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

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Mr. Albas, I think most Canadians can probably add up why the Department of Fisheries and Oceans would be involved in approving a port project.

The point is, we do want to avoid these sequential or overlapping reviews. The transport project office, which, I commit to you, will be established—should this bill get royal assent—with great speed.... In fact, I'll invite you to the ribbon-cutting, Mr. Albas, and we can do that together. The transport project office will catalyze these federal regulatory review processes. They will be subject to the same directives and legal obligations that Bill C-39 sets out for all regulatory processes and for permitting. That seems to be obvious.

You seem to be arguing that we should be going faster and more aggressively and saying, “shall set up a transport project office”. I can assure you that the project office will be set up. It will have great efficiency and will enjoy great authority.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Mr. Albas, thank you.

We'll go over to Mr. Bains now for five minutes.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Richmond East—Steveston, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

With respect to the transport sector, Minister, how does Bill C-39 allow federal departments to work concurrently while ensuring that underlying safety, environmental and regulatory requirements remain rigorous?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

Well, that's a better way of asking the question that Mr. Albas just asked.

A transportation project office will be created to work with the sector to receive projects, to ensure that they are compliant and to work to ensure that regulatory processes—those that apply to a given project—are rigorously adhered to and that the timelines are also rigorously adhered to. We've had too many examples in this country.... One thing that I suspect Mr. Albas and I—and you, Mr. Bains—would agree on is that there are examples of many projects that have taken too long. This is an attempt, as is the bill more generally, to maintain Canada's rigorous standards while making these reviews much more efficient and simultaneous, concurrent as opposed to sequential.

[Parm Bains, Liberal, Richmond East—Steveston, BC]

Thank you.

Minister LeBlanc, when people hear government speak about speeding up approvals, some may assume this means lowering standards. Much of Bill C-39 appears focused instead on coordinating federal processes and reducing duplication. Can you explain the distinction between reviewing a project more efficiently and reviewing it less rigorously?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Thank you for that question. It picks up a bit on, I think, the question of our colleague Dr. Martin.

Projects often face lengthy approval processes because, as Steven said, different federal agencies or departments look at the reviews or contemplate decisions sequentially rather than concurrently.

If we move towards a system where federal reviews and decisions take place concurrently, we can provide greater certainty and reliability to proponents, investors and those coming forward with a project. Canadians themselves will benefit from processes that give them a decision in a more timely and reliable way—none of which compromise, as you said, Mr. Bains, in your question....

Canadians, understandably, want the assurance that these reviews undertaken by the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Environment and Climate Change Canada, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission—the different regulators—and the scientists and experts who work in those departments.... I had a chance, in a previous portfolio, to see the remarkable women and men who work in many of these line departments. Their work will still benefit the decisions taken in terms of approval.

One thing, for example, is that our responsibility to consult with indigenous peoples, of course, remains unchanged. If we set up, in the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada, a Crown consultation hub, this may allow different indigenous communities with different levels of capacity to participate fully. If free, prior and informed consent is an important principle—the I in FPIC is for “informed”.... This morning, when I met with the indigenous advisory council of the Major Projects Office, it gave us examples of communities that want to participate fully and properly in this consultative process, that want to be accommodated, obviously, as the government will want to do as well.

Setting up a way for them to have greater access to capacity financing and to preparatory financing means that this work will be done more efficiently and more expeditiously, but with no less rigour and no less seriousness than Canadians would expect of a government committed to moving quickly but properly in reviewing these projects.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

That's your time. Thanks, Mr. Bains.

Mr. Simard.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière—Hébertville—Pays-des-Bleuets, QC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Ministers, both of you, in your answers and in your opening remarks, explained that what made this bill necessary and justifiable was the tariff crisis and your desire to make the Canadian economy less dependent on the United States. I'm not putting words in your mouth; that's what you said.

When I look at this more closely, I see very clearly that Bill C‑39 can help the oil and gas sector. However, I'm less clear on how Bill C‑39 can help the sectors most affected by the tariff dispute. I don't see how this bill can help the forestry sector, I don't see how it can help aluminum processors, I don't see how it can help people in the automotive industry, and I don't see how it can help people in the steel sector.

Furthermore, when I see the disproportionate benefit this gives to people in the oil and gas sector, what immediately comes to mind is that 91% of our oil exports go to the United States and that it's a product not subject to tariffs. You're putting in place a legislative measure that will help the Americans with their energy sovereignty, because they are the main beneficiaries of the big oil companies.

Earlier, you challenged my friend Mr. Ste‑Marie. I challenge you to explain to me—if you have any analysis, maybe you can table it with the committee—how this legislative measure helps the forestry sector, the aluminum sector, the auto sector and the manufacturing sector.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

This one is easy. It's because we have challenges in Canada when it comes to diversifying our markets. Of course, we want to create new opportunities for Canadian wood and Canadian aluminum, and for the Canadian manufacturing sector to have increased transportation capacity. I explained earlier—I don't know if you were here—to my colleague Ms. Harrison—

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière—Hébertville—Pays-des-Bleuets, QC]

Can you tell us where it says that Bill C‑39 does that for the forestry sector?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

This will be achieved through the digitization of our business, through the standards we establish to ensure compliance in this area and through the expansion and diversification of our opportunities—

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière—Hébertville—Pays-des-Bleuets, QC]

I can assure you that's not how it's perceived in the forestry sector.

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

—when it comes to trade infrastructure, such as ports and supply chains, to better plan and manage transportation. If you talk to Quebec entrepreneurs, they'll tell you that there's a major issue that's causing them to take the slightly easier route from the United States instead of making an effort in France, Europe or Asia. It's the paperwork and compliance requirements. Bill C‑39 is a major step forward effort in this regard.

[Mario Simard, Bloc, Jonquière—Hébertville—Pays-des-Bleuets, QC]

Mr. MacKinnon, are you aware that the president of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers told us that the market for the oil sector will remain the U.S. market?

[Steven MacKinnon, Liberal, Gatineau, QC]

I'm here to tell you that the Fédération des chambres de commerce du Québec has strongly supported Bill C‑39.

[The Chair, Liberal, James Maloney]

Thank you, Mr. Simard.

That takes us to Mr. Leslie.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister LeBlanc, why does a pipeline needing 299 kilometres of new land get an independent regulator's decision while one needing 301 kilometres has to go to cabinet? Why is that the right number for a political decision to suddenly be implemented? What is the demonstrated analysis as to why that's the appropriate point for a decision level to be changed?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

I think that's a very good question. I know that our colleague the Minister of Natural Resources consulted and worked with the energy sector and energy-producing provinces to come up with this particular decision. In discussions we've been in, our colleague Tim Hodgson used examples of smaller pipelines and existing rights-of-way that got caught in a process that frankly had created a high level of uncertainty and delay. The government had to choose a particular cut-off where we think a rigorous regulator with a lot of expertise and access to independent advice would be able to participate in those decisions in the appropriate way.

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

Thank you, Minister. I'm glad you said it that way, because you just outlined that after independent experts, in this case the regulators, have completed their review, you are still building in the opportunity for politicians to get the final say on whether or not this project can move forward. If the public interest is already part of the regulator's legal test, what additional issue does cabinet need to decide after the regulator has come to that decision?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Again, the existing process would have given cabinet a great deal—

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

This one does too, though, does it not? If it's over 300 kilometres, you still get to decide, as cabinet.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

This does, for a category of project.

I think people expected the elected government, at the right moment, after the rigorous assessment and the proponents—

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

I don't think Canadians trust your government's pipelines, Minister.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

I would be very careful, as a Conservative MP, talking about this government approving pipelines.

Maybe you missed it, but the Prime Minister was in the province of Alberta with Premier Smith, announcing a very important piece of energy infrastructure for the economy—

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

Okay, Minister. As the government—