Evidence of meeting #46 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 45th Parliament, 1st session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was work.

A recording is available from Parliament.

On the agenda

Members speaking

11 a.m.

Liberal

The Chair (Robert Morrissey (Egmont, Lib.)) Liberal Bobby Morrissey

I call the meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 46 of the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. Pursuant to the order of reference received on Wednesday, September 23, 2026, the committee is meeting on Bill C-266, an act to establish a national framework respecting skilled trades and labour mobility.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, meaning that some people are participating in the room and some are participating virtually, pursuant to the Standing Orders of the House.

Before we begin, I have a few notes.

To those of you in the room, please ensure that your devices are on silent mode and please refrain from tapping on the microphone boom. This is for the benefit and protection of the translators.

You also have the option of choosing to participate in today's meeting in the official language of your choice. Please ensure that you're on the right channel if you require interpretation in the room. If you're appearing virtually, click on the globe icon at the bottom of your Surface and choose the official language of your choice. If there is an interruption in translation services, please get my attention. We'll suspend while they are being corrected.

As a reminder to all—you are well aware, being seasoned members of this committee—please direct all questions through me, the chair. Wait until I recognize you by name before proceeding and we'll get along fabulously.

I would like to now welcome our witness today on Bill C-266, and congratulate MP Parm Bains on his private member's bill.

Mr. Bains, you will have five minutes for your opening statement. You have the floor.

11 a.m.

Liberal

Parm Bains Liberal Richmond East—Steveston, BC

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good morning.

This is Bill C-266. When I received the opportunity to introduce a private member's bill, my first one in the House, I knew immediately that I wanted to champion something that could make a real difference for skilled trades workers across Canada.

As a former aircraft maintenance engineer, I have seen first-hand the dedication, expertise and hard work that tradespeople bring to their professions every single day. I've also witnessed the frustrations they face when workplace circumstances change unexpectedly, when economic opportunities arise in another province or when bureaucratic barriers make it difficult to take their skills where they are needed most.

My own experience, combined with countless conversations with trades workers, apprentices, young professionals, employers and industry leaders, many of whom are family, friends and colleagues, inspired me to introduce Bill C-266, an act to establish a national framework respecting skilled trades and labour mobility.

At the core of this bill, it's about solving a problem that has existed for far too long. Since tabling this legislation, I've met with trade associations, unions, employers, industry organizations and educational institutions from every region of our country. Despite representing different sectors and perspectives, they consistently identify the same challenge: Canada needs a more streamlined, coordinated and harmonized approach to recognizing skilled trades credentials across provinces and territories.

Today, too many workers encounter unnecessary hurdles when pursuing opportunities outside their home jurisdiction. These barriers limit career growth, create inefficiencies for employers and contribute to labour shortages that impact communities and industries from coast to coast to coast.

At a time when Canada urgently needs skilled trades workers to build homes, modernize infrastructure, strengthen supply chains and drive economic growth, we cannot afford a system that prevents qualified Canadians from putting their skills to work where they are needed most. That's why support for Bill C-266 has continued to grow.

Polytechnics Canada has endorsed this effort, recognizing that improving harmonization and credential recognition will help workers move more freely to meet labour demands across the country. Their support reflects a broader understanding that labour mobility is not simply a workforce issue. It's an economic imperative.

As someone who spent years working in aerospace, I'm also encouraged by the support of the executive director of the B.C. Aviation Council, who has described Bill C-266 as a positive step toward improving labour mobility in Canada. The council is now engaging with counterpart organizations across the country, further demonstrating that the need for action extends across multiple sectors of our economy.

Importantly, this bill recognizes that even where national standards already exist, opportunities remain to improve consistency and portability. The British Columbia Institute of Technology, BCIT, in my hometown of Richmond, has highlighted that while trades such as instrumentation and control technicians are nationally harmonized through the Red Seal program, elements of apprenticeship governance and implementation still vary across jurisdictions. This bill presents an opportunity by encouraging greater collaboration among governments, educational institutions, apprenticeship authorities, employers and labour organizations. We can develop a framework that respects provincial and territorial responsibilities, while making it easier for Canadians to build careers wherever opportunity calls.

The goal is not uniformity for its own sake. The goal is to create a system that maintains excellence, responds to regional economic needs and gives workers confidence that their qualifications will be recognized across Canada. The unions I spoke with, including CUPE and Unifor, have been broadly supportive because they see the potential benefits for workers. They have also raised an important concern, one that I share wholeheartedly. Enhanced mobility must never come at the expense of wages, safety, training quality or worker protections.

Let me be absolutely clear: Bill C-266 is not about lowering standards. It's about strengthening and harmonizing standards while removing unnecessary barriers. It's about ensuring that workers can pursue opportunities with confidence and employers can access the skilled talent they need without compromising quality and safety.

Canada's future depends on our ability to build. We need skilled workers to construct homes, maintain critical infrastructure, power our economy, support major projects and strengthen our country's competitiveness. We cannot fully unlock our economic potential if qualified tradespeople face obstacles when moving from one province or territory to another.

That's why the Government of Canada's team Canada strong skilled trades strategy is such an important step forward. Through investments of up to $6 billion over five years, including support for apprenticeship training, recruitment and retention, Canada is making significant investments in the next generation of skilled workers, and Bill C-266 complements these efforts.

Thank you.

The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey

Thank you, Mr. Bains.

Mr. Genuis, you have the floor for six minutes.

11:05 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Bains, for being here.

The objectives of the bill are very good, and they are ones we agree with and have certainly been talking about for a very long time.

Does this bill give the government any new powers?

Parm Bains Liberal Richmond East—Steveston, BC

Does it give the government any new powers?

I think, ultimately, what the bill would do is.... If you look at something the BCIT mentioned—

11:05 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

It's a simple question. I'll ask you fairly simple and short questions, if that's okay.

Does the bill provide the government with the power to do anything that it's not presently able to do?

Parm Bains Liberal Richmond East—Steveston, BC

Yes. It allows the government to continue to pursue stronger governance instrumentation of the regulations and standards of many of the Red Seal programs and other programs that are out there that tradespeople have. If you look at—

11:10 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Okay, but you started your response by saying, “It allows the government to continue”. My question is a simple question: Does this bill give the government any new powers?

Parm Bains Liberal Richmond East—Steveston, BC

It does, because it—

11:10 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

What will the Government of Canada be able to do after this bill passes that it's not presently able to do?

Parm Bains Liberal Richmond East—Steveston, BC

The government will.... With regard to the internal trade barriers we have, for example, it will allow them to streamline and harmonize across all provinces. That work needs to be done, and—

11:10 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

You're saying that this bill provides the government with new legal authority to address trade barriers. Is that what you're saying?

Parm Bains Liberal Richmond East—Steveston, BC

Yes.

11:10 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Okay.

What part or section of the bill can you point me to that provides the government with that new authority? I don't actually see in the bill at all what you're saying, so tell me where it says that the government has new legal authority to address trade barriers.

Parm Bains Liberal Richmond East—Steveston, BC

If you look at the work that's being done right now—

11:10 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

I'm sorry. The question is this: Where in the bill is the government given new legal authorities to address issues around trade barriers?

Parm Bains Liberal Richmond East—Steveston, BC

I would have to double-check where exactly in the bill I can point to.

11:10 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Okay. You're sure that the bill provides the government with new legal authority to address trade barriers, but you're not sure where it is in the bill. Is that right?

Parm Bains Liberal Richmond East—Steveston, BC

I can provide that information to you in writing after.

11:10 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Okay.

I'll have another round later, because I've read the bill—I've been through it several times—and I don't see any evidence that it provides the government with new powers whatsoever.

Would the minister have been able to create a framework without this bill? If the bill had not been put forward, would the minister have been able to do a framework absent that?

Parm Bains Liberal Richmond East—Steveston, BC

I think what this bill ultimately does is formalize that work. When we are asking provinces to harmonize the standards across the country, this bill gives the government more opportunity to make sure that it's a framework that each province can follow. It allows for more accountability and reporting.

11:10 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Okay.

Could the minister not simply convene tomorrow a meeting of federal and provincial leaders and say, “I would like to create a framework,” and do all of the things that are in the bill? Could the minister not do it?

Parm Bains Liberal Richmond East—Steveston, BC

The minister could, but this is the opportunity that's actually formalizing that work. This bill formalizes that work. He could say that. However, the fact that now we've all voted—you voted on it, or this side of the House has voted on it.... This actually formalizes it, adds the accountability, adds reporting structures to it and allows for that work to not only continue but also come back in a way where.... There are measures in here that tell each jurisdiction to ensure that they're reporting within a year.

11:10 a.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

That's right. However, I guess the point—and you've agreed—is that, with regard to the framework, the minister does have the power to do those things anyway.

Suppose this bill passed and the minister either didn't comply with the framework in general or missed one of the timelines set out. What are the consequences for a minister or for the government if some part of this new law is not followed? What are the consequences?

Parm Bains Liberal Richmond East—Steveston, BC

The consequences if it's not followed would be that you have to potentially request an extension if the work is not done. If the work needs to be completed and the reporting and the harmonization across the jurisdictions, whether that's language issues in certain jurisdictions or other standards.... If the work is not complete, there's potentially an opportunity for the minister to ask for an extension.