“Our government is acting quickly to bring major projects and investments to Canada. Since last spring, we have signed over 20 economic and security deals and started 27 big projects. These will support over 337,000 jobs and bring in almost $200 billion.”

“Mr. Speaker, Canada’s new government is building Canada strong. From the time we took our seats in 2025, we have been acting with greater speed, certainty and predictability to bring projects and investments into Canada. Since last spring, Canada has signed over 20 new economic and security agreements and has advanced 27 nation-building initiatives that will support more than 337,000 jobs and attract nearly $200 billion in new investments.”

“This bill already has rules to stop ministers from having too much power. We can also make the bill better when it goes to committee.”

“Mr. Speaker, I understand the concerns the opposition member has about this. That is why this bill has built-in guardrails to safeguard against giving ministers the authority that he is talking about. Of course, when the bill goes to committee, members will have an opportunity to weigh in and give their suggestions on how to make this bill better, as the bill is still open for suggestions. I would reiterate that there are guardrails in it to prevent that from happening.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

  Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

  See full analysis →

“What does my colleague think about the proposed changes to the Canada Labour Code?”

“Mr. Speaker, we are hearing comments about the amendments to the Canada Labour Code, primarily with respect to section 107. Can my colleague share her thoughts on this section? What does she think about it?”

“I want this bill to pass. It protects workers' rights, stops wage theft, speeds up workplace dispute settlements, and keeps the right to strike.”

“Mr. Speaker, union workers are at the heart of a strong economy. This bill is designed to strengthen good-faith bargaining and achieve better outcomes for everyone. It would crack down on wage theft and the misclassification of jobs. It would protect workers during business transactions and insolvencies. It would safeguard bargaining rights when contracts change hands. It would speed up grievance arbitration, in addition to always upholding the constitutionally protected right to strike. I just want to reiterate that the right to strike would always be protected under this bill.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 46 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“We are building projects right now, like the nuclear work at Darlington near my home. We need to pass this bill to keep building.”

“Mr. Speaker, we have been building, and if you were listening to my colleague’s speech earlier, they were talking about Darlington, where shovels are in the ground at the moment. It is in my region, so I have seen that myself. This is the second part of Bill C-5 that we need in order to make Canada—”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 48 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“The member complained that our policies delay major projects. But this bill would finish project reviews and permits at the same time in one year. Then he complained that one year is too short. I want him to clarify where he stands on this one-year timeline.”

“Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for his intervention, although I ended up feeling a little confused. He started off talking about Liberal policies stalling and stifling major projects. In this bill, my understanding is that both the impact assessment and the permitting would be done concurrently and over the course of a year. I would think that would address his problem with our stalling major projects. Then he went on, and it seemed that at the end he was criticizing the one year as not being enough. Exactly where does the member stand on the one-year timeline to get projects approved?”

“I want the member to tell me what he thinks about our plan to decide on federal project permits within one year. This one-year limit gives investors the clarity they need to make decisions.”

“Mr. Speaker, I would like to know what my colleague thinks about our commitment to ensuring that decisions on projects requiring a federal permit are made within one year. This would give investors and project proponents the predictability and clarity they need. When it comes to making investments, people need to know what to expect.”

“I want the House to pass this bill quickly. It gives businesses stability by speeding up federal reviews of major projects to one year, without skipping environmental or Indigenous checks. It also protects our supply chains and helps workers and bosses solve labour disputes faster, so our goods get to market on time.”

“Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to address Bill C-39, the building Canada strong act. I would also like to take the opportunity to welcome my colleagues to this new parliamentary session. This is the first time I have spoken since we came back. I hope that we will have a good session of constructive work and that we will move quickly on all the bills that we need to move forward and pass. When we talk about building Canada strong, we often think of major projects. We think of infrastructure. This includes ports, railways and major investments. In my view, a strong Canada starts in our communities. It starts at home. I proudly represent the riding of Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, which is located in the Lower Laurentians of Quebec and includes the cities of Boisbriand, Rosemère, Deux-Montagnes and Saint-Eustache. I am very proud of these communities. I meet families and workers there, as well as entrepreneurs and small and medium-sized business owners. I meet people from the manufacturing sector who want to continue to produce and create good local jobs. What they want from us is simple. They want stability. They want clear rules. They want to be able to invest. They want to be able to hire as well as grow their businesses. They want us to get things done. This issue is even more important today. We live in a world where economic uncertainty has become a daily reality. We see it particularly clearly in our trade relationship with the United States. Just a few months ago, entrepreneurs in my riding were telling me about plans to expand. They were talking to me about growing their businesses, buying new equipment and hiring more workers. I was told about plans in Saint-Eustache and elsewhere in the Lower Laurentians. Today, the context has changed. With the uncertainty coming from the United States, some entrepreneurs are being more cautious. Some are re-evaluating their plans, while others prefer to wait before making a major decision. I can understand them. I was an entrepreneur before I got into politics. Expanding a plant, buying equipment and hiring workers are big decisions. A business needs to know where the markets will be. It needs to know what it will be able to get in return for its goods. It also needs to know that it will be able to deliver its products to its customers. It needs predictability. We do not control every decision made south of the border, but we can act on what we control here in Canada. We can make our processes more efficient, strengthen our infrastructure, diversify our markets and create a climate where businesses have more confidence to invest within Canada. A significant portion of Bill C‑39 focuses specifically on how we review major projects in Canada. Currently, a proponent may have to work with multiple departments. They may also need to go through a process to get the necessary authorizations. Bill C‑39 seeks to better coordinate these efforts. For certain designated projects, a decision should be made within a year once the required studies and information have been provided. A one-year timeline would be fantastic. The bill also calls for better coordination of assessments, federal authorizations and, of course, consultations with indigenous groups. In my view, the idea is simple. Companies that want to invest in Canada need to know the rules. They need to know what the steps are. They also need to know how quickly a decision can be made. That does not mean that we are setting aside our environmental responsibilities, nor does it mean that we are setting aside consultations with indigenous peoples We need to do things right, but we also need to be able to do them efficiently. We can build faster, and we can build responsibly. Another aspect of Bill C‑39 is particularly important to me. I have been a member of the Standing Committee on International Trade for several years, and I am thinking here of supply chains and trade corridors. At committee, we talk a lot about trade agreements. In fact, we have signed about 20 of them in the past year. We are talking about new markets. We are talking about exporting more Canadian products. However, trade agreements are not enough. We need to be able to deliver the products. I will give a very concrete example that we heard at the Standing Committee on International Trade. Earlier this year, we heard from Antoine Morin, senior vice-president at Olymel, a company with a strong presence in Quebec’s pork production market. We are talking about Canadian exports to Japan, a very important market. Some of that pork is sold fresh, never frozen. It is a very valuable commodity that needs to be delivered in a very specific time frame. Mr. Morin explained that Olymel uses the port of Vancouver as its main gateway to Asia. He also explained what happens when there is a service disruption or a strike. When fresh pork piles up at the port, the company has to make a decision quickly. They may need to freeze a product that has to be sold fresh. They may also need to redirect it to another market. The product is not necessarily lost, but some of its value may be. They also have to pay for storage. There are delays and additional pressure on trading partners. Olymel explained that roughly 250 containers pass through the port of Vancouver every week. That represents a lot of money and a lot of jobs in Quebec and Canada. When service is disrupted, up to 50 containers a day could be delayed. If a disruption lasts for as long as a week, losses can run into the millions of dollars. That is real money. Getting a container of fresh pork to market requires producers, factory workers, shippers, railways, the port and, at the end of the chain, customers in Asia waiting for their product. When just one link in that supply chain fails, the consequences can be felt everywhere. That is why reliability matters. Our partners need to know that when they buy a Canadian product, we can deliver it on time. We need to be able to deliver on time. It is a matter of trust. It is also a matter of Canada’s reputation. That is why Bill C‑39 proposes, among other things, the designation of trade corridors. The bill would also allow for the creation of a national trade corridors council. This council would track the movement of goods, analyze significant disruptions and recommend solutions. The bill also provides for the possibility of establishing a transportation project office. The goal is to better coordinate federal authorizations related to transportation projects. This objective is particularly important for Quebec. Quebec has the St. Lawrence River, ports, and road and rail networks. Quebec has businesses that sell products across Canada and around the world. The Lower Laurentians is part of that network. A business in Boisbriand may depend on a supplier on the other side of the country. A business in Saint‑Eustache may have customers in the United States, Europe or Asia. Everything is connected. A trade agreement can open the door, but we still have to deliver the goods. We also need to talk about workers because we cannot have a strong economy without the men and women who keep it running every day. Bill C-39 will not do away with labour disputes, but it does seek to encourage the parties to begin bargaining earlier. It seeks to strengthen the use of mediation and to provide more opportunities for workers and employers to come to an agreement on their own. It is important to note that workers must be able to defend their interests and rights, while employers need stability and predictability. The best solutions are often those that the parties are able to negotiate themselves. The bill also seeks to strengthen occupational health and safety resources. It provides for additional resources for the Canada Industrial Relations Board. If we look at what happened with Olymel, we see just how closely related labour relations and supply chains are. A disruption can have consequences far beyond the place where it occurs. I want to come back to my riding of Rivière‑des‑Mille‑Îles. When we debate an important bill here in Ottawa, we always need to be thinking of the people we are doing this work for. I am thinking of the business owners that I know in my riding. Some of them had plans to expand. Today, they are being more cautious about those plans.”

• Echo ×3

  A repeated line

  “When we talk about building Canada strong?”

  Said 3 times by 3 members since May 29.

  Every time it was said →

“I want to focus on this bill. Under it, a major project could start within one year after studies and talks with Indigenous peoples finish. I want to know what my colleague thinks about giving investors that kind of certainty.”

“Mr. Speaker, my colleague is talking about hypothetical projects. Today, I am here to speak to Bill C-39. I would like to know what my colleague thinks about the fact that after the studies and the consultations with indigenous peoples are done, it would take only one year to initiate a major project. What does he think about investors knowing that it would only take a year for it to get started?”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 47 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“This bill does not cut corners on major projects. We will still take a year to study environmental impacts and consult with Indigenous peoples before approving them.”

“Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague. Which riding do you represent? Is it Chicoutimi or Lac-Saint-Jean? An hon. member: Jonquière Linda Lapointe: Welcome to the Standing Committee on International Trade. I understand you are to be our new member. I very much look forward to working with you on the Standing Committee on International Trade. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to hear that he is going to join our committee. His question was about consultations. Before a major project is approved and implemented, there is a one-year period for the environmental assessment and consultations with indigenous peoples. No, we will not cut corners.”

• Little substance
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Signal 32 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 →
• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

  Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

  See full analysis →

“This bill will go to a committee where members can make changes to it. Even with a one-year timeline, it still includes environmental studies and respects Indigenous rights and consultations.”

“Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my highly esteemed colleague. Bill C‑39 will be studied by a special committee. If amendments are suggested and the parliamentarians on that committee accept them, there is definitely a way to move them forward. When it comes to the environment, “one project, one year” still involves environmental studies and respect for indigenous peoples’ rights and consultations.”

“Any changes or ideas for this bill need to be suggested in committee.”

“Mr. Speaker, I will say the same thing I said to my other colleague earlier: Any suggestions, changes or amendments will have to be proposed in committee.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 49 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“I support this bill. U.S. tariffs are hurting our steel, car, and industrial workers, so we need to strengthen our own economy. This bill will approve major building projects within one year, improve trade routes to help move our goods, and protect workers.”

“Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Madawaska—Restigouche. First, I would like to wish the Westmount Wildcats senior football team a successful season opener. I thank Coach Tom Pain, all the teachers and the coaches for everything they do to provide the young men this wonderful opportunity to compete in the fall football season. It is an honour to rise on behalf of the residents of Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas in support of the building Canada strong act. Since the 2025 federal election, our government’s top priority has been to strengthen the Canadian economy, diversify global trade, invest in Canada, reduce our reliance on the United States, defend our national sovereignty and stand up for Canadians. The building Canada strong act is a critical part of our government’s plan to take action with urgency. President Trump has chosen to attack Canadian workers and businesses with illegal and unjustified tariffs, tariffs intended to destroy the livelihood of Canadians and, as stated, ultimately make Canada the 51st state. This is a real threat, and everything we do as a government has to be considered within this context. The Trump administration has targeted Canadian steel, aluminum, auto and other industries that support hundreds of thousands of Canadian jobs and Canadian families. Nowhere is that more real than in my home of Hamilton, Ancaster and Dundas, because Hamilton is Canada’s industrial centre and steel city. For generations, Hamilton’s industrial economy has been deeply integrated with our friends and allies in the United States, a mutually beneficial agreement that has helped workers and businesses on both sides of the border. Those workers did not cause this trade war, but in large part it is the workers on both sides of the border who are suffering the consequences. Canada continues to work toward a fair deal with the United States, because we want a strong trading relationship and our two economies are deeply connected, but a fair deal has to be a good deal for Canada. We will not sacrifice Canadian workers, Canadian businesses or Canadian sovereignty just to sign a deal. We cannot pretend that things will go back to normal. As the Prime Minister has stated, “Nostalgia is not a strategy.” We have to be prepared to build our own future, and that means building a stronger Canadian economy, finding new customers for Canadian projects and attracting new investment. Most importantly, it means creating good jobs and greater security for Canadian workers and their families. Ultimately this is about people, families, workers, and opportunity for the next generation. Fortunately, Canada stands in a position of strength. As the Prime Minister has stated, Canada has what the world needs. We have energy, critical minerals, agriculture, steel, aluminum, lumber, technology, research, education, training, expertise and innovation, and we have some of the best workers and most skilled tradespeople anywhere in the world. We certainly have something increasingly valuable today in an increasingly divided and dangerous world: certainty. Canada is stable, and Canada is reliable. We have strong regulations and strong labour and environmental standards, and when Canada makes a commitment, our partners know we will honour it. That makes Canada a reliable place to do business. It is why we are building closer ties with Europe. We are expanding trade across Asia, including with China, India, Indonesia and other Indo-Pacific countries. We are working to get more Canadian energy to global markets, including the potential for a new pipeline to the Pacific and selling Canadian oil directly to Asian customers, including China. Our partnership with the Ukraine is also creating opportunities for Canadian workers and companies in defence and manufacturing, including with drones and advanced technologies. That is the purpose of the building Canada strong act. The bill is about three core pillars: building more important projects faster, moving Canadian products to markets and supporting the workers who are at the core of everything we do. The most important thing is getting more projects built faster, because Canada has no shortage of opportunity but does need better ways to turn that opportunity into actual projects, shovels in the ground, jobs and paycheques. Right now, major projects face overlapping reviews, different levels of governments and years of uncertainty. That uncertainty has consequences. It is certainly something I have observed in my career working as an engineer in the construction industry, because a delayed project means delayed construction, delayed investment and Canadian workers waiting longer for jobs. The building Canada strong act would create a clearer, more predictable review process with one decision within one year, working with provinces and municipalities to get shovels in the ground at speed. We will maintain environmental protections and respect indigenous rights, but we can do those things while we make decisions in a reasonable amount of time. Hamilton is a good example of what is possible. Right now, there are 800 acres of shovel-ready industrial land that is ready for development in advanced manufacturing, with the potential for billions of dollars in economic growth and tens of thousands of new local jobs. These are former industrial lands that the council worked proactively to zone. The infrastructure is there. The province has recently recognized this site as a provincial priority for economic investment. That is what “shovel-ready” should mean: do the planning early, get governments working together and resolve the issues before they become roadblocks. Then when there is the opportunity for investment, we need to start from a position of “yes” through the approvals process. The government should be working to get to “yes” instead of starting from “no”. At the recent Canada investment summit, investors from nearly 30 countries came to Canada with nearly $500 billion in investment commitments announced because the world wants to invest here. Our job is to turn that investment into projects, jobs and opportunities for Canadians. The second part is about moving Canadian products to market. If we want to sell more Canadian goods around the world, we need the infrastructure to get them there. That means ports, railways, highways and air corridors. The building Canada strong act would identify important national trade corridors and help move transportation projects through federal approvals faster. Again, Hamilton is a perfect example of how this can work. We have the busiest freshwater port on the Great Lakes. We have major rail connections, and the busiest overnight cargo airport in Canada. We sit at the centre of Canada’s largest manufacturing region. Our new rail container terminal is already helping to get traffic off the highway by putting trade onto rail instead of trucks on the 401. There is huge potential on the Great Lakes. The St. Lawrence Seaway has significant underutilized capacity, and there is so much opportunity for Canadian steel, grain, minerals and manufactured goods to travel directly to markets throughout Canada and the United States and to global markets from the Great Lakes through the seaway and out to the Atlantic. This means less congestion on local highways for families in the Golden Horseshoe, more reliable supply chains for businesses and better access for new customers and Canadian companies. The third part of this bill is about the people who actually build this country: Canadian workers. Hamilton has a very proud tradition of organized labour. Our city was built by generations of steelworkers, tradespeople, skilled tradespeople and unionized workers. That is why this legislation is important for strengthening Canada’s federal labour framework. It would help unions and employers deal with issues earlier and reach negotiated settlements and agreements before they get to a strike vote. It would add new health and safety officers, increasing capabilities, and would add staff to deal with the backlog of worker complaints. The main purpose of this legislation is to ensure safe workplaces, fair treatment, strong collective bargaining and more stability for workers and their families. To close, Canada is at an important turning point. The United States has started a trade war that we did not ask for. The global trading system is changing. We do not know what the Trump administration is going to do, but we know what Canada can do. We can build, because Canada has what the world needs. We need to get things built. We need to get our products to market. We need to make sure that the benefits come home to Canadian workers and Canadian families, because together we will build Canada strong.”

• Echo ×7

  A repeated line

  “Canada is in a position of strength.”

  Said 7 times by 6 members since May 26.

  Every time it was said →

“I believe in Canada and our businesses. We have great economic opportunities, like in industrial areas like Hamilton. Canadian workers and companies will face our challenges and build a stronger economy.”

“Mr. Speaker, maybe this is a bit of a misalignment of ideologies. On this side of the floor, we believe in Canada, we believe in Canadians and we are proud of Canadian businesses. I am amazingly proud of and optimistic about the opportunities we have, especially in Hamilton, being that it is an industrial hub, and the opportunity to realign our economy the way we have to based on the threat we are facing. I know Canadian workers, Canadian businesses and Canadian industry are going to rise to that challenge and be much more economically stable in the future.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 31 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“The port in Hamilton supports thousands of steel jobs, just like the port in my riding. I want my colleague to explain how this bill will help expand trade and speed up development through Hamilton's port.”

“Mr. Speaker, I know that the city of Hamilton, which my colleague represents, is home to a port that is really pivotal to the commerce of the steel industry, just like the port of Trois-Rivières in my own riding, and is supporting thousands of jobs in his riding. I am wondering if my colleague could tell the House how this bill is going to accelerate the development and expansion of trade corridors in his region, including through the port of Hamilton.”

“I support this bill because it will improve our ports. Moving more goods by ship and train will take trucks off our busy highways. That means less traffic for families and a more reliable way to move products.”

“Mr. Speaker, I had the opportunity to visit the port in Trois-Rivières last winter. There is so much opportunity within Canada to expand and also gain efficiencies in the port system. As I said, one of the things I am the most excited about is getting trade traffic, which right now is putting goods onto transport trucks and clogging up the 400 series highways between Windsor and Montreal, onto rail and onto shipping so that when we are out with our family, we are not hitting that congestion in traffic. It is also much more efficient, getting goods to market with consistency and reliability.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 46 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“Much of the oil and gas we send to Asia is used to make products, not burned for fuel. This means it does not put carbon into the air. We are also focusing on clean power and electricity, which creates good opportunities for Ontario and Hamilton.”

“Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is obviously a champion for the environment. We very much respect that. My understanding is that a lot of the Canadian oil and gas being shipped to Asia is being used to make the physical products we use. It is not being burned for energy. Carbon is not being released into the atmosphere. I do agree that we have so much opportunity beyond just the oil and gas industry. That is why we are focusing on renewables, on the transition to the electric economy and on doubling the transmission and generation of electricity, because those things are where the real opportunities are in the electric future. There is so much opportunity for those industries in Ontario and in Hamilton.”

“I want the House to pass this bill. It will attract investment by setting a one-year deadline for decisions on major projects while still keeping our environmental rules strong. It also improves our ports and trade routes to move goods faster, and it helps employers and unions settle disputes earlier to avoid strikes.”

“Mr. Speaker, in April 2025, we were elected with a clear mandate to strengthen, diversify and unite the Canadian economy. Over the past 18 months, our Prime Minister and our government have shown real leadership in advancing these objectives. Last year, we began by establishing a framework to support major nation-building projects. In budget 2025, we put forward various tax incentives to stimulate investment in Canada. We have invested heavily in our infrastructure and in projects of critical importance to our country. We have signed economic and defence agreements with some 20 countries on five continents. We are in talks to strengthen our ties to the European Union. These are just a few examples of measures that speak to our government’s ambition to strengthen the Canadian economy. The bill before us today, Bill C‑39, the building Canada strong act, is the latest in a series of measures. Bill C‑39 is important because it provides predictability for those who want to invest in Canada. This is extremely important under the current circumstances, because the eyes of the world are on our country and the investment opportunities presented by projects here. I have a good example. The first-ever Canada investment summit was held in September. The results speak for themselves. The summit produced nearly $500 billion in new investment commitments to Canada. This capital will support Canadian workers, businesses, infrastructure, and our country’s strategic sectors. On the sidelines of the summit, I had the opportunity to attend a reception hosted by the Government of New Brunswick in Toronto, where I was able to speak with four different people who were leading projects for northern New Brunswick. When we talk about projects that will boost the Canadian economy, that also includes the region I come to Ottawa to represent. The feedback I received was very interesting. It helped connect project proponents from northern New Brunswick with various international investors. The feedback I received from the people I spoke with is that the world recognizes Canada’s investment potential. They see the wealth of natural resources in our country. They see our government’s ambitions and the efforts we are making to build at scale. As a government, we want to seize this opportunity and send a clear message that now is the time to invest in Canada. This will enable us to foster sustainable growth, create opportunities and ensure prosperity for all Canadians. If we want to attract these investments, and if we want them to translate into tangible projects on the ground, we must ensure that a regulatory framework is in place. With Bill C-39, we are trying to attract more investment to Canada and move forward on projects that are important for our economy and communities by implementing a clearer, more efficient and more modern regulatory framework. A key aspect of Bill C-39 is a commitment to make decisions within a one-year period for projects requiring a federal permit. That will give investors and project proponents the clarity and predictability they need to invest and build in Canada. Right now, this process is taking far too long in many cases. I want to emphasize the fact that acting more quickly does not mean being ineffective or abandoning our high environmental standards. Not all projects will be approved. We can still reject projects that do not meet Canada’s environmental standards or Canadians’ expectations. However, rather than taking years to say no, we want to be able to say no more quickly. If the project does not meet the government’s expectations, people will not have to wait for years before getting a definitive answer. When the answer is positive, we obviously want to let those involved know as soon as possible, while respecting the process in place, particularly when it comes to environmental standards. It is important to avoid delays because when a project is ready to go in the first year but it has to wait for years and years because of administrative delays, that results in millions of dollars of additional costs, and investors may decide to invest in other countries instead. That is not the message we want to send. We want to provide predictability for those who are interested in investing in Canada. I want to repeat that we do not need to choose between ensuring rigorous environmental protection and streamlining project reviews. We can do both at the same time. That is what we want to do with Bill C‑39. We can do those things right now, in fact: maintain strict environmental standards while moving forward at an appropriate pace. I think that the key word for those who want to invest in Canada is “predictability”. This is consistent with what we heard at the 2026 Canada investment summit from people who want to invest in projects of national interest in Canada. The transportation section is another important part of Bill C‑39. We want to diversify our economy and develop new markets. We are already seeing that now. We have signed trade and defence agreements with about 20 countries, and we are in talks with several more. These agreements give Canadian businesses access to new markets. We also want to strengthen Canada’s economy by breaking down barriers to interprovincial trade in order to build one Canadian economy. However, if we want goods to get from point A to point B efficiently and if we want to speed up the transportation of Canadian goods, whether to new international merchants or from one province to another, we need to build more efficient and resilient supply chains. Through Bill C‑39, we are proposing a suite of measures to achieve that goal. For instance, we are going to set up a transportation project office that will be responsible for coordinating the granting of federal permits and advancing priority transportation projects. We are going to invest in strengthening our existing trade corridors, but we are also going to try to develop new ones. We are going to modernize the governance of our ports. Indeed, when we look at some of the ports in other advanced economies, it is clear that we could learn a thing or two. Could our ports be more productive and more efficient? I think so. We have made the most of what we could learn by looking at certain ports around the world that are more efficient than ours. We are trying to implement some of those measures here in Canada. We also want to move forward with new strategies for digitalizing trade. It is 2026, and we have access to technological tools that can help us be more efficient. Some systems are still paper-based, and containers have to be offloaded from ships so that paper documents can be signed. The same results could be achieved more efficiently by other means. For example, for ships at sea, documents could be signed digitally. The goal is to reduce the administrative burden and come up with a clearer, more predictable regulatory framework. Our goal in implementing this suite of legislative, administrative and technological changes is really to make our ports and trade corridors more competitive. This would strengthen our position as a reliable trading partner on the world stage. It would also strengthen the one Canadian economy, supporting our long-term growth. This will have a ripple effect across the country, including in Madawaska—Restigouche, the riding I represent here in Ottawa. I see this as a very positive thing. If potatoes from the Grand Falls region can reach the Mexican market more quickly, or if the wood chips or maple syrup we produce can reach Europe more quickly, so much the better. I recently visited a business in Restigouche that exports bumpers to Australia. When we talk about moving goods, this also includes goods from Madawaska—Restigouche reaching various markets in Canada and internationally. In this bill, we are also taking steps to support our workforce. To build a strong Canada, we must start with the workers. To do this, to achieve our goals, we need our workers. Bill C‑39 enables us to take meaningful steps to strengthen labour relations by requiring early negotiations in complex cases, giving trade unions and employers more time to identify the issues, access mediation services and reach negotiated settlements before a strike or lockout occurs. Let me be clear: We will always protect the constitutional right to strike. All we are trying to do is establish a modern framework that prevents labour disputes from happening in the first place. The goal is to create a favourable environment where employers and workers can start negotiating together earlier and can access mediation together earlier to reach a negotiated settlement. A negotiated settlement is always better than a protracted labour dispute. Really, our focus is on helping the parties resolve issues earlier, supporting negotiated outcomes and providing timely assistance when challenges arise. This will benefit our workers, our employers and, I would even say, the country as a whole. I will end there. I look forward to taking questions from my colleagues.”

“I support this bill. Our government has made the economy stronger through tax breaks and clearer rules for major projects. These steps are working, and they just helped bring 500 billion dollars in new investments to Canada.”

“Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Quebec. I always enjoy debating with him in the House. When people in my riding ask me what we are doing to strengthen the Canadian economy, I am proud to tell them about our Prime Minister’s and our government’s leadership and about all of the work that we have done over the past 18 months to make Canada’s economy stronger, more unified and more robust. I also tell them about the measures that we have put in place to promote projects of national interest and about the tax incentives that we have implemented to boost investment. Bill C-39, the bill before us today, provides a clearer regulatory framework and more predictability. These measures are working. Just look at the summit that was held in Toronto, which resulted in $500 billion in investments for projects across the country, including New Brunswick and Quebec.”

• 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 support this bill. We will have time to debate it and study it in committee. Investors and workers are excited about it because it brings new projects and jobs to regions like northern New Brunswick.”

“Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased that we, as members of the House of Commons, have several days to discuss Bill C‑39. I am pleased that we can exchange ideas here, at the heart of our Canadian democracy. I am also looking forward to following the committee’s work on this. Many witnesses will share their points of view. All members, including opposition members, will have an opportunity to comment. In his question, my colleague talked about enthusiasm. What I am hearing is enthusiasm on the part of people who want to invest in Canada and on the part of workers who are seeing the positive impact of these investments across the country, including in northern New Brunswick, the region I represent. While in Toronto for the summit, I spoke with four proponents championing projects in my region. They were eagerly awaiting measures like this one, measures that encourage investment for the benefit of all Canadians.”

• Little substance
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Signal 44 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 →