Dan Albas

“Mr. Speaker, as I almost always do, I want to thank my Lord and Saviour for the opportunity to stand in this amazing place and to serve. Before I get into Bill C-39, I want to say happy birthday to my eldest son, Jagger. His birthday was yesterday and I was not home to celebrate it, but I am awful proud of him. Happy birthday to him. I am pleased to rise today on behalf of the wonderful, hard-working people of Essex to talk about Liberal omnibus bill, Bill C-39. This bill is almost 250 pages long, addressing everything from supply chain and transport corridor management to changing how collective bargaining would work. This massive bill proposes changes to 21 different pieces of legislation. My Conservative colleagues and I continue to examine every line of this bill, judging it on a simple, foundational standard. Would it protect Canadian jobs and save working families money? I will recognize that there are very serious changes being proposed to the Labour Code in part 3 that will require extensive study at committee. They would affect federally regulated sectors like railways, ports and banking. Why did the government choose to hide these major labour provisions inside a 250-page omnibus bill instead of presenting them in dedicated legislation for proper committee scrutiny? It is tough for me to wrap my head around why the government is trying to rush these significant changes in an omnibus bill instead of allowing them to be properly and thoroughly studied at committee. Major concerns have been raised about these proposed changes to the Labour Code, yet there were no consultations with key sector representatives or affected workers before this bill was tabled. The Liberals used section 107 of the Canada Labour Code to order flight attendants back to work, effectively sending them back to work unpaid. Having previously used section 107 to order flight attendants back to work unpaid, the government should not be making further unscrutinized changes to section 107 behind closed doors. What is most staggering about this massive, 250-page bill is not what it contains, but what it leaves out. While the government addresses unionized workers in federal ports and airports, there is absolutely nothing in this bill for the Windsor auto workers at Stellantis. As we sit in the House, Stellantis is facing an upcoming three-week production layoff at the Windsor assembly plant this month. This means that approximately 6,400 auto workers in or near my riding are facing layoffs right before Christmas, and there is nothing here for them. The government has offered them zero support. These auto workers need certainty. It seems that Stellantis is perhaps getting ready to leave Canada when it comes to auto production because of U.S. tariffs, among many other things, but the Liberal government has already left it behind. Why is the Prime Minister refusing to negotiate for these workers? The Prime Minister promised that he would have a deal with the U.S. by July 2025. The Windsor auto sector is getting hollowed out because of the Prime Minister’s incompetence and his failure to lower his elbows and shake hands. The Conservatives will continue to fight for policies that defend our auto workers and protect these vital Canadian jobs. Finally, I must highlight the government’s proposed changes to the International Bridges and Tunnels Act in Bill C-39. Previously, structural or operational alterations to an international bridge required full federal cabinet approval, but this bill would strip that authority from the federal cabinet and give it directly to the Minister of Transport. That would give a whole lot of power to the Minister of Transport to make some pretty significant changes without proper checks and balances. If my memory serves me correctly, the Gordie Howe bridge, near my riding, which borders one of the biggest international border crossings in Canada, was clouded with secret backdoor conversations about its opening. My colleague from Windsor West publicly raised concerns about the urgency of finding answers and getting clarity on when the bridge would be opened, and specifically asked the Minister of Transport for answers on multiple occasions without a response. If I also recall correctly, the Prime Minister claimed that the debts Canadians incurred to build the Gordie Howe bridge would be fully repaid before we began sharing tolls with the United States, and we know now that that was also false. Do Canadians really want to give more authority or decision-making power to the Minister of Transport given the track record with the Gordie Howe bridge? Under Bill C-39, the Minister of Transport would not be subject to the same parliamentary oversight that would apply to Governor in Council orders and regulations. With decision-making power resting in one minister, that would make the minister more accessible to private bridge operators or regional interests. If my memory serves me correctly, the Liberal government held private meetings with Ambassador Bridge lobbyists ahead of the Gordie Howe bridge opening, yet the Liberal government is now proposing to remove parliamentary accountability for international bridges through this bill. Why should we give the Minister of Transport more authority to make decisions when his government’s track record already shows that it does not have the best interests of Canadians in mind? I could speak for a long time on Bill C-39. There is much in Bill C-39 that requires rigorous study and much that remains deeply concerning. What I can promise the automakers and families of Essex and Windsor is that Conservatives will never stop fighting for their jobs, for their economic certainty and for a fair deal with the United States, because at the end of the day, Essex residents have made enough sacrifices at the hands of the government.”