economic legislation. It is about strengthening our economy and creating the conditions for Canadian businesses to compete and grow. It is about improving the conditions for investment and growth across Canada and reducing costs by making government work better.

One of the most practical things a government can do to strengthen its economy is to reduce unnecessary regulatory burden. Businesses should be focused on investing, building and creating jobs, not navigating duplicative processes and unclear timelines. That is why Bill C-39 takes practical steps that would streamline federal review and permitting processes and reduce duplication across departments.

We are proposing to allow federal departments and agencies to share international trade information for imports and exports more easily and with less duplication so they can reduce information filing requirements for businesses, saving them time and money.

As I mentioned, this bill supports trade digitalization and would provide opportunities to modernize regulations. Many Canadian exporters still rely on paper-based systems, which slow movements and increase costs and the time needed to get goods to global markets.

The Commonwealth estimates that trading digitalization could boost Canada's trade volumes by approximately $100 billion. We would also create a new advisory group on national trade corridors to find problem areas that cause delays, suggest ways to improve the system, improve efficiency and help different players make more coordinated decisions.

This bill would modernize Canada's national transportation policy to give greater recognition to supply chain efficiency. More than 525 billion dollars' worth of goods and services move between our provinces and territories every year. When we look beyond our borders, we see that Canada's transportation corridors support approximately $1.55 trillion in international merchandise trade. These transactions depend on reliable railways, ports and other infrastructure.

Transportation performance and economic performance are connected, but we also need to ensure that the transportation system remains secure and resilient. Today's transportation system faces more complex and connected threats than in the past. This requires a modern, more responsive approach that can respond to evolving risks while remaining predictable for industry. Updating the Canada Transportation Act to modernize the approach to transportation security clearances would create a broader, more effective framework.

These proposed changes would help partners work together, make better use of information and help us better manage risks related to people who hold trusted roles within the transportation systems.

I want to pause and underline the commitment of the Government of Canada to uphold indigenous rights and collaborate with indigenous partners during the implementation phase of this bill. We undertook engagement. We heard from indigenous people, the transportation industry and Canadians to better understand how we can build more efficient, resilient and reliable supply chains while supporting economic growth and trade. Those conversations helped inform the measures before us today—

Building Canada Strong ActGovernment Orders

September 24th, 2026 / 11:40 a.m.

The Deputy Speaker Tom Kmiec

Questions and comments, the hon. member for Red Deer.