Evidence of meeting #2 for Bill C-39 in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was work.

A video is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

Members speaking

Before the committee

Dominic LeBlanc  Minister responsible for Canada-U.S. Trade, Intergovernmental Affairs and One Canadian Economy
Steven MacKinnon  Minister of Transport
Feldberg  Vice-President, Regulatory Affairs, Major Projects Office
Vandergrift  Deputy Minister, Department of Transport
Julie Dabrusin  Minister of the Environment, Climate Change and Nature
Patty Hajdu  Minister of Jobs and Families and Minister responsible for the Federal Economic Development Agency for Northern Ontario
Hubbard  President, Impact Assessment Agency of Canada
Gooch  President and Chief Executive Officer, Association of Canadian Port Authorities
Bird  President and Chief Executive Officer, Montreal Port Authority
Legge  President, Business Council of Alberta
Baudry  Vice-President, Strategic Affairs and Communications, Montreal Port Authority

The Chair Liberal James Maloney

Good afternoon, everybody.

Before I formally call the meeting to order, I want to thank everybody for being here this afternoon. Given the events on the weekend in Wainwright, I know it's a very difficult day for members of our Canadian Armed Forces, for Canadians at large and for everybody in this room. I want to say a special thank you to everybody for being here today and carrying on with this important piece of legislation.

I would like to call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number two of the House of Commons Legislative Committee on Bill C-39. The committee is meeting today pursuant to the order of reference of Thursday, October 8. Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format pursuant to the Standing Orders. Members are attending in person in the room, and I don't believe there's anybody on Zoom.

I would like to make a few comments for the benefit of the witnesses and members.

Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. I'm going to let that sink in.

For those participating by video conference, click on the microphone icon to activate your mic.

I would like to remind witnesses that committee members may ask questions in either French or English. If you will need interpretation, please take a moment now to prepare your earpiece and select the listening channel you need in advance in order to take full advantage of the time allotted for questions and answers.

I remind you that all comments should be addressed through the chair.

I would like now to welcome our witnesses for today's first panel.

Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette—Manawan, QC

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.

The Chair Liberal James Maloney

If you allow me to introduce the witnesses, then I will give you the floor.

We have with us the Honourable Dominic LeBlanc, President of the King's Privy Council for Canada and Minister responsible for Canada-U.S. Trade, Intergovernmental Affairs and One Canadian Economy.

Accompanying him, from the Major Projects Office, we have Peter Feldberg, vice-president, regulatory affairs; and Deborah Quaicoe, director, regulatory efficiency.

We also welcome the Honourable Steven MacKinnon, Minister of Transport.

Accompanying him, from the Department of Transportation, we have Michael Vandergrift, deputy minister; Serge Bijimine, assistant deputy minister, policy; and Paul Sandhar-Cruz, director general, strategic policy.

Each minister will have up to five minutes for their opening statement, following which we will proceed to questions from the members of the committee.

I'm going to start with Minister LeBlanc, but first, Mr. Ste-Marie, you have the floor.

Gabriel Ste-Marie Bloc Joliette—Manawan, QC

Mr. Chair, I have a point of order.

You referred to the tragedy that occurred in Wainwright. The House stands adjourned, and the work of all committees has been suspended, with the exception of this committee. This is something I have never seen before. In my view, this is simply not the day for partisan exchanges with ministers. Four people have died and 39 have been injured, half of whom are in critical condition. Our thoughts are, of course, with the victims and their families, friends, colleagues and loved ones.

Therefore, I believe you will find that there is unanimous consent among committee members to adjourn the meeting and resume it at a later date, with the same number of hours allotted for hearing from the witnesses.

The Chair Liberal James Maloney

Thank you, Mr. Ste-Marie. The significance of the day is not lost on anybody. I know it wasn't an easy decision to proceed with this committee hearing today, but given the nature of the legislation and the significance of the bill, there was an agreement among all parties, including yours, to proceed today.

I do appreciate your comments, and I thank you.

Minister LeBlanc, it's over to you.

3:35 p.m.

Beauséjour New Brunswick

Liberal

Dominic LeBlanc LiberalMinister responsible for Canada-U.S. Trade

Mr. Chair and colleagues, thank you for inviting me and Steven to appear today.

Canada is facing a period of profound economic change. The choices we make now will have an impact on the strength of our economy, both in the short term and over the long term. That is why the government is proposing the measures before you today: legislative measures aimed at improving the way we build major projects, as well as projects of all sizes, across Canada.

Canada has significant advantages: We have abundant natural resources, a highly skilled workforce and trading relationships around the world. To capitalize on these advantages, we must ensure that our regulatory and decision-making processes are capable of supporting timely economic growth while, of course, maintaining the standards Canadians expect.

Projects that may involve, for example, critical minerals, traditional and renewable energy infrastructure or modern ports and trade corridors, will lay the foundation for a stronger Canada for generations to come. They will create good-paying jobs, strengthen our economic security and help Canadian businesses compete successfully in global markets.

Over the last number of months we've engaged with provinces and territories, indigenous partners, businesses, labour organizations and local communities. What emerged from those conversations is that Canadians want our country to remain competitive while preserving the values and the processes that define us as a country.

The government's objective is straightforward: to improve the efficiency, transparency and predictability of federal decision-making while maintaining, obviously, strong environmental protections and upholding the rights of indigenous people.

A more efficient process does not mean a less rigorous one: Clearer timelines do not predetermine outcomes, and responsible development and robust oversight can and should exist together.

Canada has accumulated decades of experience in environmental assessment, regulatory review and project oversight. We have learned valuable lessons about how processes can be improved without compromising their integrity. The measures before Parliament seek to build on that experience and ensure that our regulatory system is equipped to meet the demands of a rapidly evolving economy.

A fundamental element of this work is our partnership with indigenous peoples. Meaningful consultation and engagement are essential. Indigenous communities have unique perspectives, knowledge, rights and economic interests that will inform project decisions. Improving efficiency will strengthen, not diminish, opportunities for their participation. Better coordination and clearer processes will help ensure that engagement with indigenous peoples is more focused, constructive and effective.

In conclusion, we believe that Bill C-39 responds directly to these priorities.

Thank you for your time.

I can only imagine how excited our colleagues are to hear from Steven MacKinnon.

The Chair Liberal James Maloney

You took the words right out of my mouth.

Minister MacKinnon, we go over to you.

3:40 p.m.

Gatineau Québec

Liberal

Steven MacKinnon LiberalMinister of Transport

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Allow us to express our condolences and our horror at the events that took place at CFB Wainwright on the weekend.

It is a privilege to address the legislative committee today to speak to Bill C‑39, the building Canada strong act.

The world around us is changing, as my colleague just said. Global trade is being reshaped, and the assumptions that have long shaped our economy can no longer be taken for granted. Our supply chains are under pressure, as are our transportation systems, and Canadian businesses must continue to operate even though they are dealing with more uncertainty than ever.

Canada cannot control what others do, but we can take action to strengthen our economy here at home. That means building an economy that is more resilient and less vulnerable to decisions made beyond our borders. To get there, we must further diversify our trade and build new commercial relationships around the world.

Canada has the advantages the world wants: an educated workforce, vast natural resources, a growing technology and AI ecosystem, and access to markets around the globe. Now we must turn those advantages into investment, into projects, into jobs and into growth. For Canadian businesses to seize these opportunities, they need clear rules, predictable decisions and reliable ways to get their products to customers. That is what Bill C-39 is all about.

Transportation and our supply chains are the backbone of our economy. This bill proposes legislative amendments to help every part of that system—roads, railways, warehouses, ports and airports—to work together more effectively. For example, Bill C-39 would strengthen our trade corridors by allowing important routes and geographic areas to be designated as national trade corridors, with clear performance goals.

A national trade corridors council would help identify bottlenecks and improve coordination across the system. The bill would also give port authorities greater flexibility to respond to changing trade opportunities, while strengthening accountability and oversight and encouraging greater collaboration along trade corridors.

I want to be clear: This does not privatize Canada's ports. These changes are about giving port authorities the tools and flexibility they need to serve Canada's economy. However, moving goods more efficiently is only part of the equation: We also need to make it easier to invest and build in Canada.

The measures in the building Canada strong act would help achieve that by reducing unnecessary regulatory duplication. A one project, one review approach would help coordinate federal processes, clarify timelines and reduce administrative burdens while maintaining Canada's strong safety and environmental standards, because it is vital that we build major projects more quickly.

The Major Projects Office will provide a single entry point for high-priority projects and help make federal approvals more coordinated and predictable.

We also need to modernize the way we go about trade. With this bill, we are prioritizing the digitalization of trade. Too much of our trade system still relies on paper and requires businesses to provide the same information over and over. Bill C‑39 would support a “tell us once” approach and enable greater use of electronic trade documents. That means less paperwork, fewer delays and a more efficient training system.

Finally, none of this works without the people who keep our supply chains moving.

We need skilled workers and modern workplaces. We also need stability in our transportation system so that disruptions do not ripple through the broader economy.

In closing, let me say this: This bill is about making it easier to invest here, easier to build in Canada, and easier to move Canadian products across Canada and to partners around the world.

It is about building a more resilient Canada, a more competitive Canada and one that is better positioned to succeed in a changing global economy.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

The Chair Liberal James Maloney

Thank you, Ministers.

We'll start our six-minute round with Mr. Albas.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Albas Conservative Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna, BC

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I certainly want to concur with you, in that our thoughts and prayers are with the people in Wainwright right now.

Ministers, officials, thank you for your service to our great country.

Minister LeBlanc, I'll start with you, because you're the minister responsible for the Building Canada Act. Minister, Conservatives have been arguing for well over a decade that Liberals have wrecked Canada's regulatory approval system, chasing away half a trillion dollars of investment capital. Over those years, you and your government fought tooth and nail with provincial governments by adopting Bill C-69. Conservatives have argued that the approach was wrongheaded, and that we want to fix our system and see Canada build faster, better and more.

Earlier in this Parliament, your government sought extraordinary powers under the Building Canada Act to fast-track projects in response to the U.S. tariffs. If that was an admission that you got project approvals wrong with Bill C-69, is coming back with Bill C-39 an admission that you got the Building Canada Act wrong too? Who bears responsibility for that, the Major Projects Office, the government more broadly or you, as the minister responsible? Why the failure?

Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB

Mr. Chair, through you, thank you for the question.

It won't surprise you, Mr. Albas, that I don't agree with a number of the premises in your question. You attributed a series of admissions, which I don't share, and then you proceeded to try to assign blame to people who I don't think are blameworthy, so I don't accept the premise of your question. However, I do agree with you, wholeheartedly, that we need to build faster, better, and across the country—I don't remember the exact words, but I remember thinking that's absolutely something on which I'm sure we agree.

Through Bill C-5, as you said, Mr. Albas, the Building Canada Act was adopted by Parliament, with the help of the Conservative Party. It has informed a number of nation-building projects, and it has contributed to the building agenda.

My colleague, Mr.—

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Albas Conservative Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna, BC

On that, Minister, the government has said that 15 or so projects have been referred to the Major Projects Office, yet, in actuality, only Pacific link has been added to schedule 1 under the law, and it remains at a very early stage. Parliament granted these extraordinary powers under the Building Canada Act to respond to U.S. tariffs. Therefore, Minister, with so little use of those powers, why should Parliament make a temporary exception a permanent rule, as you have envisioned in Bill C-39?

Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB

Again, Mr. Chair, I understand that Mr. Albas shares our enthusiasm for the designation, the listing of projects of national interest. Good news is coming again soon, Mr. Albas, in other projects across the country. Mr. MacKinnon and I will have more to say about some of the projects referred to the Major Projects Office.

The Major Projects Office has been able to literally begin construction of projects, with shovels in the ground, without having, in many cases, to conduct an actual listing, as you said, under schedule 1.

What we think has informed this bill now before Parliament, Bill C-39, which is before your legislative committee today, is the sense that it's not only projects designated under Bill C-5 that are put on schedule 1 that should benefit from greater regulatory certainty and expedited treatment. If it's true on one side of the ledger, we think it's also true on the other side as well.

3:45 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Albas Conservative Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna, BC

I'd like to talk to you a little more about Bill C-5.

Parliament granted these exceptional powers with a five-year sunset. Your government now proposes to remove that safeguard.

Minister, why not demonstrate some results first and then ask both Houses to approve a further five-year extension before the power expires? Why do it now, with so little to show for it?

Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB

Again, the premise of your question is “so little to show for it.” I also practised litigation law at some point. I get that you put words in witnesses' mouths. I just wouldn't want you to ascribe “showing so little for it” to me. Those are the words you chose—

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Albas Conservative Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna, BC

Minister, maybe we'll move on to a different subject.

Bill C-39—

Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB

No. Mr. Chair, perhaps he'd let me answer the question he asked—

The Chair Liberal James Maloney

Mr. Albas did ask a question, in fairness.

3:50 p.m.

Conservative

Dan Albas Conservative Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna, BC

He's ragging the puck.

The Chair Liberal James Maloney

Well, let him answer the question.

Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB

The specific question was, why would we seek to make permanent the benefit of the Building Canada Act?

It's because many of these large projects of national interest will, in fact, have a life cycle that will exceed five years. Some of the projects and strategies referred to the Major Projects Office and some of what provinces, territories and indigenous groups are asking us to work on with them right now would benefit, in our view, from the government having the ability, on an ongoing basis, to make those designations for that small group of projects that meet the national interest standard.

Dan Albas Conservative Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna, BC

Let's talk about Bill C-39.

It leaves expert regulators and cabinet in separate silos. You have Bill C-5 on the one hand and Bill C-39 on the other. Instead of using the Major Projects Office, why not let regulators, with proponent consent, refer complete, credible projects for schedule 1 consideration and identify unnecessary federal requirements based on evidence? That would avoid any duplicate work and inform target exemptions, while cabinet would have the final say.

Given the limited results that you've seen under the Building Canada Act, why leave out this route to give faster approvals and fewer federal roadblocks? Why not have them work together?

Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB

Again, we think they are working well together, in the sense.... I wouldn't, obviously, Mr. Albas, attribute any misunderstanding to you, but Bill C-5 deals with designated projects added to schedule 1, in your words, and I agree with that. Bill C-39 provides that greater predictability, clarity, regulatory coherence and rigorous oversight to all projects, not just those that are specifically designated. We think the two work very well together. Far from being contradictory, we think they're very complementary.

The Chair Liberal James Maloney

Thank you, Minister.

Ms. Desrochers, it's over to you for six minutes.

Caroline Desrochers Liberal Trois-Rivières, QC

Thank you.

Before I begin, on behalf of my colleagues, I'd like to reiterate our condolences regarding the tragic events that took place in Alberta this past weekend.

Mr. LeBlanc, my first question is for you.

I took the time to carefully review all the reports published regarding what you heard over the past several months through your consultations with industry, indigenous partners, workers and communities. One of the key findings that emerged from those reports is that there is genuine enthusiasm. People want us to move forward quickly with transformative economic projects. At the same time, they want us to ensure that indigenous rights are respected and that the environment is protected. In your opening remarks, you yourself spoke about the fundamental role of indigenous peoples as partners in many of these projects.

Could you tell us how Bill C‑39 will establish the necessary safeguards to strike that balance and ensure that indigenous rights are respected and fully taken into account throughout the process?