Mr. Speaker, this is my first speech in the House this Parliament, and I would like to take some time to thank the constituents of Edmonton Strathcona for putting their trust in me again. I would also like to thank my incredible team, both in Edmonton and in Ottawa, for all the work they do to help me.
Of course, it would not be a maiden speech if I did not take a moment to thank my dear husband, Duncan, and my two children, Maclean and Keltie, for their support.
Tonight we are discussing the way that Bill C-5 is being pushed through Parliament, and I have to start by saying that Canadians are not short on ambition. Canadians want big, ambitious projects. We want nation-building projects that create good unionized jobs. We want to create secure futures for our families and for our communities, and we want to create infrastructure that meets the needs of the 21st century. We want that; that is clear. That is not up for debate in the House this evening.
In fact, I support the objectives of Bill C-5. The problem I have is that Canadians require a government that can actually deliver. We all want a government that has ambition and has big ideas, but we need a government that can deliver. The way that Bill C-5 has been drafted and the ham-fisted way the government is pushing it through mean that I have a lot of doubt that these projects will get built.
Today I rise to speak out against the way the Liberal government is attempting to ram through Bill C-5. This piece of legislation is not just flawed, but has dangerous overreach that threatens the democratic principles that underlie this House and, in fact, this country.
Let me be very clear. I support the idea of transformative investment. I support creating good unionized jobs. I support building infrastructure that will serve generations to come. However, we cannot and we must not trade away workers' protections, transparency, accountability, environmental protections and indigenous rights in the name of expediency. That is what this bill does. It is an attempt to push forward a nation-building agenda without democracy. That is a problem.
Let us look at what this bill does.
Bill C-5 has two parts, and the first part I have a lot of support for. This piece of legislation would make it easier for workers to work around this country. It would make it easier for us to have one Canadian economy, not 13 economies. It would help. There is potential for it to have some very good outcomes for workers. Of course, as parliamentarians, we have an obligation to do our due diligence to look at this legislation and ensure it is strong.
It is the second part of the legislation that I have really big problems with. It would expand federal authority over how major infrastructure projects are approved. It would centralize power in the hands of a few cabinet ministers, giving them sweeping discretion to decide which projects are strategic or urgent and therefore exempt from the usual federal processes: environmental reviews, consultation requirements, public debates, etc. This means that ministers, not Parliament, not indigenous groups and not Canadians, would decide what gets built.
I am from Alberta and I have seen what happens when decisions about lands and resources are made behind closed doors. I have seen what it looks like when economic development ignores environmental costs. Right now, Albertans are rightly furious with their provincial Conservative government, which has opened up coal mining in the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains once again. I have seen time and time again how indigenous communities are left out of decisions that directly impact their lives and futures. When I see legislation like Bill C-5, which strips away the few checks and safeguards we have, I cannot remain quiet.
This is not just about the Liberal government. Let us imagine a different government, perhaps a Conservative government with Pierre Poilievre. Under Bill C-5, that government would have the power to green-light mines, pipelines or highways without any meaningful environmental assessment, without any duty to consult with indigenous nations and without any debate in this House, all with the stroke of a pen.
Does this sound like the Canada that the Prime Minister ran on? Is this what he told Canadians they were voting for? I do not think so.
Let us be very clear about what kind of power grab this will actually mean on the ground. When transparent processes and meaningful consultation are taken away, what happens? Projects do not get built any faster. They end up in court. Communities feel shut out. Protests and blockades happen. Legal battles drag on for years, and we get no progress. We get gridlock.
This is not hypothetical. It is the history of Canada's broken attempts at nation-building without democracy. Let us remember when Stephen Harper tried something similar. He pushed for Bill C-45, the Jobs and Growth Act. It is a piece of legislation that was designed to streamline infrastructure approvals by curtailing environmental reviews and consultations. As political reporter Althia Raj has mentioned, the building Canada act, Bill C-5, is “the type of legislation that Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper might have been too timid to bring forward, fearing a public backlash.”
Now, why do we have this? It is because Canadians have rejected being out of decisions. Indigenous people have rejected being sidelined. Environmental groups have rejected the erasure of safeguards. Under Stephen Harper, nothing got built. Projects failed. The backlash was real, and the consequences were clear.
Bill C-5 is not some brand new plan. It is a recycled strategy. It is one that history tells us will not deliver on its promises, but instead will fuel conflict, division and delays. If the Liberal government wants to build real infrastructure, real jobs and real nation building, it needs to start by respecting democracy and not undermining it. If anyone is worried about the climate crisis, they should be even more concerned. This bill would allow projects to be declared strategic and pushed forward without evaluating their long-term impact on our water, air, wildlife or emissions. That is not planning for the future; that is gambling with the future.
I want to speak directly to the workers in my province, those who built this country and weathered the ups and downs, the booms and busts of Alberta's economy. They deserve good jobs. They deserve stability, but those things cannot happen if the federal government thinks that it can sidestep environmental and indigenous concerns. Anyone who has ever built anything knows it has to be built right the first time.
Let us not pretend that there is not an urgency. Donald Trump has turned everything on its head. There is an economic urgency to act. There is a climate crisis, and there is urgency to act.
Canadians need to build more. We need to start building more with Canadian workers, Canadian products and Canadian resources. It is urgent, but urgency does not give the Liberal government, or any government, a blank cheque. I am proud to be part of a party that fights for good jobs and good governance. I will not accept the false choice between economic ambition and democratic accountability. We can have both. In fact, we must.
I say to my colleagues in the House, let us build. Let us build things. Let us build big things with Canadian workers. Let us build things with Canadian products, but let us do it right. Let us protect workers' rights. Let us protect indigenous rights. Let us protect the environment. No more pushing legislation through, because what happens then is that nothing gets built.