“We are taking action and getting real projects built, like new nuclear power and power lines that create good jobs. Past Conservative leaders would back this plan. I want the member to admit these projects are happening and vote for this bill.”

“Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should be encouraging the members in his party. I think he would make a tremendous leader of the official opposition. He mixes important oratory skills with the ability to point to where the government is moving in the right direction, while keeping his obligation to the loyal official opposition to continue to push the government to do more. I would like to point out to my hon. colleague that this government is an action-focused government. This is not about symbolism; it is about delivering concretely. The bill before Parliament is of the nature of things that I know former prime minister Stephen Harper would support. I know Jason Kenney, who sat on the side of the House that Harper did, is supportive of the work the government is doing. The Sisson mine, Darlington new nuclear and the Nova Scotia-New Brunswick intertie are projects that are actively under way, creating good jobs. Will the member at least recognize that these projects are happening? Is he going to support this bill?”

• Little substance
  ?

  Question or comment in debate

  Signal 42 of 100

  Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

  See full analysis →

“I want to show the House a picture of work being done on a project to prove it is real.”

“Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. During the debate, the hon. member for Tobique—Mactaquac, which I believe is his riding’s title, highlighted the importance of projects being real and proper. Therefore, I am seeking the opportunity to table a picture of the work that is actually happening between Nova Scotia and— An hon. member: No.”

“I want the House to pass this bill. It helps big projects get approved faster, protects the environment, and gives workers better rules to settle labour disputes before strikes happen.”

“Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Pickering—Brooklin. I rise today in support of Bill C-39, the building Canada strong act. I want to begin with a word that I think sits at the heart of the debate, or at least should sit at the heart of the debate for all of us, and that is the word “trust”. It is not trust in any one government or trust in a political party, but trust in our institutions, trust that our processes work, trust that when Canadians participate in these processes, their voices matter, and trust that government is capable of making good decisions in a timely fashion. When I think about the conversations that I have had over the course of the last summer with businesses, workers, indigenous partners, community leaders and families, I find that most people are asking for exactly the same thing. They are asking for predictability. They are asking for stability. They are asking for clarity. Perhaps most importantly, and I think this demonstrates the popularity of our Prime Minister, they are asking for competence. Canadians are reasonable people. They understand that governing is complicated. It is not something that one does on social media or on Twitter in a hundred and something characters. It is done through hard work. They understand that major projects have consequences. They understand that consultation can and should take the right amount of time. They expect good decisions to be made. They expect these decisions to be fair, and they expect decisions to be made in a reasonable amount of time. That is why this legislation deserves the consideration and support of the House. At its core, this bill is trying to answer a question that is increasingly important to the future of the country in an incredibly unstable global environment: Can Canada move with the speed and certainty required to build the future we want in a way that respects the urgency of the moment and the need to preserve and protect that which we care about? The world around us continues to change at a rapid pace. Supply chains are shifting, investment is moving and countries are searching for reliable partners. Workers are looking for security. As new markets are opening and new infrastructure is being built, Canada is being presented with a once-in-a-century opportunity, but opportunities do not become outcomes on their own. They require decisions. They require institutions to have the trust of investors, have the trust of workers and have the trust of Canadians. The reality of that trust is in people understanding how decisions will be made. Workers deserve that confidence. Communities deserve that confidence. Indigenous partners deserve that confidence. Investors deserve that confidence. Government must earn that confidence. People may not always agree with the outcome; that is the nature of democracy, but they should know that there is a process that can be trusted and relied upon, that their voices will be heard and that they will get answers in a timely fashion. In my view, this is one of the most compelling arguments underpinning the legislation. We must give people answers, and those answers should demand high standards. High standards should not mean endless uncertainty. A thorough review should not mean permanent delay. It should be very clear that if projects do not meet the standards that Canadians expect, government should have the confidence and capacity to say no. As the Prime Minister has said, if a project does not meet the standards that Canadians demand of it, government should have the capacity to say no. If the project does meet those standards, government should be able to say yes. To say no quickly and to say yes on time should not be hard. That does not mean we compromise on the things we care about. It does not mean that we compromise on our standards, not one bit. We must make sure that this conversation does not meet the fate of so many others. We must not look at things as binary, as if there is one right answer and one wrong answer, as if we cannot do two things at once and as if we cannot chew gum and walk at the same time. Canadians expect of governments today the ability to do many things at once, to do them well and to do them properly. That is why this legislation matters for building the country strong. It matters for protecting our workers. It matters for protecting our environment. It matters for protecting the investments people are making in the country. It matters for protecting the things that we need to do in this moment. We have heard from many of our colleagues that these are challenging times. We all know that the trade war has shifted how we look at things in the country and what we are called upon to do. As we diversify trade, as we expand new markets, as we do all of the heavy lifting Canadians expect all of us from all parties to do, we have to protect our supply chains. We have to protect our projects. We have to accelerate our projects, but we have to protect safe workplaces for our workers and continue to protect our natural environment. The thing that seems to be lost in this conversation is the fact that a tremendous amount of consultation has gone into this process, into the refinements and into what we are seeing in this legislation today. Spring and summer were spent listening to stakeholders and responding. Whether it was with unions, employers or indigenous partners, the conversation was about worker supports and the labour relations framework, and those inputs have directly framed how this bill is in front of us today. We all know that about 95% of disputes in federally regulated workplaces are resolved without a work stoppage. Knowing this, most of the stakeholders we spoke to cautioned against broad structural changes that would undermine a process that works well in most cases. We recognize that it does not work in all cases, and we will come to that, but as Canada works to build a stronger economy to advance major projects and strengthen the infrastructure we all know we need, and that I know the opposition certainly should care about as well, we also need a labour framework that can meet this moment and that protects Canadian workers so they can thrive and prosper. Bill C-39 proposes to put forward a balanced approach that would add tools and supports to ensure that more parties were able to reach agreements at the table, creating a more transparent process for the few disputes that remain difficult to resolve. These changes underpin Canadians’ request to us: get things built, protect workers and do not backtrack on our standards. This is why dispute resolution is important. In this bill, we are proposing mandatory dispute resolution remediation for parties that have experienced a work stoppage or had a binding method of resolution imposed on them. Doing so within six months of reaching a collective agreement would help mend relationships and reduce the risk of future labour disruptions. The code does not currently prescribe when parties must begin direct bargaining. It allows parties to start their negotiations as early as four months prior, but the start date is really up to them. This bill now proposes that those conversations must begin six months before the collective agreement expiry, and be supported by federal mediators, increasing the odds of resolving differences before positions become entrenched. There is a provision that discusses conciliation. When there is an impasse at the table, the government may now appoint a federal conciliator to work with them for 60 days. This bill proposes to extend that to 90 days. Perhaps what is most important is addressing where there is concern, and that is around section 107. One of the misperceptions is that this bill would somehow incentivize the use of section 107, but it is quite the opposite. Section 107, as we know, has been in effect for approximately 50 years in this country. It is used on an exceptional basis. For the first time, this bill would put guardrails on the use of section 107. It would ensure that, for the first time, there would be requirements placed upon the use of this provision, and that is particularly important to workers in this country. It is about making sure that the right to strike is never taken away from workers. It is about ensuring that their rights are protected, but it is also about making sure that we are bringing forward solutions quickly. What it seeks to do is simply clarify section 107 by adding the two guardrails that are important. The first is the appointment of a special mediator and the subsequent report submitted to the minister. The second is a national impact assessment following the special mediator’s engagement and report. Together, these would strengthen workers’ rights and strengthen certainty. Ultimately, they would ensure that when we are looking to build big things in this country, how it all comes to pass, what goes into it and what people can expect on the other side would be certain and clear. By setting down clear rules, we would be enabling ourselves to build this country strong. We would be protecting workers. We would be protecting the rules and regulations that matter to Canadians, but we would also be making sure Canadians, businesses and workers know that decisions come quickly, they come responsibly, and they come with two things top of mind: building our country and protecting workers. This is what Canadians care about.”

“The member can bring up these concerns when the bill goes to committee. We are working with provinces across Canada, including Alberta, to solve these problems and help the whole country.”

“Mr. Speaker, there are two things the member opposite must remember. First, there will now be an opportunity at committee for him to add these important questions, to put them on the table. This is an important reality of Parliament. There is an opportunity at committee for the member to raise those issues. I would suggest the member remember that the Premier of Alberta said there has never been a better time to be a Canadian and to work with the government. These are things that the Government of Alberta and governments across this country from coast to coast are recognizing: that our government is working to ensure these problems are solved and that we work with provinces to ensure that it is not just the Prairies but the entire country that benefits from what we are trying to put forward today.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 44 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“I want the House to pass this bill. Canada and Quebec are facing a dangerous time, and this bill protects workers, the environment, and the rights of Parliament.”

“Mr. Speaker, the reality is that this is a difficult time for Quebec and Canada. It is a very dangerous time for our country and for Canadians and Quebeckers. Of course, there are things we need to do right now, but Bill C-39 contains measures that protect workers, protect the environment and even protect the rights of Parliament. We believe we must work together to protect the citizens of our country. To say that this limits or curbs Parliament’s powers is inaccurate, and furthermore, it creates uncertainty.”

“This bill is very important for Canadians. I want the member to explain who the government talked to over the summer to make sure the bill was done right.”

“Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Vancouver Granville for the overview that he gave of Bill C-39, which is extremely important legislation for our country and Canadians during this time. During the member’s summary, he talked about the consultation that took place over the summer. I am wondering if he would be able to elaborate for Canadians listening the type of consultation that has taken place to ensure that we got this bill right.”

“We consulted widely on this bill with unions, businesses, Indigenous communities, and investors. Their feedback is included in this bill, which is how Parliament should work.”

“Mr. Speaker, the consultations were widespread, with unions, big and small businesses, indigenous communities and investors, folks who are helping to build this country. Those consultations, whether in small or large groups, were ones that mattered. They are reflected in this bill. That is a really important consideration because as we go through these processes, making sure those voices are heard and the feedback is reflected is a reflection of how this place works and should work.”

“This bill has rules to stop ministers from misusing their power. It will not hurt the west coast. We still have the oil tanker ban and other protections for whales and salmon.”

“Mr. Speaker, I respect my hon. colleague and the organizations working hard to protect our natural environment and to ensure that our natural environment is well protected. Part of the provisions in this bill do put the guardrails that are required to ensure that ministers would not be using provisions without due consideration. In fact, if we look at the provisions that have been made in British Columbia to protect our natural coast, the tanker ban and other provisions that are being made to protect whales and salmon are provisions that are going to ensure that our natural environment on the west coast that I know she loves, as do I, will continue to be protected.”

“I want the House to pass this bill. Trade with the United States is less certain now, so Canada must build up its own ports, rail, and trade routes. This bill cuts red tape, approves projects faster, and helps Canadian businesses sell goods to other countries.”

“Mr. Speaker, Bill C-39, the building Canada strong act, is a critical piece of legislation that would make Canada’s transportation system work better for Canadians and for our economy. It is about keeping Canada moving by strengthening trade corridors and ports, providing regulatory certainty, achieving red tape reduction and modernizing transportation security clearances. Canada’s prosperity has always depended on our ability to move goods across vast distances and deepen trade relationships with countries near and far. However, the world has changed. The global trading system is being reshaped. Supply chains are being reorganized. Businesses are looking for reliable markets and reliable partners, while competition for investment is intensifying. For decades, Canadians benefited from a stable and increasingly integrated trading relationship with the United States, one built on growing market access and shared understanding of the rules governing our trade. Today, that environment has fundamentally changed and been replaced with a new reality, one where tariffs are being treated as leverage and supply chains are vulnerabilities. The recent tensions with Canada’s largest trading partner have underscored the importance of building greater economic strength and resilience here at home, started by building Canada strong and united as one Canadian economy. Since last year, the government has been working to advance nation-building projects faster and more responsibly, diversifying our industries and trade relationships, and creating high-paying jobs for generations. Bill C-39 would unlock more of Canada’s economic potential by strengthening our economy at home and expanding opportunities for Canadian businesses abroad. To achieve this priority is to deliver generational investments in our trade and transportation infrastructure. The proposed measures in Bill C-39 would strengthen our transportation supply chain by modernizing our transportation policy and strengthening our trade corridors and ports to get products to market more efficiently and affordably. Importantly, the bill also proposes measures to modernize Canada’s marine governance structure. Given that 85% of Canada’s non-U.S. trade moves through our marine ports, without them there is no trade diversification. The bill would also provide certainty and stability and achieve red tape reduction to get major projects built faster to help Canada’s businesses save time and money, and make Canada an attractive place for investments. It would support trade digitalization. Together, the initiatives in Bill C-39 would reduce cost, improve administrative efficiency and improve the security of goods that move across our border by mitigating fraud. They would also strengthen our labour relations framework which would create more reliable supply chains and greater economic resilience. This bill is also part of a much broader economic plan. In the Speech from the Throne, the government set an overarching goal to build the strongest economy in the G7. The government is committed to removing barriers that hold back trade and investment, getting major projects built faster and strengthening Canada’s relationships with reliable trading partners all around the world. The government has already moved quickly to launch a new $5-billion trade diversification corridor fund to put investments behind the ambition into action to build our infrastructure, strengthen our supply chains, attract private capital and grow Canada’s economy. These are significant investments that would connect Canadian products to domestic and international markets and would support our government’s goal of doubling Canada’s non-U.S. exports over the next decade. Bill C-39 is the next piece of that work. However, infrastructure investment is only part of the solution. Measures in Bill C-39 would also address some of the structural issues in the transportation supply chain. The bill would modernize the regulations, policy and governance structures that determine how our transportation supply chain operates and international trade is processed. By strengthening transportation networks, the government would build more reliable supply chains and give investors and trading partners greater certainty that Canada is a stable place to do business and invest. When there is a bottleneck at a port, a shortage of rail capacity, a shipment held up by administrative or paperwork issues or a disruption anywhere along the way, the costs are ultimately borne by Canadian businesses and workers. Delays are costly for our businesses and for Canada’s reputation as a reliable trading partner. When we strengthen Canada’s supply chains, we are not simply moving goods more efficiently within Canada. We are helping a business in Quebec, Vancouver or Toronto reach a customer halfway around the world. That is how Bill C-39 would strengthen trade, investment, jobs and economic growth. This bill is about much more than modernizing Canada’s supply chain. It is economic legislation. It is about strengthening our economy and creating the conditions for Canadian businesses to compete and grow. It is about improving the conditions for investment and growth across Canada and reducing costs by making government work better. One of the most practical things a government can do to strengthen its economy is to reduce unnecessary regulatory burden. Businesses should be focused on investing, building and creating jobs, not navigating duplicative processes and unclear timelines. That is why Bill C-39 takes practical steps that would streamline federal review and permitting processes and reduce duplication across departments. We are proposing to allow federal departments and agencies to share international trade information for imports and exports more easily and with less duplication so they can reduce information filing requirements for businesses, saving them time and money. As I mentioned, this bill supports trade digitalization and would provide opportunities to modernize regulations. Many Canadian exporters still rely on paper-based systems, which slow movements and increase costs and the time needed to get goods to global markets. The Commonwealth estimates that trading digitalization could boost Canada’s trade volumes by approximately $100 billion. We would also create a new advisory group on national trade corridors to find problem areas that cause delays, suggest ways to improve the system, improve efficiency and help different players make more coordinated decisions. This bill would modernize Canada’s national transportation policy to give greater recognition to supply chain efficiency. More than 525 billion dollars’ worth of goods and services move between our provinces and territories every year. When we look beyond our borders, we see that Canada’s transportation corridors support approximately $1.55 trillion in international merchandise trade. These transactions depend on reliable railways, ports and other infrastructure. Transportation performance and economic performance are connected, but we also need to ensure that the transportation system remains secure and resilient. Today’s transportation system faces more complex and connected threats than in the past. This requires a modern, more responsive approach that can respond to evolving risks while remaining predictable for industry. Updating the Canada Transportation Act to modernize the approach to transportation security clearances would create a broader, more effective framework. These proposed changes would help partners work together, make better use of information and help us better manage risks related to people who hold trusted roles within the transportation systems. I want to pause and underline the commitment of the Government of Canada to uphold indigenous rights and collaborate with indigenous partners during the implementation phase of this bill. We undertook engagement. We heard from indigenous people, the transportation industry and Canadians to better understand how we can build more efficient, resilient and reliable supply chains while supporting economic growth and trade. Those conversations helped inform the measures before us today—”