Transport Committee on June 18th, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

I call this meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number three of the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Monday, June 16, the committee is resuming its consideration of Bill C-5, an act to enact the free trade and labour mobility in Canada act and the building Canada act.

Today's meeting is taking place in a hybrid format, pursuant to the Standing Orders. Members are attending in person in the room and remotely by using the Zoom application.

Before we begin, I want to ask all in-person participants to consult the guidelines written on the cards on the table. These measures are in place to help prevent audio and feedback incidents and to protect the health and safety of all participants, including our interpreters. You will also notice a QR code on the card, which links to a short awareness video.

Colleagues, I would now like to welcome our witnesses for the next two hours. Appearing before us today, we have the Honourable Chrystia Freeland, Minister of Transport and Internal Trade.

Welcome to you, Minister.

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, Minister of Transport and Internal Trade]

It's great to be here.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

We have the Honourable Dominic LeBlanc, Minister responsible for Canada-U.S. Trade, Intergovernmental Affairs and One Canadian Economy. Welcome to you, sir.

We also have the Honourable Rebecca Alty, Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations. Welcome to you.

Also, from the clean growth office of the Privy Council we have Sarah Jackson, director; and Daniel Morin, senior adviser. From the Privy Council Office we have Christiane Fox, deputy clerk of the Privy Council and deputy minister of intergovernmental affairs; and Jeannine Ritchot, assistant deputy minister, intergovernmental affairs. From the Department of Crown-Indigenous Relations we have Valerie Gideon, deputy minister; and Bruno Steinke, senior director. Welcome to you all.

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, University—Rosedale, ON]

We also have Arun Thangaraj, the deputy minister of Transport, here with us.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

We could not have a meeting without mentioning his presence in the back. Welcome to you, sir.

Ministers, we'll begin with five-minute opening remarks.

With that, Minister Freeland, I'd love to turn the floor over to you for five minutes, please—

Go ahead, Ms. Gazan.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

I have a point of order before the testimony begins. I was wondering if I could receive unanimous consent to have a round of questions at the end.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Is that similar to what we did yesterday, Ms. Gazan?

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Is there any opposition to providing Ms. Gazan with five minutes to pose questions to the witnesses?

[Some hon. members]

No.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Seeing none, it's adopted unanimously. I'll make sure you get that time, Ms. Gazan.

Minister Freeland, the floor is yours. You have five minutes, please.

[Chrystia Freeland, Liberal, University—Rosedale, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Canada is at a critical moment. U.S. tariffs are battering our country and are threatening to push the world economy into a recession. Hard-working Canadians are losing their jobs, businesses are losing their customers and investors are holding back. That is why it is so essential for us to press ahead with a project that costs nothing and can be accomplished at the stroke of a pen: delivering free trade in Canada.

Ultimately, the decision to build one Canadian economy, not 13, is about trusting each other. It's about deciding that the delicious steak people eat in Calgary is surely good enough to serve in Charlottetown and that the dental hygienist whose patients in Moncton adore her can be counted on to do the same excellent work when she moves to Quebec City.

According to a 2019 study published by the IMF, the impact of these barriers to internal trade is the equivalent to Canadians imposing a 7% tariff on ourselves. A 2016 report by Trevor Tombe and Lukas Albrecht, in the Canadian Journal of Economics, found that removing all barriers to internal trade and labour mobility could lower prices by up to 15%. A 2016 study by the Senate committee on banking, trade and commerce found that lifting barriers to internal trade could boost productivity by up to 7%. Research by Trevor Tombe and Ryan Manucha, published by the Macdonald-Laurier Institute in 2024, estimates that free trade in Canada would add up to $200 billion to our economy.

Let's seize this opportunity to transform Canada by trusting one another and creating one single Canadian economy. We introduced this bill because we want to eliminate domestic trade barriers and build one Canadian economy.

Momentum is building across Canada. P.E.I, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Ontario, Saskatchewan and Manitoba have all passed legislation to remove barriers to internal trade.

B.C. has passed its historic Economic Stabilization Act. Quebec is advancing its own reforms. I do want to salute Jason Kenney, who was a leader in this area when he was premier of Alberta. Memorandums of understanding between Ontario and other provinces, as well as powerful regional agreements like the New West Partnership, signal new levels of co-operation.

I want to be clear: The federal legislation is about being part of a broader wave and a broader national effort to remove barriers to internal trade and labour mobility. This legislation by itself won't do the job, and there will be more work to do after, I hope, we pass this legislation on Friday, but this is the federal government's contribution to the excellent work provinces and territories are doing. It's important that we, as federal MPs, do our share. What a delicious irony it will be for us all to respond to tariffs imposed from abroad by finally tearing down the tariff and trade barriers we Canadians have imposed on each other. Let's get this done once and for all and deliver free trade in Canada.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Minister Freeland.

Next, we'll turn the floor over to Minister LeBlanc.

Minister LeBlanc, you have five minutes, please.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Minister responsible for Canada-U.S. Trade]

Mr. Chair, I would like to thank the committee for inviting me to discuss the proposed legislation on one Canadian economy and the critical importance of advancing projects of national interest.

This is not only a period of profound change for Canada; it is also a pivotal moment. As my colleague just said, U.S. tariffs and rising protectionism are threatening Canadian jobs and businesses. Rarely have global markets been so volatile. Given this new reality, Canadians expect their government to act boldly, decisively and with solidarity.

At this crucial time, Canada needs to be able to build strategic infrastructure, transportation corridors and energy networks that are essential for Canadians' prosperity and economic security. We must be able to move our resources from coast to coast to coast and get them to the world more quickly and more reliably. This is an opportunity for the federal government to work with provinces and territories and with indigenous partners to identify and accelerate the projects we need right now to assure our autonomy, our security and our trade diversification. The one Canadian economy act aims to do just that. It's a key tool to secure Canadian jobs for this generation, and for generations to come, as all of us would hope.

At the recent first ministers' meeting in Saskatoon, where Chrystia and I and our colleague the Minister of Energy and Natural Resources were present, premiers from every political stripe expressed their enthusiastic support for advancing nation-building projects, because premiers understood that in order for Canada to succeed, we must build one Canadian economy out of 13 and thereby build a shared future.

Too often, it takes a long time for decisions to be made about projects that have the potential to connect our country and grow our economy. The one Canadian economy bill is our chance to do things differently while remaining true to our values and our responsibilities as a country, of course.

We can and will accelerate the approval of projects, while obviously continuing to abide by constitutionally mandated responsibilities towards indigenous peoples and ensuring the protection and the environmental assessments that impose as well. To that end, the government will set up a new major projects office that will provide a seamless single point of contact for project proponents once they're designated and for stakeholders, provinces and indigenous partners. My colleague will expand on many of these aspects.

The one Canadian economy act is about nation-building on a scale not seen for generations. It's about transitioning from "Should we build?" to "How do we build?" The Prime Minister and our government have been clear about our objectives. We hope these objectives are shared by members of this committee and members in the other House. Canadians have entrusted us to do things differently and better and to move nation-building projects forward. We believe this legislation is an important step in that direction.

After you hear the phenomenal comments from my colleague, we look forward, as you can imagine, to your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Minister LeBlanc. As always, it's a pleasure to have you here.

Next, we'll turn the floor over to Minister Alty.

The floor is yours. You have five minutes, please.

[Rebecca Alty, Liberal, Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to begin by acknowledging that we are gathered on the unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people.

I'm pleased to be here today in support of the one economy act, legislation that reflects our government's commitment to building Canada strong. This bill lays the foundation for one Canadian economy: an economy that works for all Canadians, including first nations, Métis and Inuit people.

Minister LeBlanc and Minister Freeland have outlined the substance of the bill. I'll focus on how we'll be implementing this with indigenous peoples.

First, let me start by being crystal clear: Major projects will proceed under this act only with meaningful consultation and accommodation with indigenous rights holders whose section 35 rights may be affected.

This bill mandates meaningful consultation with indigenous peoples during the process of designating projects of national interest and establishing the terms and conditions that will apply to those projects.

This requirement is not optional. It's protected under the Canadian Constitution and embedded throughout the legislation.

Thanks to the efforts of indigenous leaders, governments and representative organizations, last year, we also passed an amendment to the Interpretation Act, which ensures that all legislation, including new legislation like the one economy act, is interpreted in a way that upholds and does not diminish the aboriginal and treaty rights recognized and affirmed in section 35 of the Constitution. We also have legal obligations under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, as well as our modern treaties and self-government agreements, to ensure that the duty to consult and accommodate is honoured, and honoured in full.

As we undertake this nation-building effort, the principle of free, prior and informed consent must and will guide every project. As mentioned, this legislation mandates that there must be meaningful consultation and accommodation with indigenous peoples during both the process of determining which projects are in national interest and the development of the rigorous conditions for each project.

In determining which projects proposed by indigenous peoples, provinces and territories are in the national interest, we'll be evaluating based on whether they strengthen Canada's autonomy, resilience and security; provide economic or other benefits to Canadians; have a high likelihood of successful execution; advance the interests of indigenous peoples; and contribute to clean growth and to meeting Canada's objectives with respect to climate change.

The legislation is incentivizing early engagement with indigenous peoples. Proponents who don't engage with indigenous peoples before bringing their projects forward for consideration under this legislation will be given a lower evaluation.

The intent of the legislation is to streamline the approvals to advance major projects. We know that failing to uphold our legal responsibilities around consultation and accommodation will only lead to costly and time-consuming delays in the courts. This legislation is about supporting projects that are not only shovel-ready but shovel-worthy; projects that respect indigenous knowledge and uphold aboriginal and treaty rights. We'll be looking for projects that have indigenous support and, even better, indigenous equity in the project.

To get it right, the new process proposed in this historic bill includes the creation of a new major federal projects office that will bring all relevant federal departments together to establish a single set of binding conditions for the project to move forward. This new office will include an indigenous advisory council.

We will also be providing funding for indigenous participation in this new process, from start to finish. At the same time, being a reliable partner to indigenous peoples is not just about upholding the duty to consult and accommodate. Enabling the creation of long-term wealth and prosperity for indigenous peoples through equity ownership is central to building Canada strong. That's why we doubled the indigenous loan guarantee program from $5 billion to $10 billion, enabling more indigenous communities to become owners of major projects. Just this year, 36 first nations in British Columbia used this program to secure a 12.5% equity share in a major pipeline project, generating long-term income and economic power for their communities.

The truth is that our economy can be strong only when it benefits everyone. We know that investing in indigenous economies and communities is good for the country as a whole.

Together, let's move this bill forward so we can begin the vital work of building Canada's future economy, one that includes and is built with indigenous people.

Merci beaucoup. Mahsi cho. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Peter Schiefke]

Thank you very much, Ministers, for your opening remarks.

We'll begin our line of questioning today with Mr. Lawrence.

Mr. Lawrence, the floor is yours. You have six minutes, sir.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Clarke, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you to the ministers for agreeing to be here for the next six hours. We appreciate that.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Clarke, ON]

No? That's a little fun to begin with here. You can smile here.

Conservatives agree directionally that of course we need national projects built. We need the elimination of interprovincial trade barriers. In fact, over the last 10 years, the old Liberal government was very much against that, we felt. We are glad that the new government appears to be at least open directionally, but we do have some concerns, particularly on the ethics, accountability and transparency side.

I'll start by referencing proposed sections 21, 22, and 23 of the building Canada act. Together, when these are combined, they have the ability to give a minister the ability to exempt any national project from any piece of legislation passed since 1867, with the exception of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Given that, and given the fact that the Prime Minister worked for one of the largest constructors and manufacturers of national projects of infrastructure in Canada—and perhaps in the world—at Brookfield, could you please identify to us the screens that will be put in place to make sure that we don't have conflicts of interest or other lobbying concerns?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Thank you for the question, Mr. Lawrence. It's a good question.

You're right when you identify the operation of those particular clauses. In no discussions that I was in, or that I participated in, was exempting requirements under the conflict of interest and ethics act, for example, which would be a piece of legislation that obviously you're referring to. As the minister who would be designated as responsible for this act, I can't imagine that in the course of my recommendation to cabinet that would be the kind of exemption we're looking at. I obviously would, in any circumstance, be governed by the advice we would get from officials from the Privy Council Office and the Ethics Commissioner in those circumstances.

I get the hypothetical question you're asking, and I've seen you and your colleagues raise these concerns in different fora elsewhere. I just think that it feels very hypothetical that we would be approving a national project and look to exempt the responsibilities of any member of Parliament, public office holder or member of cabinet from the ethics obligations. I wouldn't ever do that myself. I wouldn't go to cabinet with that kind of recommendation, but I take your point.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Clarke, ON]

Thank you, Minister.

Well, I would follow the old Ronald Reagan quote: “Trust, but verify.”

The way in which proposed sections 21, 22 and 23 work together in the building Canada act is striking. Literally any legislation can be exempt, including the Conflict of Interest Act, the Lobbying Act, the Income Tax Act and the Criminal Code. While I certainly want to trust, I would also like to verify. My question is, would you be open to an amendment that would restrict that to prevent exemptions from the Conflict of Interest Act and other acts?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

The deputy clerk.... As I say, it is a good question, and I wouldn't want to leave an impression that is inaccurate. Perhaps Chris Fox could add something if, in my explanation, it's not as precise as it should be.

There are limits in terms of what acts or what exemptions could be issued. Part 1 talks about “Acts of Parliament”: Fisheries Act, Indian Act, International River Improvements Act, National Capital Act, Navigable Waters Protection Act and Migratory Birds Convention Act. It doesn't speak of some of the ethics obligations, like the Criminal Code.

Again, it's a hypothetical question that we're going to approve or designate a project and exempt it from the Criminal Code of Canada. It doesn't seem like a legitimate line of questioning.

[Philip Lawrence, Conservative, Northumberland—Clarke, ON]

I appreciate that, but the act actually says in proposed section 21 that you can add other acts to it, which means that you could, in theory, add the Criminal Code. I'm not saying you would, Minister. I'm saying that the possibility thereto exists, and we have seen, in the old Liberal government, some ethical lapses—I know, it's shocking—so we would be looking for an amendment to make sure.

Specifically, like I said, the Prime Minister ran one of the largest infrastructure companies in the world, so putting those screens in place is I think incredibly important. Would you have any details on how the Prime Minister's screens might be put in place to make sure we don't have conflicts of interest?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

The Prime Minister has answered the questions and the Ethics Commissioner's office is able to talk about all the screens that are appropriately in place to ensure that there is in fact no conflict of interest or appearance thereof.

I'm not sure that any of us are going to speak to those specific ethics provisions.

Sarah, can you perhaps add something?