Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise in the House, on behalf of the incredible people of Long Range Mountains and as the shadow minister for energy and natural resources, to speak to Bill C-39.
I think most Canadians would agree on one thing, which is that we need to get this country building. We need mines, pipelines, LNG facilities, transmission lines, ports and the infrastructure that would allow Canadian resources to get to market.
Canada has the resources, workers and expertise the world needs, but for the past 11 years, major projects have been stalled and delayed by an uncertain federal regulatory system, driving investment out of Canada and, in too many cases, leaving projects abandoned altogether. That is really what I want to focus on today, along with another part of this bill, which is the changes to the Canada Labour Code.
We have heard promises about faster approvals before. When Bill C-5 was introduced, Canadians were told the federal government was going to speed up major projects and give proponents more certainty. Conservatives supported that goal of getting projects moving, because we have been calling for faster approval for years.
The Liberal government then created the Major Projects Office and said it would help coordinate projects and provide proponents with a clearer path through the federal system. More than a year later, we are back here in the House, debating yet another bill that is supposed to make it easier to build.
I think the question most Canadians are asking is quite simple: Will this actually help to get major projects built?
Given the track record of the Liberal government for the last 11 years, Canadians are certainly not going to measure success by how many offices are created or how many announcements are made. They are going to measure success by whether projects actually move forward, whether investment comes back or stays in Canada, whether shovels are in the ground and whether people actually get hired. This is especially important for resource-rich provinces like mine, Newfoundland and Labrador.
I know the importance of responsible resource development and what it means for our communities. It means good jobs and profitable local businesses but, more importantly, it means the ability to live and thrive at home. For generations, too many of our young people have had to leave home to find work somewhere else. Families watch their children finish school and learn a trade or earn a degree, only to leave because the opportunities they are looking for are somewhere else.
I know that experience personally, because I had to leave the province I love under those exact circumstances, just as my parents did when I was a young girl. Now I look at my four children and all of the young people in the communities I represent who want the opportunity to stay home. That is why this issue is especially important to me, to the people I represent and to Canadians right across this country.
Even small projects can transform communities. A mine, a sawmill expansion, an energy project or a major piece of infrastructure can mean that a young person can stay home, start a small business, build a career, raise a family and stay in the community they grew up in. These projects provide work for local contractors and suppliers and investment in communities that already have the people, the resources and the experience to contribute to Canada's economy, which is exactly why Conservatives have been calling on the Prime Minister to approve the 500 projects that are caught up in federal review.
Population growth and workforce retention are such important issues in my province, where we have a declining population and high levels of out-migration, but those challenges cannot be overcome and opportunities cannot become reality if any project, big or small, spends years sitting in the federal process waiting for approval.
Bill C-39 is the government's newest answer to years of Liberal delays in the federal permitting system. The government is presenting this legislation as a one-year timeline, but let us break that down. The clock would only begin once all of the required information and studies have been provided and accepted. That is not the same thing as saying a project would receive a federal decision one year after it first enters the process. This is simply because there is no limit to the number of things that the bureaucracy would consider and ask for before a project was approved and the time actually starts.
In addition, the process could be delayed, extended or suspended; and, if the government misses its timeline, it is only required to give an explanation and a new proposed timeline. A company deciding to invest billions of dollars in Canada needs to know with certainty how long the process will take from start to finish, especially given the track record of the current Liberal government. That certainty matters even more when cabinet retains the ability to extend or suspend the process, not to mention that workers want to know when the projects will begin and communities want to know when the jobs and investment will follow.
I want to bring some real-life context to this and explain why this is so important. During one of my commutes back and forth to Ottawa, I spoke to a young man named Justin. Justin is a dad of three and a tradesperson working in Ontario. He told me, “I just want to work close to my family so I can pick up my kids after school and take them to hockey. If we could get some work in Newfoundland, I could do that.” Justin is one of the people I think about when we talk about getting projects moving. Trades NL states that currently the unemployment rate among its members is about 70% and people are looking for work everywhere across the country except in the province. That is why we need these projects now, not when Justin's kids are grown up and that opportunity no longer exists for him. That is why the timelines in this legislation matter so much. What Canada needs is a system in which proponents know what is expected of them; from the start, the process is clear; and government's decisions are made within a reasonable time frame.
Timelines are only a part of the problem. The government keeps making changes around the edges while refusing to address the root of the problem: the regulatory and tax policies that continue to hold projects and investment back. Conservatives have consistently called for the repeal of antidevelopment laws like Bill C-69 and Bill C-48 because Canada needs a regulatory system that gives investors certainty across the board, not a government deciding project by project which ones get special treatment. We have called to remove the federal industrial carbon tax to make Canada more competitive and bring investment back.
There are roughly 500 projects waiting in the federal approval system. Conservatives have called on the Liberal government to approve them, remove the barriers holding back investment and give investors the certainty that they need to put their capital to work in Canada. Newfoundland and Labrador has tremendous offshore energy, hydroelectricity, mining and critical minerals potential. Those resources should be creating well-paying jobs, attracting private investment and giving young people a reason to build their future at home. The same is true across Canada where our energy and natural resources are in demand around the world, but having those resources means very little if the regulatory system makes it unnecessarily difficult to develop them and get them to market. The answer cannot be to leave those laws in place and then have Ottawa decide which individual projects deserve an accelerated path.
While much of this bill deals with major projects and approvals, it also would make significant changes to the Canada Labour Code. I recently met with the Newfoundland and Labrador regional representative of the Canadian Labour Congress. We had a good discussion about the issues facing workers in organized labour and their deep concerns with this legislation. One of the things that I took away from that conversation was how important it is that the workers who would be affected by these changes have a meaningful opportunity to come before Parliament and explain their concerns. There would be substantial changes to federal labour law and they should not be rushed through simply because they are part of a much larger bill. Union members should have enough time to appear before a committee and make their case for why they believe the changes being made are a problem.
Canada is not short on potential. We have the resources, the skilled workers and the communities ready to build. What Canada needs is the certainty to turn that potential into projects, investment and well-paying jobs. Business managers need certainty about the rules and the timelines, workers need confidence that they will be heard and provincial leaders need to know that their jurisdiction will be respected. Canadians should be able to expect that when Ottawa promises faster approvals, those promises lead to projects moving forward.