First, the federal Parliament does not have the constitutional power to legislate on holidays for all businesses. It has the power to legislate on federal employees and employees in businesses under federal legislation. Even if it wished, it could not impose statutory holidays for businesses, schools, and things like that. It does not have the power. It would make the bill unconstitutional.
It can legislate only on its own employees, and the federal employees already have Remembrance Day as a statutory holiday, as a day off, so that does not change anything here. The provinces would have to adopt a specific bill for their own businesses and schools to implement something that would make it a statutory holiday and define what it means for them. The federal Parliament does not have the power to legislate this.
The problem with the Holidays Act is that there is a distinction between “legal holiday” and “holiday”. For 25 years, the courts have been saying that the difference does not have any legal consequences. Because these differences in language are actualized and implemented in other legislation and in all other federal or provincial legislation, it doesn't make a difference.
If you read the Holidays Act, you see the confusion. You could think there might be a difference between “legal holiday” and “holiday”. The courts have said there is no difference, really. There are no legal consequences. The confusion would remain if somebody reads the act and thinks there must be a difference because there is “legal holiday” and there is “holiday”. In fact, there are no legal consequences to that.
Therefore, the consequence the bill would have is to remove the possibility of confusion in the reading, but this would not have any legal consequences.