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.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Do we have unanimous consent? Yes. Okay.
In that case, what's going to end up happening is that, because we have only a few minutes left, you'll get one minute, and then each of the three parties will get one minute to wrap up, if the ministers can keep it tight.
Go ahead, Ms. May.
Green
Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC
I want to keep it very tight, and I thank my colleagues for this.
The gutting of environmental protections has been so much a part of the public discourse. Quite often, Liberal MPs say it's not found in Bill C-39, and they're right. It's found in Bill C-5, which continues on and is not amended in this act.
Between clauses 94 and 118 in division 2 of Bill C-39, there are amendments made to what we used to call Bill C-5, which is now the Building Canada Act. They do not amend the key offensive section, subsection 21(2), which lists the acts that can't be broken when a project is in the national interest.
In the interest of making the Liberal rhetoric match the act, will you accept amendments to add laws to subsection 21(2) of the Building Canada Act, such as the Fisheries Act and the Species at Risk Act?
Liberal
Dominic LeBlanc Liberal Beauséjour, NB
Thank you, Ms. May, for the question.
Obviously, we wouldn't purport to assume what the committee would amend or not amend, or what amendments you would consider when the committee does its work. We have full confidence in the judgment of our colleagues.
You mentioned the Species at Risk Act, which I think is very important. You'll notice that in the discussion paper that Steven, Patty and I announced in the spring, there was a reference to limiting the application of the Species at Risk Act. We heard clearly from Canadians and environmental groups. Our colleague, Julie Dabrusin, whom you'll have the pleasure of seeing very shortly, talked to me and Steven about this, and it was deliberately not ultimately included in Bill C-39, as had been discussed in the potential decision.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
All right. Thanks.
Given the time, I'm going to suspend the meeting and this panel so that we have time to get ready for the next panel.
Ministers, thank you very much.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Welcome back to meeting number two of the House of Commons Legislative Committee on Bill C-39.
I'll make a few comments for the benefit of witnesses and members. Our new witnesses have not heard this before.
Wait until I recognize you before you speak. For those participating by video conference, you know the instructions. I will remind the witnesses that committee members may ask questions in English or French. If you need interpretation, please take a moment to set up the equipment. All comments should be addressed through the chair.
I would like to now welcome our witnesses for today's second panel.
We have the Honourable Julie Dabrusin, Minister of the Environment, Climate Change and Nature, accompanied by Mollie Johnson, deputy minister of the environment; and Stephanie Lane, acting director general, legislative and regulatory affairs, environmental protection branch.
From the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada, we have Terence Hubbard, president.
We have the Honourable Patty Hajdu, Minister of Jobs and Families and Minister responsible for the Federal Economic Development Agency for Northern Ontario. Accompanying her, from the Department of Employment and Social Development, we have Robert Wright, deputy minister of labour and associate deputy minister of employment and social development; and Peter Simpson, acting assistant deputy minister, policy, dispute resolution and international affairs.
Ministers, you have up to five minutes for each opening statement, followed by questions.
Minister Dabrusin, I will start with you, please.
Julie Dabrusin LiberalMinister of the Environment
Mr. Chair, I'm pleased to join committee members today to discuss Bill C-39, the building Canada strong act, and in particular the elements under the theme of build Canada now.
With me are Terence Hubbard, president of the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada; Mollie Johnson, deputy minister of Environment and Climate Change Canada; and Stephanie Lane, director general, strategic policy and programs at the Impact Assessment Agency.
As we begin, I want to take a moment and say that my heart is with Wainwright today and with the victims, the survivors and all the people who have lost loved ones and are grieving today. May their memories be a blessing.
As committee members are aware, Bill C-39 was introduced in Parliament as the government's response to a rapidly changing world, one where uncertainty and instability are causing serious economic consequences here in Canada and around the world. In response to these changes, Canada has the opportunity to establish our global leadership, and domestically the foundations of a newer, cleaner economy in this project of building Canada strong. Around the world, countries are investing in clean energy, modernizing industries and developing new technologies. They are building out their electricity grids and helping households and industries switch to electricity to power more homes and businesses.
Canada has the resources, the expertise and the workforce to compete in this changing global economy.
To become a superpower in clean and conventional energy, Canada needs a complementary regulatory environment that is efficient and predictable. We are doing that by building. We are building the clean energy infrastructure, technologies, industries and partnerships needed to power a competitive, prosperous and low-carbon future.
Bill C-39 will create the conditions needed for investment in projects that support jobs, economic growth and infrastructure development. The proposed amendments to the Impact Assessment Act enable the federal government to complete necessary federal reviews and decisions within a maximum of one year, once all information has been received from a proponent. This will be achieved while continuing to protect the environment and uphold the rights of indigenous people. We are not creating new standards; we are streamlining and modernizing systems to improve coordination, reliability and timeliness.
Federal coordination is imperative to this work. Under the current system, impact assessments and review processes for federal permits occur sequentially and separately from each other.
The fact that several federal departments and ministers have separate reviews and decision-making systems creates duplication, delays and uncertainty for stakeholders, investors and communities.
Under Bill C-39, the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada would function as a federal review coordinator, working with other federal departments to ensure IAAC-led assessments occur at the same time as required federal permits.
IAAC is well positioned to play this role, as it has already reorganized its processes to work more closely with federal permitting departments to support proponents during impact assessments.
Bill C‑39 also includes targeted amendments to certain environmental permitting laws to improve efficiency in reviewing major projects and reduce duplication while maintaining environmental protection.
We also cannot forget the importance of completing this work in partnership with indigenous peoples. Consultation is vital to getting this done right.
Indigenous groups often receive engagement consultation requests from multiple federal bodies on the same project, resulting in consultation fatigue. Bill C-39 formalizes IAAC's role in coordinating Crown consultations through the creation of the Crown consultation hub. IAAC will work with federal departments and agencies to make sure that each indigenous group goes through one consultation process for each project, replacing multiple overlapping processes. It will also emphasize early engagement, so that potential impacts to indigenous rights and interests are identified and addressed in a timely manner.
Let me be clear. The one-year timeline I mentioned at the outset is only with respect to the final phase of the assessment process, during which the government reviews all of the information provided. IAAC takes steps long before the start of the one-year timeline to identify and involve indigenous groups potentially impacted by major projects.
Finally, this new process will culminate in a single, comprehensive federal decision for major project permits, approvals and enforceable conditions. It's one federal decision document issued by me at the end of the process.
Thank you for the opportunity to discuss this bill with you.
I look forward to your questions.
Patty Hajdu LiberalMinister of Jobs and Families and Minister responsible for the Federal Economic Development Agency for Northern Ontario
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. It's my privilege to appear before this committee to provide an overview of the labour components of Bill C-39.
Let me start by emphasizing the central objective of these reforms: to support workers and employers in negotiating good and durable agreements at the bargaining table. That is the best outcome for everyone.
Federally regulated sectors underpin our economy, helping us stay connected and moving. They have one of the best, most skilled workforces in the world, with over one million workers.
Reliable supply chains and a strong economy depend on healthy labour relations. Collective bargaining and the strong labour relations in this country are essential ingredients to a strong and reliable economy.
Bill C-39 is focused on strengthening collective bargaining, protecting workers from misclassification, strengthening support for first collective agreements and ensuring successor rights when contracts change hands.
The tripartite advisory council and many consultation respondents pointed out that the majority of labour relationships work well. In fact, in 95% of labour disputes that the federal mediation and conciliation service supports, parties arrive at new collective agreements without a disruption.
However, for a small number of disputes that become entrenched, existing tools have not been sufficient to help these parties get to a deal together at the table. Often, these are parties that have experienced previous disputes. This bill presents new tools to increase the number of successful collective agreements reached by employers and unions themselves.
It focuses on three key areas.
First, it modernizes collective bargaining and gives earlier support, stronger mediation, additional help for difficult negotiations, and more time at the table. It also lays the groundwork for expedited grievance arbitration and an administrative monetary penalty regime for bad-faith bargaining.
Second, it strengthens worker protections against misclassification, wage theft and workplace accidents. It also preserves airport workers' union representation when contracts change hands.
Third, it brings clarity, transparency and accountability to section 107 of the code. Section 107 is a tool that has been in the Labour Code for decades, but Canadians told us they wanted greater clarity and transparency around its use.
Bill C-39 sets that out in law. Parties in particularly challenging disputes would receive intensive support from a special mediator focused on reaching a deal. If settlements still can't be reached, a report on the dispute would be made public, explaining where the bargaining broke down.
In addition, a national impact assessment would determine whether significant consequences of the labour disruption extend beyond the bargaining parties. Only after those steps and, importantly, only once a lockout or a strike has begun could section 107 be used. Each step is designed to return responsibility for reaching an agreement to the bargaining table.
The majority of negotiations will still proceed through the regular bargaining process without a special mediator or a national impact assessment.
Mr. Chair, the right to strike is fundamental to meaningful collective bargaining, and this bill strengthens and protects that right by explicitly removing the ability to use section 107 prior to any labour disruption.
The government has a responsibility to act when an exceptionally consequential dispute remains unresolved with no path to resolution in sight. Protecting workers and protecting the national interest go hand in hand. Bill C-39 strengthens protections for workers, including by ending misclassification.
A stronger Canada for all requires strong workplaces, fair labour practices and a workforce that can thrive, and that starts at the bargaining table. These measures will help support workers, employers and productive labour relations across the country.
And they will help build Canada strong.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
Thank you, Minister.
We'll start the six-minute round with Mr. Seeback, I believe.
Mr. Seeback, it's over to you.
October 19th, 2026 / 5:50 p.m.
Conservative
Kyle Seeback Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Minister Hajdu, you say that your goal in this legislation is to support workers and employers to get to a collective agreement, and you've put in place a special mediator. Other than the special mediator's being able to deliver a report, what special powers does the special mediator actually have to get the parties to bargain?
Liberal
Patty Hajdu Liberal Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON
Thank you very much for that question.
The use of the special mediator is not entirely new. In fact, we sometimes appoint special mediators in particular disputes, and in particular when parties agree to the use of a special mediator. This government and other governments have done that, but the new piece—
Conservative
Kyle Seeback Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
I don't need the history of special mediators. I asked you, what special powers does the special mediator have to create a better bargaining environment, other than delivering a report? It's a very specific question. I don't need the history of special mediators.
Liberal
Patty Hajdu Liberal Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON
The new tool this special mediator would have would be the ability to make public a report of what is happening at the table.
Liberal
Patty Hajdu Liberal Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON
This is a brand new tool for a mediator. In fact, mediators typically are not able to disclose the negotiations and what has broken down at a table.
Conservative
Conservative
Kyle Seeback Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
Okay, but are you aware that in some of the rail strikes, there were almost no meetings leading up to your use of section 107? In fact, in 2023, with the dispute with the ILWU, there were, again, very few meetings between the employer and the union.
Can the special mediator actually compel the parties to sit in a room together and try to mediate?
Liberal
Patty Hajdu Liberal Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON
Well, actually, yes. Thank you for pointing out that important change in this legislation as well. We will have, for the first time in history, the ability to compel parties to begin bargaining earlier.
Conservative
Kyle Seeback Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
No. I didn't say bargaining. I'm talking about the special mediator.
The special mediator has now come in. You appoint the special mediator. Can the special mediator actually get the parties in the room to bargain?
Liberal
Patty Hajdu Liberal Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON
Well, certainly, the parties are at that point already in the room bargaining, because the government has mandated that they do that. Now, listen—