Debates of June 13th, 2025

Government Business No. 1—Proceedings on Bill C-5

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

moved:

That, notwithstanding any standing order, special order or usual practice of the House, Bill C-5, An Act to enact the Free Trade and Labour Mobility in Canada Act and the Building Canada Act, be disposed of as follows:

(a) the bill be ordered for consideration at the second reading stage immediately after the adoption of this order, provided that,

(i) two members from each recognized party, one member from the New Democratic Party and the member from the Green Party may each speak at the said stage for not more than 10 minutes, followed by five minutes for questions and comments,

(ii) during consideration of the bill at second reading, the House shall not adjourn, except pursuant to a motion moved by a minister of the Crown,

(iii) at the conclusion of the time provided for the debate or when no member wishes to speak, whichever is earlier, all questions necessary to dispose of the second reading stage of the bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment and, if a recorded division is requested, the vote shall not be deferred;

(b) if the bill is adopted at the second reading stage and referred to the Standing Committee on Transport, Infrastructure and Communities,

(i) if the report on the striking of membership of Standing and Standing Joint Committees of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs has not yet been concurred in by the House, the whip of each recognized party shall deposit with the Clerk of the House a list of their party's members of the committee no later than the adjournment of the House on the day of the adoption of this order,

(ii) the committee shall meet on Tuesday, June 17, 2025, and on Wednesday, June 18, 2025, at 3:30 p.m., provided that,

(A) the committee shall have the first priority for the use of House resources for committee meetings,

(B) the committee shall meet until 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday, June 17, 2025, for the election of the chair and vice-chairs, the consideration of routine motions governing its proceedings, and to gather evidence from witnesses,

(C) the committee meet until 11:59 p.m. on Wednesday, June 18, 2025, to gather evidence from witnesses and undertake clause-by-clause consideration of the bill,

(D) all amendments be submitted to the clerk of the committee by noon on Wednesday, June 18, 2025,

(E) amendments filed by independent members shall be deemed to have been proposed during the clause-by-clause consideration of the bill,

(F) if the committee has not completed the clause-by-clause consideration of the bill by 11:59 p.m. on Wednesday, June 18, 2025, all remaining amendments submitted to the committee shall be deemed moved, the Chair shall put the question, forthwith and successively, without further debate, on all remaining clauses and amendments submitted to the committee, as well as each and every question necessary to dispose of the clause-by-clause consideration of the bill, and the committee shall not adjourn the meeting until it has disposed of the bill,

(G) a member of the committee may report the bill to the House by depositing it with the Clerk of the House, who shall notify the House leaders of the recognized parties and independent members, provided that if the report is presented on Thursday, June 19, 2025, the bill shall be taken up at report stage on the next sitting day;

(c) the bill be ordered for consideration at report stage on Friday, June 20, 2025, provided that,

(i) two members from each recognized party, one member from the New Democratic Party and the member from the Green Party may each speak on report stage motions for not more than 10 minutes, followed by five minutes for questions and comments,

(ii) at the conclusion of the time provided for the debate or when no member wishes to speak, whichever is earlier, any proceedings before the House shall be interrupted, and in turn every question necessary for the disposal of the said stage of the bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment, and, if a recorded division is requested, the vote shall not be deferred, except pursuant to Standing Order 76.1(8),

(iii) the bill be ordered for consideration at the third reading stage immediately after concurrence of the bill at report stage;

(d) when the bill is taken up at the third reading stage, pursuant to subparagraph (c)(iii) of this order,

(i) two members from each recognized party, one member from the New Democratic Party and the member from the Green Party may each speak at the said stage for not more than 10 minutes, followed by five minutes for questions and comments,

(ii) at the conclusion of the time provided for the debate or when no member wishes to speak, whichever is earlier, all questions necessary to dispose of the third reading stage of the bill shall be put forthwith and successively, without further debate or amendment, and, if a recorded division is requested, the vote shall not be deferred;

(e) on Friday, June 20, 2025, the House shall not adjourn until the proceedings on the bill have been completed, except pursuant to a motion moved by a minister of the Crown, provided that once proceedings have been completed, the House may then proceed to consider other business or, if it has already passed the ordinary hour of daily adjournment, the House shall adjourn to the next sitting day; and

(f) no motion to adjourn the debate at any stage of the said bill may be moved except by a minister of the Crown.

Mr. Speaker, this is the first chance I have had to speak in the House since you became a chair occupant. Let me congratulate you on this important honour.

I rise today to speak to Bill C-5, the one Canadian economy act, which I had the honour of tabling in this House last week. This House is a place where, for generations, Canadians have placed their hopes, confronted adversity together and shaped the future of our country. Today, we do so again, facing challenges both new and familiar. The time for resolute action is now.

At the first ministers' meeting last week in Saskatoon, premiers unanimously expressed their spirited support for decisive movement on nation-building projects. There was a clear recognition that this hinge moment is an opportunity to reunite with the can-do spirit that envisioned and built, for example, the Confederation Bridge or the St. Lawrence Seaway. In that spirit, I hope colleagues will join us and recognize that this is an important moment to accelerate the adoption of this legislation.

Canada stands at a crossroads. Global shifts and internal obstacles demand a clear and rapid response. The United States, our closest trade and security partner, has become unpredictable and undependable. It has imposed unjustified and illegal tariffs, reminding us that our prosperity cannot rely disproportionately on the status quo. However, in challenge lies opportunity. Canada's unity, resolve and resourcefulness are obviously our greatest assets.

In the same spirit, I am honoured to speak to Bill C‑5, the one Canadian economy act, a plan designed to remove barriers, redefine our vision and open a new chapter in our national history. The time for action is now.

From fishers in the Northumberland Strait to mine workers in Whitehorse and innovators in Montreal, let this be the moment where we come together and choose to build and achieve great things. In the face of these new uncertainties, it is up to us to forge our economic destiny.

One of the central pillars of this legislation is a new framework for what we call projects of national interest, initiatives that will move our country forward, reinforce our economic sovereignty and drive prosperity in every region of the country.

For far too long, major projects, whether energy transmission lines, critical mineral developments, pipelines or clean technology projects, have been stalled by assessments, challenges, and overlapping and duplicative regulations. Investors, provinces and territories, and the business community have said that it is too difficult and takes too long to build important economically feasible projects in Canada. This has led to potential missed investment opportunities, lost jobs and a lack of competitiveness vis-à-vis our international counterparts. Our shared prosperity requires quick action.

This bill would introduce a new tool, a process for identifying, prioritizing and advancing transformative infrastructure and development projects. To support this new process, the government plans to create a new federal major projects office to coordinate, problem-solve and fast-track projects of national interest, transitioning from a fragmented approach to approval to unified, decisive action. For projects of national interest like these, we are committed to making decisions within a maximum time frame of two years, not five years or more.

The Prime Minister has been very clear. Moving forward, we will commit to a “one project, one review” approach. The days of duplication and cost overruns are over. Federal, provincial and territorial authorities will all work on a single assessment to move quickly, while remaining just as thorough and maintaining public trust. Standards will be high. Only projects that strengthen Canada's resilience, provide measurable economic benefits and are in line with our environmental, social and indigenous reconciliation values will receive this designation. Our goal is to put “Canada” and “achievement”, not “Canada” and “delay”, in the same sentence.

Just as vital is the continued commitment by this government that indigenous governments, partners and indeed indigenous peoples and communities must be engaged from the outset. Respect for constitutionally protected indigenous rights, knowledge and priorities is obviously non-negotiable and is clearly enunciated in the bill currently before the House. When we say partnership is the foundation, we mean exactly that. Whether in Inuvik, the Métis heartland of Manitoba or the Mi'kmaq territory in Atlantic Canada, nation building is only real if it is shared. That is why equity partnerships for indigenous peoples will be supported and prioritized.

Environmental stewardship will also remain paramount. This bill would not weaken any of Canada's core environmental statutes. Instead, it is about considering whether major projects drive clean growth and forge a sustainable legacy for the next generations.

The work of building a modern one Canadian economy does not stop with flagship projects. Our prosperity also depends on removing barriers that hobble Canadians' ability to trade, connect and work wherever opportunity calls across our country.

Let us talk about the reality facing thousands of small business owners everyday. Let us say someone makes kitchen appliances right here in Ontario. They might be investing in new refrigeration or dishwasher technology that saves Canadians money on their electricity bills, but even though they meet Ontario's stringent energy efficiency requirements, they cannot say their product meets federal standards for energy efficiency unless they have met all the federal testing, labelling and compliance procedures. As a result, they would not be able to sell their appliances across the border into Quebec or Manitoba. It might take months or more to navigate the federal process to prove their product is really as energy efficient as they say or as the Ontario standards have confirmed. That can slow things down and obviously adds cost.

The results of that are clear: unnecessary costs, regulatory confusion and a missed economic opportunity. Bill C‑5 is designed to ensure that a product that meets provincial or territorial energy efficiency standards would meet comparable federal standards.

Under this bill, if a good is produced, used or sold in accordance with a province's rules, it can move across the country without having to meet federal standards as long as it serves the same purpose.

Think about a Manitoba truck driver who has to deal not only with provincial requirements, but also with additional federal rules when crossing the border into Saskatchewan or Ontario. Paperwork, fees and compliance reviews are all barriers that slow down our most ambitious workers and businesses.

This bill will remove those federal barriers. A good or service produced in line with provincial or territorial regulations will be recognized as meeting comparable federal standards for interprovincial trade.

Labour mobility is also part of this bill. People in too many professions, like nurses, engineers, land surveyors and skilled trades people, find their skills underutilized due to conflicting or duplicate certification requirements. Where federal and provincial regulations overlap, this legislation guarantees swift mutual recognition of provincial and territorial credentials for federally regulated workers. This is about leveraging Canada's full talent pool, ensuring that skilled workers can answer opportunity's call everywhere in the country without bureaucratic delay. It is also about Canadians trusting each other. Every barrier we lift is a door opened to higher wages, broader horizons and greater economic momentum.

With this legislation, Canada positions itself firmly to become a clean and conventional energy superpower. Fort McMurray oil sands will lead on both production and emissions reductions. Edmonton and Sarnia are primed for leadership in hydrogen. New transmission infrastructure will ferry Labrador's clean hydro to Montreal and beyond.

We will mine, refine and finish uranium from Saskatchewan, lithium in northern Quebec and cobalt from Nunavut, delivering resources the world needs from a reliable, sustainable partner. Pipelines and port expansions will be built faster and smarter with climate and community in mind, showing that economic and environmental progress are not at odds but intertwined. Canada will not simply participate in the global resource economy; we will help define it.

I would like to assure the House that this commitment to acceleration does not mean exclusion or diminution of environmental standards or, obviously, our constitutionally enshrined obligations to indigenous peoples. Every major project advanced through the changes proposed in Bill C-5 will require real partnerships with indigenous peoples. We have already announced that we are setting up an indigenous advisory council. We will ensure that self-determination, inclusion and respect are at the heart of this process.

Environmental protection measures are essential too. Projects of national interest must facilitate clean, responsible growth, meeting today's needs while leaving a healthy legacy for future generations. This bill is driven by and focused on Canadians. It is for young apprentices in Lethbridge considering a career in biofuels, for power line technicians in Thunder Bay and for health care professionals in Moncton.

We are delivering what Canadians have always asked for: an economy that rewards people who work hard and innovate, no matter where they live. There has never been a better time for the world to choose to do business with Canada. We offer a stable and predictable political environment and a skilled and diverse workforce, making us the best place in the world for investment and collaboration.

Where our allies seek certainty, reliable timelines or climate leadership, Canada is ready to answer that call with our brightest and our best. Let us capture this moment, one where trade flourishes, dreams of workers and business owners can grow, and hope will abound in every part of our country as we look to greater economic prosperity together.

We have a real opportunity now, across political parties and regions, to unite behind the idea of delivering, not delaying. Let us remove the barriers that keep us locked in 13 separate economies instead of one growing, sustainable Canadian economy. Let us turn the page and move forward with purpose, to get big things built in this country once again.

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

Mr. Speaker, on April 17, 2025, the Prime Minister said, “Secondly, to commit the federal government to do its part by Canada Day, so free trade in Canada by Canada Day.”

Even if this legislation passes by July 1, we will still have many, many barriers, some provincial and even some federal. Why did the Prime Minister mislead Canadians?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister, of course, did not mislead Canadians. Our colleague will know that it is only within the jurisdiction of this Parliament or the Government of Canada to remove barriers that are properly federal barriers to free trade within Canada.

The provinces also have a series of measures that they are working on removing. In fact, I have been very encouraged by provinces signing agreements with each other and by provinces trying to lead each other in who can move the fastest. Conservative premiers, New Democratic premiers and Liberal premiers are doing this work with the Government of Canada.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, in his song Les Yankees, Richard Desjardins sang the following: We come on behalf of Big Control
...
The president has ordered me
To bring peace to the entire world...

Basically, this is what indigenous people are being told: We come as friends
But enough discussion
Now sign your submission...

The government sends a letter and gives grand chiefs five days to relinquish their rights, so it can say that first nations have been consulted. However, I do not see that as consultation. Not every community has been consulted. The government is ignoring the fact that all nations have different ways of doing things. In my view, the government is telling first nations and the people of Quebec how things are going to be.

Does the minister agree that a little more time should be taken in order to respect the spirit of reconciliation and consultation with first nations?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I agree with the member for Abitibi—Témiscamingue that we need to fulfill our obligations with regard to consultation and partnership. I know how committed my colleague is to indigenous peoples, and I really appreciate that. That is something we have in common.

The five-day consultation he referred to is a consultation process in a bill that is before Parliament and that would enable the government to designate projects as being in the national interest. The government and private companies would then be able to conduct extensive consultations.

We are building something, but these consultations obviously have to happen before a project can be designated and approved.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, we have a new Prime Minister, a new administration. Coming out of the last federal election, we have been given a very clear mandate: a healthy, stronger one Canadian economy for all regions of our country. This bill captures what I believe is the essence of an election platform, and this is something that Canadians from coast to coast to coast are behind.

Would the minister not agree that this legislation is a reflection of a very important platform issue from the April 28 election?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I know that colleagues in the House will be disappointed. I arrived at the last minute to give this speech. I am told that the first speech has unlimited time. If I had not arrived in time, colleagues could have heard the member for Winnipeg North for possibly a few weeks on this bill.

My colleague from Winnipeg North is absolutely right. This commitment to one Canadian economy, to getting big projects in the national interest built quickly, was on page 1 of the Liberal platform. This should not surprise any parliamentarian. The government is in fact moving quickly on an obligation we have to Canadians.

[Matt Strauss, Conservative, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for that overview of the bill. He mentioned several times health care workers such as myself and how this bill would allow them to go between provinces with greater ease. At other points in his speech, he talked about federally regulated workers. From my reading of this bill, this would not make it any easier for myself as a physician or for nurses to go and practise where practice is needed.

Could the minister go on the record right now and explain how this would actually affect health care workers in Ontario and other provinces today?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for the question, and I absolute appreciate the challenge he has just identified.

One of my friends for the last couple of decades is also a physician, Andrew Furey, and he was the premier of Newfoundland and Labrador until recently. He worked with Atlantic premiers because, as my colleague has correctly identified, the actual certification of physicians and other health care professionals is properly within the provincial domain. Atlantic Canada got together and created an Atlantic physicians registry, led by the four provinces, which we think is an example to the rest of the country. The Government of Canada wants to encourage exactly that kind of work.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am not surprised that the minister is so fond of his own bill because it would give excessive power to him personally. The minister will be able to designate projects as being in the national interest, hold non-binding consultations and have the federal government adopt environmental standards. Nothing would prevent the federal government from adopting the lowest environmental standard in the least rigorous province. Essentially, that would result in the federal government allowing one province to legislate in the place of another province that is fulfilling its responsibilities, such as Quebec.

I would like the minister to tell us what the point of having provinces is.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I obviously understand the political aspect of my colleague's question.

I think we need to be careful before defining the responsibility that the bill can assign to a minister. We have to be careful not to exaggerate those circumstances. As I have said, environmental standards and regulations will obviously be at the forefront, as will consultation with indigenous peoples.

I would have thought my friend would be happy that the Government of Canada wants to work with BAPE in Quebec or with the Quebec process so that major projects in Quebec get approved more quickly, as a result of that partnership.

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Minister of Jobs and Families and Minister responsible for the Federal Economic Development Agency for Northern Ontario]

Mr. Speaker, as the proud mother of an operating engineer who is working on projects of national interest as we speak, I want to ask the minister if he can tell us a bit about the reception of this bill by organized labour.

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague often speaks about her son, who is an example of exactly the kind of worker and skilled professional the country and, frankly, this government want to support.

I was encouraged by conversations with labour leaders representing not only the skilled trades but a series of other professions that would benefit from exactly this kind of nation-building exercise. Provincial premiers speak to labour leaders about the importance of creating economic opportunity at a time when our economy is threatened, and we are doing this for people exactly like my colleague's son.

[Gérard Deltell, Conservative, Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the minister on his re-election and on introducing this bill.

He talked about the principle of “one project, one environmental assessment”. That is a principle we agree on. Just 13 months ago, we actually had a vote in the House on Bill C‑375, which had the same exact goal. The Bloc Québécois agreed with the principle that we had put forward, but, curiously, the Liberals voted against it.

As the legal experts suggested, our approach was to say that for each project, federal experts and experts from the province where the project was taking place should meet, work together and conduct one assessment.

Is that exactly the approach the minister is proposing?

[Dominic LeBlanc, Liberal, Beauséjour, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk for his question. He just put his finger on exactly what we want to do with this bill.

We have been very clear. The Prime Minister was very clear during the election campaign. Within six months at the most, we would like to have exactly the kind of agreement that my colleague just described to avoid duplication and to minimize costs for businesses, provinces and Crown corporations that are proposing major projects. We also want to use the expertise that provincial and territorial authorities often have and ensure that the federal government's expertise is complementary, that it adds value and that it does not create obstacles that would duplicate or extend the project.

[Shannon Stubbs, Conservative, Lakeland, AB]

Mr. Speaker, where is Canada after this last, lost, anti-development Liberal decade? Only 11 years ago, Canada became internationally recognized as home to the richest and biggest middle class in the world, with more children lifted out of poverty than ever before. Heading into 2015, the budget was under control, with a billion-dollar surplus, and Canada's economy was the strongest in the G7, the last in and the first out of the great global recession.

Today, Canada's economy has fallen behind those of our allies. Productivity lags. Workers cannot make ends meet and wonder whose job will be gone next. Canada's natural wealth sits idle in the ground and offshore. Investment heads south and to other countries. Families, and people with no one else to count on but themself, fall further behind. Young people lose hope for their future and wonder whether they will ever be able to afford a home, build up a nest egg or actually capture their big dreams.

Communities lose opportunities and dwindle. Businesses close due to excessive red tape, taxes, costs and constant uncertainty, and they have to reduce their charitable and community contributions. Violence, crime, mental distress and suicide, especially among rural men, are on a steady rise.

Killing energy projects does not just cost jobs; it also costs communities. It takes away critical revenue to build roads and bridges. It takes away revenue for critical supports for social programs; to build arenas; to support health care, like the long-term partnerships with the Lloydminster and Bonnyville regional health foundations and energy companies; and to build schools and universities.

Today, Canada works for the super-rich, the well established, the elites, the well-connected, the big companies of all kinds, mostly foreign-founded and multinationals. It does not work for the Canadian people who do the work, take big risks and build big projects: individual entrepreneurs, small business owners, innovators, and workers and contractors who fuel, feed and power this country for our Canadian people. That is the Liberal legacy; the cost to Canadians is real, and it is staggering.

Today, we as MPs find ourselves in an odd position. The very same government that inflicted the last decade of anti-energy, anti-private-sector death by delay and uncertainty on natural resource workers and businesses in every corner of Canada, that harmed all the secondary and tertiary sectors that depend on it everywhere, that sent allies away in dire need of Canadian resources, and that divided our country, pitting Canadians, provinces, businesses and sectors against each other, suddenly claims to want big natural resources and infrastructure projects to get built in Canada, so it brought in Bill C-5, with all kinds of big promises.

However, at its heart, Bill C-5 is really a glaring admission that everything the Liberals have done for the last 10 years has made Canada a place where the red tape and constantly changing goalposts get to “no”, and nothing can get built efficiently or affordably.

The real question is this: Would the Liberals' Bill C-5 really clean up the colossal mess the Liberals themselves have made? Where are the projects held back by the lost Liberal decade? Where are the investments that would have created prosperity for every single Canadian? Where are the thousands of well-paid jobs for Canadians everywhere, and especially in rural, remote, northern, Atlantic and indigenous communities that need them most? Where are the revenues for all three levels of government to fund public services and programs, build public infrastructure and support communities?

Where has all that gone, and how much are we talking about here anyway? Well, Canada has lost $670 billion in cancelled oil, gas, LNG and pipeline projects alone since 2015, due completely to the Liberals' anti-energy, anti-development messages, policies and laws.

On Wednesday night, in committee of the whole, the minister and I discussed Bill C-5 a bit. I suggested an obvious, immediate first step, if the Liberals really want to get Canadians working and building to strengthen Canada's economy and sovereignty, that would not require weeks and months of delay, meeting after meeting, and press conference promises with very few details.

The minister said I brought up “hypothetical projects”, and he refused to say whether they met his factors for projects in the national interest, which the Liberals themselves will decide. That was alarming in itself, since the projects I mentioned are real projects, with real proponents, that would offer real jobs with powerful paycheques for Canadians and long-term tax revenue for all three levels of government. Real businesses are paying real money and losing real time trying to get to build their big projects. The problem is that they are stuck in one form of federal regulation or red tape right now.

The immediate solution is blindingly obvious, without all the extra rigamarole, uncertainty and time delays. What was extra weird about the minister's evasion is that of the five vague factors the Liberals have outlined for Bill C-5, which they will use themselves to decide what is in the national interest, two of these factors are that projects must bring economic or other benefits to Canada and that they must have a high likelihood of successful execution. Clearly the top priority action, then, to fast-track efficiently should be all the projects and proponents stuck in red tape right now by the Liberals' own conditions.

Where is the Crawford nickel-cobalt mine project near Timmins, Ontario? It was proposed in 2020 but is stuck in the regulatory mess the Liberals created. Where is the Troilus gold and copper mining project in Quebec? It has been stuck in the regulator since 2023. Where are the Rook I uranium mine and Denison uranium mine projects in northern Saskatchewan? They were proposed in 2019 and are both still stuck. Where is the Bruce C nuclear project planned for Ontario? It is stuck in double layers of regulatory review.

It is no wonder Canada ranks dead last in the G7 for development. The projects are not only lost in red tape; they also seem to be lost completely from consideration by the minister, since he was so adamant on Tuesday night that they did not exist. They are five projects, five chances to grow Canada's economy, five chances to lead the world in energy, innovation, responsible resource development and indigenous opportunities.

Of course, it is not only those five projects. In fact, there are dozens of major energy, nuclear, critical mineral and indigenous-backed resource road proposals that are stuck in limbo right now at the federal level. These projects are not theoretical; they have names, investors and local support. They have involved years of engineering, technical, environmental and consultation work, risk and investment.

The missing piece is a federal government with a will to fast-track the assessments through the regulatory maze it created itself, to approve them efficiently and to back proponents once they approve them so proponents can actually build on their time and on their dime. In Bill C-69, as would also be the case in Bill C-5, cabinet is the final decision-maker, with all the power.

Currently, both officials and ministers already have significant sweeping powers to start, stop, restart, extend, delay and suspend, and to change the rules and start all over again as many times as they want. It is no wonder things cannot get built. The government also has the power to fast-track the projects right now. Instead, it ignores all the real and ready projects, proponents and people, and has brought in a short-term workaround of its own bad policies and laws, Bill C-5.

The Liberals talk about emissions reduction and imposed electric vehicle mandates, and they want so-called green growth, but they stalled the very projects needed to make all that happen. We cannot build electric vehicles without nickel, lithium and cobalt, currently dominated by China. We cannot power a reliable, affordable modern grid without uranium and natural gas. We cannot reduce emissions and build new technology without the innovation, jobs and revenues that come from responsible Canadian resource development, mostly from traditional oil and gas, and from pipeline companies.

Alberta is an example. By 2023, Alberta oil sands reduced emissions intensity while growing production by 96%. Alberta leads the country in alternative energy development too, as in fact it always has.

According to the federal government's national inventory report from 2025, Alberta had the largest absolute reduction in emissions of any Canadian province between 2022 and 2023. That is the truth the Liberals will not tell Canadians. Albertans cut emissions not by shutting down, but by showing up and building through free enterprise, innovation and technology, getting better emissions reduction results, real emissions reduction results, without killing jobs or driving away investment. However, the Liberal government still treats as problems not solutions Alberta and every province that develops resources, those of us in the so-called ROC, the rest of Canada, that politicians in Ottawa usually ignore. The Liberals punish the most responsible energy producers in the world and give a free pass to foreign polluters. They celebrate emissions reductions in Canada when they come from lockdowns, lost jobs and bankrupt businesses.

Canadians cannot afford essentials because the government drives up costs and imposes unrealistic targets on power and fuel. It is worse when the facts do not fit the Liberals' narrative. When it turns out that Alberta reduces emissions the most, the Liberals stay silent. When LNG could displace coal from growing energy demand in Asia, India and Africa from B.C., or help secure European energy needs and cut dependence on Russia, the Liberals turn allies away. When western provinces want to build major projects or northerners want to mine and drill offshore, the Liberals deny, ban and delay. When Atlantic Canadians want to drill offshore, ship LNG to Europe or have a pipeline to bring western oil to eastern refineries so future generations of Atlantic Canadians can stay home with jobs and abundant opportunities, the Liberals interfere and then look away.

Let me pause here to tell members how important that issue is to me, because the fact is that Atlantic Canadians and Albertans are inextricably linked. We have helped build each other's provinces in the best interests of all Canadians. I say that as a first-generation born-and-raised Albertan and the daughter of a Nova Scotian and a Newfoundlander.

The Liberals spend years talking about reconciliation, yet delay, risk or kill pipelines, roads, mining projects and LNG opportunities that so many indigenous leaders, elders, youth, entrepreneurs and workers spent years negotiating with businesses to get jobs, to get their own-source revenue and to do environmental oversight in a good way. The Liberals claim to support first nations but deny them the opportunity to own, to build, to partner and to profit. It is not reconciliation when Ottawa decides who can build and who must wait. It is not partnership when one side always says no. It is not respect when indigenous voices are ignored because they want to make their own development decisions and exercise their rights and title.

The bill that we are debating today proves what Conservatives have said all along: The Liberals' antidevelopment agenda kills Canadian jobs, kills Canadian investment, weakens Canada's security, unity and sovereignty, and has made our country a risky place where nothing can get built and where uncompetitive, pancaked and incoherent taxes, laws and policies; uncertainty; and constantly changing goalposts deter big projects from our own country.

Canadians deserve a plan based on facts and results, not vague statements and delay from the same government that caused the problems it suddenly now claims to want to fix. The consequences of the Liberals' antidevelopment decade are growing poverty, not prosperity, and fractured national unity. The Liberals pit Canadians against each other and attack Albertan businesses in particular with constant misinformation and myths.

The reality is that when Alberta builds and grows, so does Canada, and when Alberta is strong, so is Canada. Albertans have been there all along with our friends from Saskatchewan and from Atlantic Canada. We have just been asking the Liberals to help get the country's top export from the industry that is still the biggest investor in Canada's declining economy by far, whether the anti-energy zealots like it or not, to more markets globally so Canada is not dependent on the United States.

Ten years later, ten years of this lost last antidevelopment Liberal decade, Canada faces economic, security and sovereignty threats from our closest ally, the world's biggest economy, our biggest customer and now, because the Liberals held Canada back every step of the way, our biggest competitor. Canadians cannot afford essentials, because the government drove up the costs of power and fuel for everyone.

Make no mistake; it did not have to be this way. With all due respect, by which I mean almost none, the time to “build Canada” and make our country self-reliant, secure, united and strong was the last decade. The answer has always been to unleash Canada's natural resources and increase production and export customers, as Conservatives and only Conservatives have consistently and unequivocally advocated the entire time. This was never actually an even-sided theoretical or philosophical debate. It has always been simply the fiscal and economic reality of our country.

Canadians deserve a government that backs them, not a government that blocks them and not a government that pees down our leg and tells us it is raining. Bill C-5 is breadcrumbs and baby steps, not a real breakthrough of Liberal-inflicted barriers on Canada. Our country needs real change and long-term, concrete certainty for the private sector and for Canadian workers to make us autonomous, resilient and secure, as the Liberals say they want to do now, even though they have been in charge around here for the last 10 years.

What would that actually look like? It would mean fixing the fundamentals and repealing the failed “no new pipelines, never build anything” bill, Bill C-69, which is rife with uncertainty; which has no concrete timelines despite Liberal claims, arbitrary and unrelated conditions, political interference and jurisdictional overreach; and which the provinces, territories, businesses and indigenous groups all oppose or want to overhaul. The Supreme Court declared Bill C-69 unconstitutional for every single reason that Conservatives, and it happened to be me, warned about during the debates. However, Liberals ignored this entire Conservative team, all the premiers, all the territorial leaders, the private sector and the Senate and rammed it through anyway.

The government should repeal the shipping ban bill, Bill C-48, which blocks dedicated export routes for Canada's much-needed energy to countries with actual emerging markets that need Canadian energy and technology in Asia, like Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines, and to European allies like Germany, Latvia, Ukraine, Greece and Poland.

The geopolitical security aspects of this issue, obviously, cannot be overstated. That ban signals that shipping may be blocked by the government off any coast, just like its offshore unilateral drilling bans and antidevelopment zones on land and in water, but it stays. Clearly, the Liberals are A-okay with Canada's allies and other countries getting energy they will continue to want long into the future from the U.S. or from foreign regimes like Venezuela, Libya, Iran and Saudi Arabia over Canada, with much lower environmental, labour and safety standards and where the benefits usually only go to a wealthy few.

The government should repeal the Canadian oil and gas cap that will cut Canadian energy production by 5%, kill over 50,000 jobs and remove over $20 billion from Canada's GDP. That is self-inflicted sabotage that no other country in the world is doing to itself and totally nonsensical for what is actually a radical anti-energy government suddenly plagiarizing, like someone's thesis, the former Conservative government's vision for Canada as an energy superpower.

While the minister and his Liberal buddies laughed when I asked questions about job losses, Canadians stress, wondering where their next paycheque will come from. In 2021, TD Economics projected that of Canadian oil and gas jobs, up to 75% could disappear by 2050. The Liberals call it a transition for Canada. It is devastation.

The Liberals should repeal the globalist, top-down economic restructuring, just transition plan in Bill C-50 that they already know will threaten the livelihoods of 2.7 million Canadians and cause labour disruptions, which is bureaucratese for job losses, for 642,000 workers in the transportation sector, almost 300,000 agriculture workers, 202,000 energy workers and, get this, 193,000 in Canada's important manufacturing sector, which is maybe more important than ever before, given this world becoming more dangerous and the global threats that Canada faces because this Liberal government has failed us.

The truth is, the future does not look brighter with the same government pretending to be a new one. TD reports the unemployment rate in Canada has risen to its highest rate since 2016, outside of COVID, to 7%, and 100,000 jobs are to be lost by the third quarter of this year. The job outlook for students is even worse, with a 20% unemployment rate; that is the highest since the 2008 recession. In fact, Canadian manufacturing has lost 55,000 jobs in a period of only four months. This is not getting Canada on track; it is the continued track record of the same Liberal government, and we know what they say about lipstick on a pig.

It was not always this way. Under the former Conservative government, Canada ranked fourth for ease of doing business of all countries in the world. However, by 2020, with the Liberals, Canada had fallen to 24th, behind Georgia and Thailand. Today, Canada ranks near the bottom globally for construction permits, property registration, securing electricity and cross-border trade. In fact, Canada is ranked second worst in the OECD for construction permit timelines because of the Liberals.

The Liberals' blocked projects, hiked taxes and doubled debt have made Canada 30% less productive than the U.S. today. Since 2015, $5.6 trillion has left Canada for the U.S. That is not a coincidence; that is a Liberal consequence. The trend of Canadian investment up in the U.S. and U.S. investment down in Canada is a historic anomaly caused squarely, and for the first time ever, by the Liberals' damaging economic and energy policies.

Just last week, StatsCan reported a more than 5% decline in forestry, fishing, mining, quarrying, and oil and gas since last spring. Declines in primary and resource-producing sectors impact everything else. Ontarians now face the worst unemployment, outside COVID, since 2013. In April alone, Ontario lost 33,000 manufacturing jobs. Tens of thousands of real people lost their jobs while the Liberals patronized and laughed at opposition MPs fighting for those workers. It is a travesty that it has taken global instability, external threats, growing conflicts and a cost-of-living crisis that the Liberals created for them to even appear to take notice.

Canadians now know, without a doubt, that energy security means food, job and national security for Canada. Last year, the energy sector contributed 7.7% of GDP, or $208.8 billion, to Canada; 446,600 Canadian workers, including 10,800 indigenous people, relied on natural resources. My point here is that none of this is accidental or externally inflicted on Canada. It is the direct result of domestic antidevelopment laws and policies. Canada's top global energy and resource competitors have ramped up their production of all kinds in the same time period, with much lower standards than Canada.

We now arrive at Bill C-5. The current Prime Minister, who advised the last one for half a decade and is well known for his global advocacy to keep resources in the ground, has not actually explained whether he has had some kind of major philosophical metamorphosis, transformation and awakening from all his previous values and views but nevertheless has met with premiers and businesses and suddenly claims to want to do what Conservatives have been urging the gatekeeping, road-blocking, radical Liberals to do the entire time, which is to build, build, build.

However, there are a lot of questions. Let us start at the beginning. As of right now, the Liberals say five factors will be considered to determine whether projects are in the national interest. Bill C-5 says a project must “strengthen Canada’s autonomy, resilience and security”; “provide economic or other”, whatever that means, “benefits to Canada”; “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.”

Now, it is worth a a pause here to point out that most Canadians would likely be shocked that these factors are not already part of regulatory and cabinet decision-making and may rightly wonder what the heck the government has been thinking about for the past decade.

Also, it is worth noting that these concepts are broad enough that any interpretation or any argument could be made about each factor either way for any project, which is, of course, automatically and inherently uncertain, and wide open to manipulation and ideological or politically connected decision-making. So much for objective, technology- and sector-agnostic, predictable, clear, certain and evidence-based decision-making in Canada.

As of right now, there is no public list of projects. Now, the Prime Minister says he is getting lists from provinces, and some premiers have said what their asks are, yet the minister claims there is no list and that that will happen after Bill C-5 is law. The minister specifically said on Wednesday, and I meant Wednesday earlier when I said Tuesday, that “when the projects are designated, they will be made public.”

Do the projects drive the legislation, or does the legislation drive the projects? Do they have a list from premiers or do they not? Nobody knows, because of mixed messages and misleading answers. What is clear is that the whole thing is a politically driven and determined process, which is, actually, already exactly what the Liberals have been doing for the last decade. That is the opposite of clarity and certainty--

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

Order. I have to interrupt the member as it is 11 o'clock. We will now proceed to statements by members, and the member will have time after question period to conclude her remarks.

St. Andrew Anglican Church

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to present my first member's statement in this new Parliament. I will begin by thanking the people of Saanich—Gulf Islands for returning me to Parliament to work on their behalf.

I want to highlight an event that happened this week, which is the reason I am participating remotely. As some may know, I am a practising Anglican and try to follow the path of Jesus Christ in my work. I am a parishioner at a little parish called St. Andrew Anglican Church in Sidney, British Columbia.

This week, on Wednesday, June 11, we had the great honour of our bishop, the Right Reverend Anna Greenwood-Lee, come to St. Andrew's. She went up, believe it or not, in a cherry picker, in the bucket, to the roof of the church hall to bless the solar panels. We had prepared and worshipped together with a liturgy for the blessing of solar panels.

Those panels will save our parish $3,000 a year to go toward the work to help the homeless and those who need support.

Annual Veteran's Salmon Derby

[Sima Acan, Liberal, Oakville West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the 12th Annual Veteran's Salmon Derby taking place on June 14 in Bronte Harbour, Oakville.

Since its founding, this incredible event has grown from a local initiative into a cherished tradition, bringing together Canadian Armed Forces veterans, serving and retired; their families; local businesses; and our community. More than just a fishing derby, it is dedicated to the emotional well-being of those who have given so much in service to Canada. It also raises critical funds for Veterans Helping Veterans and the military family resource centre, which are supporting those who stood for Canada and deserve our ongoing support. This year's event will honour not only veterans but also numerous COVID-19 responders, recognizing their dedication during some of Canada's most challenging times.

I thank the organizers, volunteers, sponsors and especially our veterans and frontline heroes for their service and sacrifice. I wish tight lines to all participating.

Condolences

[Amarjeet Gill, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House with a heavy heart following the heartbreaking crash of an Air India flight en route to London. My heart goes out to the victims, their families and all those impacted by the devastating tragedy.

In that same spirit of reflection, I wish to honour the legacy of Peter Robertson, a dedicated public servant, educator and pillar of the Brampton community. Mayor Robertson began his public service in 1976 as a regional councillor, and in 1991, he was entrusted by the people to serve as mayor of Brampton, leading the city for nearly a decade through a period of significant growth and transformation. His leadership was defined by vision, principle and a steadfast commitment to serving his fellow citizens.

Today, on behalf of the residents of Brampton West, I extend my deepest condolences to his loved ones. His name lives on, not just on Peter Robertson Boulevard, but in the countless lives he touched. May his example of service, humility and vision continue to inspire us all.

Musqueam Canoe Races

[Wade Grant, Liberal, Vancouver Quadra, BC]

Mr. Speaker, there are many great places in Vancouver Quadra and none are more special to me than the mouth of the Fraser River. From its headwaters hundreds of kilometres north, to where it enters the Salish Sea, it has always been a special place for residents of Vancouver Quadra. Over the years, it was used as our highway, and now it is being used as a working river.

Many years ago, the Musqueam people, where I come from, raced in what are called the war canoe races. They raced against other first nations from Coast Salish territory, Washington State, Fraser Valley and Vancouver Island. That went dormant for a number of years until Elder Dick Louis and Kelly Louis brought it back for the youth of the Musqueam people.

We now host thousands of spectators and hundreds of people from across Coast Salish territory. That is going to happen this weekend, June 13, 14 and 15, starting tonight. Everyone in the area is invited to come down and enjoy as they reconnect with their culture, share their culture with Canada and raise their hands to each and every one of them.

Hay čxʷ q̓ə.

Italian Heritage Month

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Mr. Speaker, June is Italian Heritage Month, a time to honour the dreams and sacrifices of those who came before us.

I am a proud granddaughter of Italian Canadians. My grandfather came to Canada, with hope in his heart, to build a life rooted in hard work, family and faith. I am deeply proud of my Italian roots and incredibly honoured to represent the almost 40,000 Italian Canadians in King—Vaughan who entrusted me to be their voice here in Ottawa.

Auguri a tutti gli italiani qui in Canada e in Italia. Felice mese di patrimonio italiano.

This is in honour of the Speaker.

[Member sang in Italian]

Governor General's Award

[David Myles, Liberal, Fredericton—Oromocto, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I am thrilled to stand in the House today to highlight the significant achievements of Jeremy Dutcher, who is being awarded this year's Governor General's National Arts Centre Award in recognition of his extraordinary work as an artist, composer, activist, ethnomusicologist and language carrier.

A Wolastoqiyik member of the Tobique first nation, Dutcher was born and raised in Fredericton and has been instrumental in preserving and sharing the Wolastoqiyik language and culture. He is the only two-time Polaris prize winner, a Juno Award winner and has performed on many of the most important stages around the world.

From the bottom of my heart, I want to thank Jeremy for his art, his values and his passion. As the region's representative, I would like to congratulate Jeremy on his extraordinary achievements.

Kuli-kiseht, Jeremy.

Congratulations.

Summer Events in Cariboo—Prince George

[Todd Doherty, Conservative, Cariboo—Prince George, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is that time of year again: It is rodeo season.

It is time to rope that dream, blow off some steam and head to Cariboo—Prince George for the greatest shows on dirt. Starting this weekend, there is the Prince George Western Heritage Society rodeo and the 4th Annual Logan Parent Memorial Bulls & Barrels in 100 Mile House. In two weeks, there will be the 97th annual Williams Lake Stampede, the “wildest show west of the rocks,” and then it will be the 56th Annual Quesnel Rodeo and Billy Barker Days Festival.

It's not just a sport, it's our way of life.
It's the bulls and the blood, the dust and the mud,
The roar of the Sunday crowd,
The Let R Buck Saloon playing the music just a little too loud.
Bucking bronc fun under the hot Quesnel sun,
This summer in Cariboo-PG is gonna be fun.
It's boots and chaps, it's cowboy hats,
Wild horses and the smoke show.
It's the broncs and the blood, it's the steers and the mud,
We call it rodeo.

Yee-haw.

70th Anniversary of the Town of Ajax

[Jennifer McKelvie, Liberal, Ajax, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to rise in this great House for the first time representing the beautiful community of Ajax, which celebrates its 70th anniversary this year.

I want to thank the residents of Ajax for placing their trust in me, and I want to thank my family and volunteers for their support.

I also want to recognize my predecessor, the hon. Mark Holland, for his many years of service. We wish him well.

As Ajax celebrates this milestone, we recognize its place in history and its vibrancy today. The area was home to Defence Industries Limited, the largest shell-filling plant in the British Commonwealth during World War II.

With a new name needed for the town, a competition was held among its employees, and they selected the name Ajax after one of the ships that defeated the German battleship Graf Spee near Uruguay in 1939. Today, many of Ajax's streets are named after veterans who served on HMS Ajax, and it is home to innovative businesses, the historic Pickering Village, the St. Francis Centre for Community, Arts and Culture, and beautiful green spaces.

I wish Ajax a happy 70th anniversary.