“This bill will not actually help trades workers. It only calls for consultations, reports, and reviews, which will take years and change nothing. If the government wants to help trades workers, it should take real action now. It should keep student loans for private trade colleges, and it should stop companies from using illegal, trafficked workers on government-funded building projects.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is wonderful to be back in Ottawa. These are words I never thought I would hear myself saying, and they are words I do not think anyone has actually ever said in a truthful state. It is wonderful to be back in Parliament debating my colleague’s bill, Bill C-266. The author of the bill, the member for Richmond East—Steveston, and I had the pleasure of working together on the operations committee for several years, and I quite enjoyed working with him. Although there is technically nothing wrong with his private member’s bill, I question what the end value would be because it really would not do a lot. Conservatives are here to represent Canadians and to help Canadians. We are focused on saving Canadians money. I believe the Liberals are out of touch on this issue, and the bill before us shows part of that. The bill would not actually provide any action to help Canadians, and every day without action from the Liberal government is costing Canadians money. Bill C-266 has a lot of good points on paper, if it were to actually accomplish anything, but what would it accomplish in the end? It would accomplish a call for a national framework. It would not actually assist an electrician in Ontario to work and be recognized in Alberta. It just calls for a framework. In the end, that is what would happen, as the bill states, “The Minister must develop a national framework respecting skilled trades and labour mobility”. That is wonderful, but would it actually do anything? No, it is just paperwork to “develop a national framework”. The bill also states, “the Minister must hold consultations”. Well, that would be work for bureaucrats and hopefully hotels during the consultations, but in the end, after all these consultations, after all the work, debate and everything, our result would be the tabling of a framework. The bill continues: Within one year after the day on which this Act comes into force, the Minister must prepare a report setting out the national framework and cause it to be tabled That would be within a year. Maybe we could get through this in a month and then, in 2027, after another year without action, it would be tabled. The bill also states: Within one year after the day on which the report is tabled under subsection 4(1), and every year after that, the minister must prepare a progress report It does not state that he has to do anything. It is just a progress report. We have seen, with this government, lots of other frameworks and lots of other items that state it has to prepare progress reports. We have seen it in public accounts, where the Auditor General comes to say, “Yeah, for 20 years we have been doing progress reports, but nothing has changed.” The bill further states, “Within five years after the day on which this Act comes into force, a comprehensive review of the national framework must be undertaken by the committee of the Senate, of the House of Commons or of both Houses of Parliament that is designated or established”. We would have one year to study this, another year for a progress report and then, within five years, another review of the framework. It begs the question, why does the government not just get this done? Why do we need a framework? Why do we need a private member’s bill to ask the government to do what its job is, and why the delays? What should the government be doing instead? Well, it could be acting. One of the things the Liberals could act on would be to delete from their budget 2025 their intent to defund student loans for private colleges. There are 31 of these in B.C. and seven in Alberta that deliver apprenticeship training and such trade training privately, but the government is going to ban students from being able to access funding to attend them. One of the other things the Liberals could do that would be a lot more important, which I have spoken about repeatedly in the House and in committee, would be to end the scourge of trafficked and illegal workers on government-funded infrastructure projects. We have projects that are funded partly by the feds, partly by the province and partly by the municipalities where we have illegal, trafficked workers on the sites. The contractor will win the bid with a low bid and then immediately subcontract out the entire job to a subcontractor to create a layer, a distance I guess, so they can claim, “We’re innocent. It was the subcontractor who broke the law.” The subcontractor will then recruit from Mexico, Venezuela or Colombia to bring in workers under a visitor’s, vacation or other visa, and then they put them to work. I have presented to the Treasury Board evidence of how they are recruiting the workers. Two years ago, in the House, I spoke about it, and the government has done nothing. They will bring in these workers, abuse them, underpay them with $10 an hour in cash, make them work overtime, and then steal the overtime. Who are these workers bumping out? They are bumping out trades workers, the very skilled trades workers that this bill is supposed to help. The government talks about wanting workers from Ontario to be able to work in B.C., yet it turns a blind eye when workers are trafficked or smuggled into the country, which bumps out trades workers from working on government-funded infrastructure projects. One of the items we found is that nine of these trafficked workers, and this was in Edmonton, were forced to rent their accommodation from the wife of the subcontractor. There were nine of them in a one-bedroom house, and they were paying $3,000 for this. They were told that, if they complained, they would go back on a plane and go home. I visited one of the work sites on the Henday, the ring road or ring highway around Edmonton, which is actually in the riding of Edmonton Riverbend. Now, if the member for Edmonton Riverbend were to show up in Edmonton once in a while, he would perhaps see this work being done. We spoke to every single worker on the site during the construction. Funnily enough, every single worker was not a worker but a subcontractor. Now, if anyone has worked in construction, they know there is a general contractor. Perhaps they would sub out the drywall to a subcontractor who would then hire workers, but every single worker on this site was a subcontractor. Every single worker was from out of country. We spoke to the contractor. He tried to chase us off and run us down with his pickup truck, so I think we know how the contractor felt about that. Now, workers from Local 222, the cement masons, should have gotten the work on that Henday project, the bridge, but not one of them did. The government talks a lot about wanting to help work with the unions. It is actually in this bill that the government is going to consult with the unions. I am pretty sure, if they consulted with Local 222 of the cement masons, they would be told, “Let us work. Let our legal workers work on Canadian-funded infrastructure projects instead of trafficked workers.” We heard a story of a gentleman who was one of the illegal trafficked workers. He fell and landed on his head. Luckily, he had a helmet on. He fell 25 feet and woke up in the hospital. No one from the company or worker’s comp visited him. The only person who visited was the safety officer from the subcontractor, who told him that, if he told the truth to workers’ comp or anyone else, he would be fired on the spot and sent home. Three months later, after he got out of the hospital, on his first day back on the job, he was given his cheque and told he was fired, to get out. This is happening on the Edmonton LRT project; the Edmonton library, which just got built; sidewalk projects; and the Yellowhead. Again, two years ago, I had documented evidence of this. Two years ago, I placed it in the hands of the Treasury Board. I promised the Treasury Board that I would not make this public and that I would work with the government to get this done. A year later, I approached them again. I said, “You guys have done nothing. I’m going to start speaking about it. It’s now been two years and nothing has been done.” We tabled a motion in the operations committee to look at this, to help the trade workers that Bill C-266 is supposed to help. The Liberals voted the motion down rather than study this. It has been two years. The government talks about wanting to help trade workers. If it wanted to actually do that, instead of developing a national framework that is going to do nothing, the government should sit down, listen to the unions and crack down to end the scourge of trafficked and illegal workers being used on government-funded infrastructure sites.”

“I want us to study this bill carefully. Canada needs more skilled tradespeople to build homes and big projects. Right now, it is hard for certified workers to move and work in different provinces because their licences are not recognized everywhere. This bill tries to fix that by getting the provinces together to match up their job credentials. It does not solve everything, but it could help workers go where the jobs are.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise today and speak on behalf of the good people of Medicine Hat—Cardston—Warner. I want to remind Canadians that this session, Conservatives will be working to restore Canada’s promise of an affordable, safe and independent Canada. We will work to save Canadians money, unlike the Liberals, who are costing Canadians money. We will save Canadian jobs, keep Canadians safe, fix the immigration system and put Canada first. Today, we are talking about Bill C-266, regarding a national framework on skilled trades and labour mobility, something that we should all give serious consideration to. It is not lost on anyone in this House that Canada faces a crossroads in our relationship with our neighbours, as well as old and emerging trade partners. What cannot be forgotten, however, is the strength that lies within our own borders to meet these challenges head-on. My colleagues on both sides of this chamber must ask themselves the following. In the face of external pressures, will we leverage our immense geography, resources and skills to build a Canada that produces what it needs and controls its own destiny? Bill C-266 is central to that conversation. Skilled trade certification and labour mobility in Canada are largely governed by the provinces and territories. It is a fragmented system that creates differences in credential recognition, standards, licensing and regulatory requirements, and it can make it difficult for trade workers to move between provinces. This legislation would require the federal government to develop a national framework to identify these barriers and explore ways to harmonize and streamline credential recognition, improve labour mobility and promote careers in the skilled trades. The framework would be developed through consultation and reported to Parliament, while respecting provincial and territorial responsibility for certification. Importantly, Bill C-266 would not itself replace provincial certification systems or impose a single national licensing regime. Instead, the act would be designed to require the federal government to bring the provinces, regulatory bodies, industry, employers, unions, apprenticeship organizations, indigenous organizations and educational institutions to the table for months of consultation. The resulting framework would then have to include a complete list of skilled trades across Canada; compare and map equivalencies between provincial standards and credentials; and then identify measures to harmonize standards, reduce duplication and streamline the process of having credentials recognized from one province to another. It would also have to address emerging trades and new technologies and promote greater awareness of the importance of skilled trades. This is about making sure that a Canadian who has earned the skills to do a job can have those skills recognized when opportunity takes them somewhere else in their own country. It is appropriate that this bill is the first order of business after our return to Ottawa. The events of this summer have put an even greater onus on the Prime Minister to make good on his vow to build at speeds not seen in generations, for the housing construction sector and the major infrastructure projects and the economic investments we need to put Canada first. Regrettably, however, the Liberal government has not yet made good on that vow. There has been a lot of talk and not a whole lot of action, and it is completely out of touch. Let us examine housing, for instance. It is the central issue facing an entire generation that has effectively been locked out of the market. Housing is a skilled labour issue. We cannot build the homes Canadians need without the electricians, plumbers, carpenters, equipment operators and other skilled tradespersons needed to build them. Despite 62,000 vacant trades jobs in late 2025, over 127,000 certified tradespeople in Canada were unemployed, according to StatsCan. At the same time, the Canadian Home Builders’ Association reports that 47% of builders say they or their subcontractors have had to lay off workers, rising to 65% in Ontario. That tells us something important. The challenge is not simply a shortage of skilled workers. It is also a failure to connect workers with opportunities where they are needed and where these opportunities exist. The same problem exists when it comes to major projects. The Prime Minister promised to build at speeds not seen in generations, but we need projects to actually get built if skilled workers are going to put their skills to work. There are 500 shovel-ready projects still awaiting approval at the Major Projects Office. Canada cannot afford to train more tradespeople while qualified workers face barriers in moving between provinces and major projects are struggling to get off the ground. Bill C-266 may help address one part of that equation, that is, making it easier for qualified workers to move to where the work is. While the Liberals deserve much of the blame for siphoning the full potential of our workforce, successive governments at both the federal and provincial levels have erected barriers to prevent Canadians from working and doing business freely across their own country. In the words of the Business Council of Canada, “13 different provincial credential recognition regimes” complicate our labour mobility. Not only do these roadblocks increase costs and ultimately leave Canadians paying more for essentials, but they also hold back growth when we should be firing on all cylinders. Shockingly, the International Monetary Fund estimates that impediments to internal trade in Canada are equivalent to a 9% tariff on ourselves and that removing them could increase the size of our economy by a further 7%. There should be no further hesitation by the government in finally and fully realizing the promise of one Canadian economy. Conservatives have always believed in the free trade of goods and labour, and there is no better time than now to trade with ourselves. We need to and would embrace the broad mutual recognition of goods, services and labour across Canada, making restrictions the exception rather than the rule. Bill C-266 is not, by itself, the end of that work, but it could provide a mechanism to identify exactly where the barriers exist and bring every jurisdiction to the table to address them. By mapping provincial credentials and identifying equivalencies, the framework could give provincial regulators the information they need to recognize qualifications more consistently, reduce duplication and make it easier for workers to move. On this side of the House, we are optimistic but have every reason to reserve doubt. While the bill’s sponsor has promoted it as one that would focus on tangible outcomes, it is fair to ask why these problems remain unresolved by the Liberal Party after more than a decade in government. That is why Conservatives will continue to examine the bill carefully. We need to determine whether its framework actually produces the results that Canadian workers and employers need. The stakes are high. These restrictions impact businesses and the people they employ and serve. It is no wonder that Canada’s business community has been sounding the alarm for years. Both the Canadian Chamber of Commerce and the Business Council of Canada have called for unified recognition of skilled trade credentials across Canada, warning that barriers between provinces prevent skilled workers from moving to where they are needed. The numbers are sobering. The chamber has warned that roughly 700,000 skilled trade workers are projected to retire in the next two years, while Canada faces enormous housing and infrastructure demands. Therefore, the chamber has called for a unified framework developed with provincial and territorial governments, industry and regulatory bodies to recognize skilled trade training and credentials across Canada. This is remarkably close to what Bill C-266 asks the federal government to begin doing, which is to bring those same stakeholders together, map out the differences between jurisdictions, identify equivalencies, reduce duplication and report publicly on the progress. The Business Council of Canada has also pointed to Canada’s patchwork of provincial credential recognition regimes as a barrier to labour mobility, while its research has found that shortages of skilled workers can have a significant impact on major projects and investments. Bill C-266 could not only address these challenges; it could create a national process for identifying and addressing some of the barriers the business community has repeatedly identified. It is for these reasons that the Conservatives will continue to carefully examine Bill C-266, not as the solution but as an important stepping stone to a more mobile and productive Canadian workforce. We have Canadians with skills, we have employers with available jobs, and we have communities that desperately need these workers. Bill C-266 may be a good step in identifying the barriers, bringing the people responsible for removing them to the table and requiring Parliament to measure whether progress is actually being made. Canada’s skilled workers should never be held back by borders within their own country.”