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
Patty Hajdu Liberal Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON
Oh, it was just tabled. Look at that: I just got a note.
Conservative
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Clarke, ON
It was just tabled. We look forward to seeing that.
It would have been nice, candidly, to have that before the questioning began.
October 19th, 2026 / 6:55 p.m.
Liberal
Patty Hajdu Liberal Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON
I think it was meant to be tabled earlier today, but there were delays.
Anyway, listen, I'm not the justice minister. The good news is that it's tabled.
I assume that means I can speak about what's in it, if I'm asked....
Apparently, I can speak about it.
I do know what's in the charter statement, because I have—
Conservative
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Clarke, ON
I do not. I haven't had an opportunity to study it, because it's late.
I will move on.
Liberal
Patty Hajdu Liberal Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON
Just to be clear, I saw a draft, not the full statement. I may not have all the details.
Conservative
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Clarke, ON
Okay.
That goes to my last question, Minister. You've been elected since 2015, I believe. You've had a chance to observe Parliament for many years. Would you describe the opposition parties as always acting collaboratively, collegially, productively and in good faith?
Liberal
Patty Hajdu Liberal Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON
Look, if you're asking me if the opposition parties have always acted collaboratively and in good faith, I think the system of democracy is designed for us to ask ourselves hard questions. Sometimes I don't think we've always acted collaboratively and in good faith, no.
Conservative
Philip Lawrence Conservative Northumberland—Clarke, ON
I'm wondering how you're going to square this circle, because your premise is that your change through Bill C-39 is that when negotiations become public, they will always become collaborative, collegial, productive and in good faith. You've just said that this is not the case.
If, in fact, making negotiations be in public doesn't accomplish that, then why don't we have any firmer restrictions? Why aren't we giving the special mediator more powers?
Liberal
Patty Hajdu Liberal Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON
Listen, I have never once said that what we will do will essentially be rainbows and sunshine for all parties for the rest of time. That's not how negotiations work. If you've worked as a unionized member or you've been an employer for a unionized organization, the latter of which I have, you will know that collective agreement negotiation is difficult. That's even when the parties have good relationships, because we are talking about challenging discussions around wages and revenue and capacity and benefits and time off and operations.
These are challenging conversations, but I will also say that 95% of organizations get there without disruption.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna, BC
Yes, the minister has said that there's a charter statement. The committee has not received one. It is absolutely ridiculous that she would expect us to ask her intelligent questions about a document that no other parliamentarian has. I've been checking the website, Mr. Chair.
It's contemptuous of Parliament to make references that it's available when it's not. I think the Minister of Justice should answer, and I'd like you to convey the committee's absolute contempt for this process.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
I think she simply made reference to the fact that it was tabled today and didn't go beyond that in any way, Mr. Albas.
Conservative
Dan Albas Conservative Okanagan Lake West—South Kelowna, BC
It's contemptuous of this Parliament and this committee.
Liberal
Liberal
Patty Hajdu Liberal Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON
Look, I'm so sorry if I've made a mistake here, but I have a note that, apparently, it is in your inbox, so you may look at it at your leisure. Again, I think the intent was to table it earlier today. However, there was disruption in the process of the House.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal James Maloney
It's okay, Minister. I think we've moved on, thanks.
Mr. Louis, go ahead. Thank you.
Liberal
Tim Louis Liberal Kitchener—Conestoga, ON
Thank you, Chair. I'd like to direct this round of questions to Minister Dabrusin, specifically about the regions of national interest.
To set that up, it's important that this bill preserve the approved framework that Canadians expect—environmental, health, social and economic impacts—and that these continue to be assessed. We need to talk about cumulative effects and the climate commitments that need to be considered, and keep indigenous rights and indigenous knowledge as part of federal decision-making. We need to reduce duplication and improve certainty at the same time.
The way I understand it, this bill is a change of process but not a change of standards, and it's not going to remove environmental assessment requirements or environmental laws. However, there have been questions when we talk about “regions of national interest”, which can be referred to as “advanced planning” before a region can be designated as having to undergo regional assessments under the Impact Assessment Act. That examines existing and future activities, cumulative effects, indigenous rights, environmental and social conditions, and human health. More work up front can actually equal less repetition later. Minister, can you explain how we can do this work up front, and that the process is not an automatic approval or the creation of some sort of exemption zone?
Liberal
Julie Dabrusin Liberal Toronto—Danforth, ON
I would say two things. I was talking briefly about the regions of national interest earlier, and if I can just kind of jump back into where I was when I was talking about them, I think they're really important. However, taking a step back on this entire bill, I use this example to try to explain it: When my kids were in public school, I used to fill out a million forms that had their OHIP number and their emergency contact, and I had to keep filling out the form, even though it was going to the same place. I kept wondering, “You have the information. Why can't you all just share it and get this dealt with?” I think every parent, come September, has to deal with that frustration.
The idea is to try to get rid of that. If we have that information, how can we work better on the back end to make sure that you don't have to fill out that form a million times? We still need that information, but we just need to simplify the process. That's kind of my view, if I were to take a broader view of what I see about this.
The regions of national interest are really important, because they allow us to go and do a deep dive in an area. It's not a blank cheque—maybe I'll start with that and be really clear. It's not a blank cheque, and it doesn't work on a region.... We don't do a study of all projects that could happen in an area. The way it's done is that we look at a type of project in a region and then, taking that into account, look at things like these: What do we know about the species at risk in the area and the biodiversity? What's culturally significant in an area? We would take a look at that and look at what the cumulative impacts would be in that area. We would reach out and consult with the indigenous people who would be impacted by that type of project in that area, so we get to do a really deep dive as to what the impacts are.
If, at the end of that, we look at it and say, “Knowing all that we've discovered in going through that process, we're comfortable with projects of that type moving forward in this place,” then we can actually move forward with the process. However, a person who's then, with that type of project, putting in an application.... If there's something unique about their project, they still have to do a further assessment on that unique aspect of it.
I just want to get away from the idea that it's a blank cheque. It isn't, but it actually, I think, helps us to do the deep, heavy work at the front end. From a proponent's side, that can deal with getting rid of any frustrations they have of having this perfect idea that this would work somewhere and then discovering, after they've made massive investments, that it's really not going to work out there. It also allows us to work with the local area and community with a deeper knowledge to say that this is actually something that's going to work there and that we should work to try to encourage this in this space.
I think it's one of the stronger pieces. As I said, it builds on what we had in the “A Force of Nature” nature strategy, where we already committed to doing more mapping so that we would have a better sense and know at the front end—and this is about quicker decisions—whether something makes sense somewhere or not.
Liberal
Conservative
Kyle Seeback Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Minister, in your conversation with your own members, you are talking about how you've enhanced section 107 and added in this national interest test, which has various components to it. You say this is putting guardrails on the use of section 107.
Are you saying that you didn't use any of these tests when your government used an unprecedented number of section 107 referrals over the last five years?
Liberal
Patty Hajdu Liberal Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON
What I can say is that I think implicitly a labour minister is asked to balance the needs of multiple sectors and parties whenever contemplating any back-to-work legislation or section 107 referral. This formalizes the need to do that.
Conservative
Kyle Seeback Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
Okay, then you didn't actually consider whether it would have a significant impact on the Canadian economy. You didn't consider whether the strike or lockout was causing or might cause serious social disruption.
Liberal
Patty Hajdu Liberal Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON
That is not what I said. I can't speak for other ministers—obviously, I'm not in their heads—but I can say that I was the Liberal federal labour minister for a number of years around 2018, and whenever you are contemplating either back-to-work legislation—which I have used—or section 107—which I have used—those balances are part of the deliberation. In fact, you're getting—