Debates of June 13th, 2025

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

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Mr. Speaker, these are not normal times right now. We are in an economic crisis, and we need to do things faster.

I also think the legislation will protect the environment, but we need to put measures in place to make sure of that. I hope that when this bill is referred to committee, these aspects will be studied further.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my question has to do with removing interprovincial barriers and obstacles for businesses and any other entrepreneur or worker.

Does the member believe that removing these barriers is going to benefit his riding, as well as businesses and entrepreneurs in Squamish and across his riding in British Columbia?

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Mr. Speaker, yes, these measures will be a tremendous boon to entrepreneurs in my riding. In my speech, I mentioned Backcountry Brewing, a brewery based in Squamish. Its beers are amazing, but they are not sold anywhere in Ontario. I could think of more examples. I know other companies that manufacture highly specialized materials for buildings. They will be able to sell their services and products here.

I hope that this—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

The hon. member for Elgin—St. Thomas—London South.

[Andrew Lawton, Conservative, Elgin—St. Thomas—London South, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I cannot help but notice that the Prime Minister has moved the goalposts here. It was to be unequivocal free trade by Canada Day. Now the government is saying, “Well, this is provincial, and that is provincial.” Why has the commitment not been met?

[Patrick Weiler, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the things that are within the federal jurisdiction are the things that are covered in the act. The federal government cannot force the provincial governments to reduce the internal trade barriers, but it has to act as a facilitator to do everything it can to do that. The first thing we can do is get rid of those federal barriers and do what we can to encourage the provinces to remove provincial barriers, and I think we are seeing a lot of progress, from what I mentioned in my speech.

[Dominique O'Rourke, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Speaker, as a new MP in a new government with a new Prime Minister, in a very new Canadian and global context, I am very pleased to share my enthusiasm for the one Canadian economy act, an act to enact the free trade and labour mobility in Canada act and the building Canada act. The act aligns with the goals outlined in the throne speech two weeks ago, namely, to affirm our sovereignty, protect our economy and build the strongest economy in the G7, and in so doing, to advance reconciliation and take bold climate action.

The throne speech was the vision, the mandate letter set the priorities, and now, the legislation would start to drill down into the execution. I hate doing the math, but it was 30 years ago that I graduated with a degree in economics, A hot topic at the time was interprovincial trade barriers. Since then, Canadians, under governments of all stripes, have seen little progress in this regard. Provinces were interested in protecting emerging sectors or jobs, or customised standards and practices, or fees and tariffs, for a variety of reasons that probably seemed reasonable at the time. They included different transportation rules, food safety standards, environmental regulations and professional certifications.

Even if not designed to restrict trade, fragmented policies mean it is harder for businesses to operate across provincial lines. Here is an example I heard about a couple of years ago. Court Desautels is the CEO of the Neighbourhood Group of companies. It is a B Corp, a group of restaurants in Guelph focused on spectacular food and also on sustainability. In addition to that, part of Mr. Desautels' commitment is to reconciliation, so he really wanted to ensure that at least 10% of his procurement was with indigenous companies. He found a great indigenous-owned winery in B.C. but could not add it to the wine list in his restaurants. At the time, he could import wine from the U.S. but not from B.C. It just defies all logic.

I have been thinking about that story since I heard it. About 18 months ago, my campaign team asked me what I would like to tackle if I were successful in gaining the trust of voters as Guelph's new MP. I told them I would like to work on reducing interprovincial trade barriers, and they kind of laughed a bit, because apparently I was not the first person in 30 years who had that idea. However, like Charlie Brown running for the football, I thought I would give it a shot.

Now, the imperative is even more critical. With the U.S. wolves at the door, threatening our sovereignty and our economic security, we have what in change management theory is called a “felt need for change”, and a renewed desire to reduce interprovincial trade barriers. We are setting aside provincial and regional interests for national interests to reaffirm our sovereignty; protect our industries, jobs and workers; and build a stronger economy and, I am hoping, a renewal and reaffirmation of the Canadian federation.

I applaud the leadership we are seeing from provinces, like the historic agreement between Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador, which reached a monumental deal over power from the Churchill Falls hydroelectric plant that could mean $200 billion for each province over the long term. New Brunswick premier Susan Holt is proposing a free trade zone within Atlantic Canada. B.C., Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba have invited the territories to join their trade pact, the New West Partnership Trade Agreement.

The leadership must come from the federal government, as well as from the provinces. The winds of change are blowing. The political will for eliminating interprovincial trade barriers and building nation-building projects exists; we saw it at the first ministers' conference in Saskatoon just last week, and it is exciting. To reiterate from the Speech from the Throne, “this moment is also an incredible opportunity. An opportunity for renewal. An opportunity to think big and to act bigger.”

As our Prime Minister has said, we used to build things in this country. I think about that when I walk past the historic Rideau Canal here in the nation's capital, because there are actually a number of very interesting parallels. The Rideau Canal was built for military and strategic purposes in the early 19th century, after the War of 1812, to be a secure inland water route for supplies between Montreal and Kingston. Why is that? It is because there was a threat from the Americans.

The canal then facilitated transport and exchange between two provinces. The easier navigation brought settlement and development to the interior of Upper Canada. It facilitated trade and transportation at a time when railways had not yet been built, and it especially became a vital commercial waterway supporting the movement of goods and people.

We have a history of infrastructure projects, and we will again build a stronger, more competitive and more resilient domestic economy from coast to coast to coast.

There is a significant difference in the approach to major projects that is proposed in this bill, of course, and that is how we approach projects and who stands to gain. The following criteria are essential in the designation of major projects. They are to strengthen Canada's autonomy, resilience and security. They are to provide economic or other benefits to Canada. They must have a high likelihood of successful execution. More importantly, they have to advance the interests of indigenous peoples through meaningful partnerships and participation, and they must contribute to clean growth and to Canada's objectives with respect to climate change. We can accomplish many of these goals at the same time. These principles are at the core of this legislation.

Over the past year, I have held round tables with Guelph business leaders, and their message is consistent: streamline regulation and processes. This reflects the findings of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business, which found that 85% of small business owners said that excessive regulation, including interprovincial trade barriers, hurt their productivity. More than a third of Canadian business owners say that interprovincial trade is more difficult than international trade. In our country, that has to be unacceptable.

The one Canadian economy seeks to address some of these concerns. With respect to the major projects, decision-making will also be simplified. Instead of having multiple ministers rendering regulatory decisions, there will be one designated minister responsible for the decision. However, that does not preclude the required consultation with ministers, provinces and indigenous people to make sure conditions are sufficient. Those conditions will be published; there is transparency. The speed comes from a coordinated approach, rather than a sequential one. This new bill helps provide speed and certainty and is guided by the principles of transparency and efficiency, all important factors to attract investment.

During the election campaign, we promised that we would enhance this aspect of our government. Three weeks later, we are already facilitating processes while ensuring the respect of indigenous rights and initiating bold climate action. We were elected on the promise that we would deliver big projects to benefit Canadians, and that is what we are doing. We are committed to a thriving Canadian economy, including job creation and training more tradespeople, and that is what we are doing.

Eliminating internal trade barriers across the country, whether in federal, provincial or territorial jurisdiction, could grow our economy by as much as $200 billion or boost productivity by 7%. Each year, 530 billion dollars' worth of goods and services are exchanged across provincial and territorial borders. That is nearly 20% of Canada's GDP. In 2024, one-third of Canadian businesses engaged in internal trade. This supports jobs, expands markets for Canadian businesses, increases consumer choice and helps make life more affordable for Canadians across the country. It is the eighty-twenty rule. Canada must play to its strengths, and we are building a strong Canada.

This legislation would ensure Canadian energy security, diversify trade and ensure long-term competitiveness. At a time when the world economy is being redefined and when our historic and most trusted trading partner has engaged in a trade battle with us, this is an opportunity, and now is the moment to lower trade barriers and to engage in nation-building projects. It is time to create one Canadian economy. It is time to seize this moment. It is time to advance reconciliation.

With this legislation, we are improving national supply chains, boosting productivity and creating a more competitive investment environment. That is a better future made real. This is what building one Canadian economy looks like, an economy that promotes reconciliation, supports clean energy and works better for everyone everywhere in this country.

I invite all members of this House, all political parties, to support this legislation. Let us get it done.

[Ellis Ross, Conservative, Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC]

Mr. Speaker, it is no secret that tariffs actually made Bill C-5 as presented to the floor. None of this really matters until we streamline all the legislation, regulations and jurisdictional issues currently in place.

My question is on process. As the government negotiates with the U.S.A. on trade, does the government negotiate provincial resources first, and then consult with provinces, or does the government get provincial consent before negotiating trade based on provincial resources? Which is it?

[Dominique O'Rourke, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I think we saw, at the first ministers' conference just last week, the Prime Minister engaging with very enthusiastic premiers, who have presented their ideas for nation-building projects. That is where the conversation begins. How that will now be assessed based on the five criteria remains to be seen, and we are going to see that pan out in the regulation.

[Greg Fergus, Liberal, Hull—Aylmer, QC]

Mr. Speaker, Guelph is certainly one of the most renowned locations for agricultural product research.

Does my colleague think that removing interprovincial trade barriers will not only facilitate research, but also encourage commercial applications for research across Canada?

[Dominique O'Rourke, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Speaker, for farmers and farm product processors, removing interprovincial barriers is really essential for marketing new products.

One very simple example comes to mind. A product that is certified organic in Manitoba should be certified organic across Canada without having to go through the process all over again. We are trying to allow marketing and open up new markets to give our producers easier access and to support their prosperity.

[Jacob Mantle, Conservative, York—Durham, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to my colleague's story of the company in her riding, but the great irony of her speech is that this bill would do nothing for that company because she described a provincial barrier, not a federal one.

We have heard a lot about that $200 billion. That is all trade barriers, not just federal ones. Will she give us a real, correct number for what this bill would do?

[Dominique O'Rourke, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Speaker, all Canadians are going to be looking to their provinces to continue to lead on eliminating interprovincial trade barriers. Leadership does not just come from this place. We are showing leadership federally in eliminating interprovincial federal trade barriers. We are seeing leadership from the provinces on major unprecedented projects.

Every Canadian should be looking to their provincial leadership and asking it to eliminate those barriers.

[Marilène Gill, Bloc, Côte-Nord—Kawawachikamach—Nitassinan, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I listened to my colleague's speech, and I thank her for her contribution to discussions in the House.

She mentioned the project designation criteria several times. She also talked about leadership. In her opinion, does leadership mean not respecting the laws that were duly passed by the House of Commons? Does it mean not respecting provincial jurisdictions? I could provide more examples. Being in government means showing leadership and being accountable. Does that mean disrespecting jurisdiction and the laws duly passed by the House of Commons?

[Dominique O'Rourke, Liberal, Guelph, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we are in the midst of a crisis the likes of which Canada has rarely seen in the past 50 years.

Leadership means having a clear vision and moving swiftly to implement measures that will protect Canadians.

The bill lays out the role of the minister who is responsible for making decisions and who is also responsible for consulting with provincial counterparts, indigenous communities and other ministers before drawing up a list of criteria. Respect for all existing legislation passed by the House is baked into the bill.

[Tim Louis, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the King’s Privy Council for Canada and Minister responsible for Canada-U.S. Trade]

Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to speak in this House about one of the first bills of this new government, which is foundational for our vision and ambition, groundbreaking in scope and unifying in its promise. I refer to the one Canadian economy act. Today, I want to share a bold vision with members, a vision for unity, for growth, for a Canada that does not sit on the sidelines or take our destiny for granted.

Today, the world's economies are changing. Global relationships are being tested. Our biggest trading partner, the United States, is taking a new, more unpredictable course. However, the unjustified tariffs issued by the U.S. administration have also presented Canada with an opportunity. History has shown us what these moments of challenge can become when a nation discovers its true strength. It is in times like these that we must stand together as one Canada, work together and move forward.

I will share the two key federal barriers that the one Canadian economy act is proposing to knock down. First, the bill would help remove federal obstacles that hold back the movement of goods and services within our country. It would also allow us to address federal licensing barriers that make it harder for Canadian workers to work wherever opportunity takes them. The free movement of goods, services and labour is essential if we are to meet this moment. Second, the one Canadian economy act offers us a path forward to growth and prosperity, so that projects of national interest, projects that build this nation and benefit Canadians, could move swiftly from the drawing board to the real world, where they would have the power to make a difference in the lives of all Canadians. I will speak to each of these elements further.

I will start by addressing the need to eliminate federal trade barriers, beginning with an example of how current national regulations make it challenging for Canadian business owners to sell a simple item outside of their province or territory. For example, an organic tomato farmer in Ontario can call their tomatoes “organic” and sell them at farmers' markets across Ontario because they were certified under Ontario's system. However, they may want to sell those organic tomatoes in Quebec, a province that has its own organic system.

A responsible grower, even when they have been doing everything right in Ontario, cannot legally call their tomatoes “organic” in Quebec unless they obtain federal certification and go through the extra paperwork and extra expenses. Rather than just putting those tomatoes on a truck and getting them to shelves in Montreal, they face extra steps, because provincial organic certifications are not automatically accepted by the federal government. Our farmers are doing things right; it is the system that puts up barriers where there ought to be bridges. Under this bill, if a good is produced, used or sold under a province's rules, it can move across the country without needing to meet federal standards if it serves the same purpose.

I would like to highlight the work the provinces and territories are already doing to make it easier to sell goods and services to each other, addressing provincial barriers. We need to continue to work together at all levels of government and above partisan politics. The one Canadian economy act builds on that co-operation. It is not about encroaching on responsibilities or regulations of provinces or territories. This is the government's effort to do its part to make trade smoother at the federal level.

This legislation would allow the Government of Canada to lend a hand in taking down roadblocks, because when every order of government works together, there is no limit to what Canada can achieve. Under this bill, if goods are produced, used or distributed according to the rules set out by a province or territory, those goods could be recognized as meeting comparable federal standards on interprovincial trade. We are also proposing to do the same thing with federal trade barriers on selling Canadian services across our provinces and territories. Under this bill, if a service is provided following provincial or territorial rules, that service would be considered in line with the federal rules on interprovincial trade.

The second key element of this bill's barrier-reduction strategy is labour mobility. This is a commitment to ensuring that every Canadian can put their talents to work anywhere in Canada without being weighed down by complicated, costly barriers. This government is working closely with provinces and territories to allow skilled Canadians, including nurses in St. John's, engineers in Edmonton, carpenters in Wellesley and teachers and paramedics from Trois-Rivières to Whitehorse, to move freely, taking their skills, credentials and ambitions with them wherever opportunity calls. The one Canadian economy act is about unlocking the true potential of Canadian workers so that whether a person is a home builder in Kelowna or a health care worker in Cape Breton, this country stands behind them, values their training and welcomes their contribution.

When goods, services and Canadian workers can move freely across our country, so do ideas, skills and opportunities. That is what unity looks like, not just in words but in action. That is what this bill is designed to deliver. When we break down barriers and open new doors, we set the stage for something bigger: for projects of national interest that will move this country forward.

We need to get projects approved faster and change our mindset from whether to build to how to build. That is why we are proposing that Canada adopt a new approach to projects that will advance our national goals, projects that shape the future of our country, build our resilience in an uncertain world and strengthen our autonomy and security. We need to do all of these things in a way that still respects indigenous rights and protects our economy.

The one Canadian economy act is about more than increasing our GDP; it is about investing in people. Let us rise to meet this moment with clarity, with courage and with the conviction that the next chapter of Canada's story will be written by those bold enough to build it.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, John Nater]

Before we adjourn, I will wish a happy Father's Day to all fathers. Also, it is Men's Mental Health Awareness Month, so I hope we will all take the time to reach out to loved ones in our lives at this time.

It being 2.30 p.m., the House stands adjourned until next Monday at 11 a.m., pursuant to Standing Order 24(1).

(The House adjourned at 2:30 p.m.)