Bill C-39 Committee on Oct. 19th, 2026

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Mr. Leslie, for the benefit of the interpreters, if nothing else, please do not talk over the minister.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

I understand that there's a certain eight-track the Conservative Party keeps playing around pipelines. I was an opposition MP for the entirety of Mr. Harper's government. He approved zero kilometres of pipeline.

I would think, if you look at the—

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

All right. Let's move into this decade. Let's move—

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Order.

Hold on, please, everybody. Let's have one person at a time.

Thank you.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Here's what you're not going to find. Mr. Harper's reforms to the Impact Assessment Act—

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

I didn't ask about Mr. Harper.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

—did the exact same thing you're currently decrying.

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

I didn't ask you a question. I didn't ask about Mr. Harper.

Minister LeBlanc, cabinet already has the powers to set national energy policy and give binding policy direction to the regulator. Why does it still need to continue to have approval authority over individual projects?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Again, what we did in this legislation is seek to find the appropriate balance whereby smaller projects, existing rights-of-way.... There is a great deal of good work and expertise in the Canada Energy Regulator. I hope colleagues acknowledge the important work that this organization has done for a long time.

I've had the opportunity to meet people who work in the energy sector in provinces across the country, including in Atlantic Canada. There is a great deal of interest in having an approval process that's more reliable in terms of timelines and that produces decisions based on a series of criteria that are well understood, and that's exactly, from our perspective, what these changes seek to do.

I understand that, on the one hand, as my colleague Steven indicated, Mr. Harper's changes around the Impact Assessment Act—

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

I'd like to focus on the last decade, Minister.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

—did exactly what you're now decrying our government for having done.

[Branden Leslie, Conservative, Portage—Lisgar, MB]

Minister, why did it take the last 11 years of your government making all of these additional red tape barriers, seeing all of the investment fleeing our country and seeing all of those frustrations that you outlined as the reasons for changing today to come to this conclusion now?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

I've been an opposition MP too. If it's something with which you agree, you say, “Why did it take you so long to get there?” I understand why you'd ask that question. It's taken us a lot less time than it took Mr. Harper to get there. I can tell you that.

The other thing I think is instructive here is that in those projects.... One of the challenges that I wouldn't.... Of course, I don't share the melodrama of investment fleeing and all of the stuff you said in the premise of your question, but I recognize that one of the challenges is to get a greater level of certainty up front. It's for a promoter of a project that is as important to the economy of the country as many of these energy projects are....

I come from Atlantic Canada. The success of the energy economy across the country is pretty important in the region I represent, as it is all across the country. Every Canadian has an interest in our getting this right. I say that consistently and in any part of the country.

However, one of the challenges was that without a greater level of certainty about the process and the timelines at the beginning, many proponents and many companies wouldn't invest the hundreds of millions of dollars, or potentially billions, necessary to get to an ultimate final investment decision. This, to some extent, is what we're trying to remediate in this legislation.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Leslie.

Ms. Harrison, it's over to you for five minutes.

[Emma Harrison, Liberal, Peterborough, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister MacKinnon, during the second reading of Bill C-39, you said Canada must be building the supply chains of the future. What does the supply chain of the future look like in Canada, and what specific provisions in Bill C-39 will help us get there?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Thank you for that question. This builds nicely on our earlier exchange, and on Madame Desrochers' question earlier as well.

Bill C-39 will give us several things. It will give us a more resilient transportation system and supply chain network in Canada, and a better planned transportation system by virtue of the corridors council and the guidance that we will get from it with respect to bottlenecks, effective fixes and infrastructure expansions or improvements that we need to make across the country.

We will have better data, such that the Government of Canada will have better awareness of where problems are, so that we can respond specifically to the agriculture community when there's a bumper crop and they're having trouble getting their crop to market through ports and rail and what have you. We will have data that can respond to shippers and other participants in the supply chain ecosystem in Canada that will allow us to do those things.

We will also expand. By virtue of the fact that a more predictable, stable and effective regulatory process will be in place, people will have more confidence to invest in our transport system, whether it's port authorities, railways, highways or other pieces of infrastructure or equipment that can be used to upgrade and make our transportation networks more resilient. We'll have a better regulatory framework with which to do that.

[Emma Harrison, Liberal, Peterborough, ON]

Thank you, Minister MacKinnon.

Minister LeBlanc, much of the discussion around Bill C-39 is focused on the legislation itself. Could you describe the role that the accompanying cabinet directive plays in the overall framework and why the government felt it was important to issue the guidance alongside this bill?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Ms. Harrison, thank you for that question. It picks up on some of our Conservative colleagues' questions in terms of how we can be assured that the public service, which has a responsibility to implement, follow and enact laws adopted by Parliament and implement the policy set by the government....

I have been lucky enough to be a member of the cabinet for over 10 years. I understand clearly how public servants, many of whom are sitting with us at the table, understand the significance of a cabinet directive. It is, if you will, the most significant way for the executive of the government, the cabinet itself, to formally instruct the public service on policies to implement and on the methods and ways it will implement those decisions and the government's policies as established by the cabinet.

It brings clarity. It gives the hard-working men and women in the public service a reliable road map of how they want to serve the elected government in the best way they can. A cabinet directive gives them the clarity of saying this is how the elected executive of the government expects them to implement the policy priority of the government.

I'm very confident that the people who will be asked to implement this cabinet directive will do so rigorously and expeditiously. My experience has been that if you give a series of clear directives, particularly in the case of following laws adopted recently by Parliament—if you look at Bill C-5, or if Bill C-39 receives royal assent—the entire apparatus and the machinery of the Government of Canada will understand the priority that Parliament and the elected executive, through the cabinet directive, have put on these decision-making processes.

[Emma Harrison, Liberal, Peterborough, ON]

Minister MacKinnon, how will Bill C-39 strengthen our strategic trade corridors, and what practical difference will these changes make for Canadian exporters?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

With the time available, let me build on my last answer by talking about paperless trade. This will allow exporters, small and large, to enjoy a tell-us-once principle, whereby ease of access and ease of use of all of these very complicated customs, brokerage, freight forwarding, bills of lading, in some cases food inspection, in some cases other compliance requirements by the border authorities.... All of this will hopefully come to a place where you have one compliance process.

It is digital. You get quicker answers where answers are required and better access, therefore, to Canada's supply chains, trading apparatus and trading infrastructure. That is a big win for all Canadian businesses, small and large.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Thank you, Minister.

Thank you, Ms. Harrison.

We're going into the next round.

Ms. May, you have your hand up.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Thank you, Chair.

I'd like to request unanimous consent from all members of the committee to have one minute in total to put a question to the ministers. They can choose which one wants to answer my question.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Does that include the answer?

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Yes, sir, it does.