“This bill will help grow Canada's economy. The Prime Minister's work just helped bring half a trillion dollars in new investments to Canada. I want the Conservatives to see that this bill supports those investments and to back it.”

“Mr. Speaker, it is important to note that Bill C-39 is there to support and grow Canada’s economy. All one needs to do is take a look at the last 18 months, where we have had a Prime Minister and cabinet going out and encouraging people to seek further trade opportunities for local businesses, to seek investments, to the degree that just a couple of weeks ago in Toronto, we saw half a trillion dollars. That is a historic amount of money, never before seen in Canada’s history, because of the relationships with our Prime Minister. I would encourage the member of the Conservative caucus to look at the bigger picture. Would the Conservatives not recognize that the bill complements that half a trillion dollars’ worth of commitments coming over?”

“I want the House to pass this bill. It will speed up approvals for big building projects and help get Canadian goods to market. It also protects workers by helping them solve labour disputes sooner, keeping them safe, and making sure they get the pay they earned.”

“Mr. Speaker, we are living through a moment of enormous change. Global markets are shifting, our trading relationships are changing and Canada has to be ready to meet the moment. That means focusing on what we can control and building here at home. We can make Canada a place where businesses want to invest, where projects actually get built, where Canadian goods can reach new markets and where those investments create good jobs for Canadian workers. That is what the building Canada strong act is about. It would bring greater speed, certainty and predictability to major project reviews. It would strengthen the trade corridors and ports that connect Canadian businesses to the world, and it would create the conditions to attract investment, put Canadian capital to work and build a more resilient and independent economy, because certainty matters. Certainty means investment. Investment means building. Building means jobs. All of that makes our economy stronger and more resilient in a world that is becoming less predictable. However, we cannot do any of that without a strong labour relations framework. The people who will build these projects, operate our ports and railways, move our goods and keep our economy running are Canadian workers. The strongest workplaces are workplaces where workers are treated fairly, where employers and unions have productive relationships and where people can sit down together and solve problems. That is why the labour measures in Bill C-39 matter. Free and fair collective bargaining is at the heart of our labour relations system. Let me be very clear: We are absolutely committed to workers’ constitutional right to strike. The best deal is the deal reached by parties themselves at the table. In fact, our system works remarkably well. Approximately 95% of federally regulated labour disputes supported by the federal mediation and conciliation service are resolved without a work stoppage, but we also know that some of the bargaining relationships become difficult long before anyone reaches a picket line. This bill is about getting in earlier. It would provide greater support for first collective agreements, including bringing in the federal mediation and conciliation service from the beginning. It would provide earlier support in difficult bargaining relationships and relationship building after a dispute, because anyone who has worked in a workplace knows that a bitter dispute does not magically disappear when a collective agreement is signed. It would also invest in the institutions that make collective bargaining work, including the Canada Industrial Relations Board and the federal mediation and conciliation service, so that problems can be addressed earlier and workers are not left waiting because of backlogs. I also want to address section 107 directly, because I know that we have heard concern about it here in this House. Section 107 has existed in the Canada Labour Code for nearly 50 years. This bill does not create a new power. What it does is put new restrictions, guardrails and transparency around how that power can be used. Before a minister could direct the Canada Industrial Relations Board to end or suspend an ongoing work stoppage and impose a binding dispute resolution, two new conditions would have to be met. First, a special mediator would work intensively with the parties and provide a report to the minister that would be made public, a key factor for ensuring accountability for both parties and for ensuring that both parties are bargaining in good faith. The appointment of that mediator would not take away the right to strike or lock out. Their job would be to help the parties do what we want them to do in the first place, which is to reach an agreement themselves. Second, there would have to be a national impact assessment examining whether the dispute is or may be adversely affecting the national interest, including the consideration of free collective bargaining and the protected right to strike. These are real guardrails, and the principle behind them is straightforward: Collective bargaining remains the primary way labour disputes should be resolved. We have heard that recognition from labour. Canada’s Building Trades Unions has been clear that it wants strong guardrails around government intervention and wants the right to strike protected, but the CBTU has also recognized the value of improving the process between bargaining and government intervention. As Sean Strickland has put it, “you’ve gone through some really substantive steps here to try to get parties to make a deal”. That is exactly the objective, to have more opportunity to negotiate, more opportunity to mediate and more opportunity for parties themselves to find the way forward. That is only one part of the labour reforms in this bill. Bill C-39 would strengthen protections for the workers we are asking to help build this country. It would crack down on wage theft and worker misclassification. It would strengthen workplace health and safety, including through more inspections and a greater focus on workers’ health and safety, and it would protect workers in air transportation when contracts change hands, so they can keep their union representation and collective agreement. These things matter. A worker should get the wages they earned. They should be safe when they go to work and safe when they come home. When something does go wrong, they should have a labour system capable of responding quickly and fairly. I want to recognize what the Building Trades of Alberta has said about this bill. There are 19 unions in Alberta. I visited them only last week. These are ironworkers, carpenters, machinists and bricklayers. They have said that they welcome the Canadian government’s Bill C-39, which will expedite project approvals and help our job-ready workforce build Canada strong. I want to finish where I started. We are living in a more uncertain world, but we can control what we build here at home. We can build the projects this country needs. We can move Canadian goods to markets. We can attract investment, create good jobs and make sure Canadian workers share in the prosperity that they create, and we can do it with a labour relations system that protects workers, respects collective bargaining and gives employers and unions the tools to solve problems together, because this moment demands more than resilience from Canada; it demands ambition. Canadians want to build. We want to invest in ourselves. We want to compete, and we want to give ourselves more of what no country, no trade dispute and no decision made beyond our borders can take away, which is the capacity to build for ourselves, the confidence to bet on ourselves and the ability to determine our own economic future. That is what this bill would help Canada to do, and it is why I call on all members of the House to support the legislation. Let us get to work, and let us build Canada.”

“We worked hard with businesses and unions to write this bill. Our government is already moving big building projects forward, but we need to do more. This bill will make sure project reviews take only one year.”

“Mr. Speaker, this bill is the product of two rounds of public consultations with employers and unions. As well, it follows nearly half a year’s worth of conversation and consultation with the tripartite council that we established in order to do the hard work and the heavy lifting to build this bill. I take issue with the members’ framing of this. The government is actually hard at work pushing projects to approval, including the port of Montreal, the Matawinie mine and BHP’s potash project. There is the OPG Pickering refurbishment that the Minister of Natural Resources announced earlier this week. These are all examples of projects that are moving forward, but we have to do more, and this bill would get us to one project, one decision, one year.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“I support this bill. It updates our labour laws to make bargaining fairer and workplaces safer, using ideas from both unions and employers.”

“Mr. Speaker, our unionized workers are the backbone of a strong Canadian economy. This bill takes into account the recommendations made by unions, employers and management representatives during two rounds of public consultations. It seeks to strengthen good-faith bargaining and get better results for workers, employers and Canadians. As workplaces continue to evolve, labour laws in Canada must evolve with them to ensure that these workplaces remain fair, safe and productive.”

• 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 →

“A business leader once told me that every government department should focus on economic competitiveness. I want the parliamentary secretary to explain how this bill helps our economy stay competitive.”

“Mr. Speaker, back in January 2023, I had the honour of being invited to an event where the special guest was the executive chairman of Maple Leaf Foods, Michael McCain, a very well-known businessman and philanthropist. It was a meeting of Liberal members of Parliament who were interested in business and economic growth. At one point in the meeting, Mr. McCain was asked, “If you had one piece of advice for the Government of Canada, what would it be?” I forget a lot of what happened in the meeting, but I remember his answer to that question. It was that every single federal government department, every single Crown corporation and everything that is affiliated with the Government of Canada should have in their mission statement the word “competitiveness”. I invite the parliamentary secretary to reflect on that and how it aligns with what we are doing in Bill C-39.”

• Off topic
  ?

  Question or comment in debate

  Relevance 49 of 100

  None of this question addressed the preceding speech or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →
• Little substance
  ?

  Question or comment in debate

  Signal 13 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 support this bill. Canada faces threats from abroad, so we need to show we can build projects quickly and stay competitive.”

“Mr. Speaker, my colleague hit the nail on the head. This legislation is designed to ensure that we can meet the moment. Under the strain and threat we are facing from abroad, it is important that we be able to demonstrate to Canadians that we can move projects forward, be competitive—”

“I want the House to pass this bill. It speeds up federal environmental reviews so we can build major energy and infrastructure projects faster. It sets clear timelines without lowering environmental standards or stepping on provincial powers.”

“Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise in the House today. I will be speaking in the context of this debate on Bill C‑39. I am going to focus on the part that deals with environmental protection. Between the fall of 2015 and the spring of 2025, I had the honour of serving as director general of Quebec’s ministry of environment and climate change. During those 10 years, I learned about, discovered and explored all sorts of areas of environmental protection, including industry, transportation and infrastructure. I also worked with committed and dedicated professionals who understand very well the importance of enforcing environmental laws and regulations. That is the lens through which I would like us to discuss the bill before us today. In Quebec, there was a proposal in 2015 to review the Environment Quality Act. One of the major challenges was the issue of predictability and transparency in issuing authorizations. Quebec committed to fast-tracking and reviewing its processes in that respect. Interestingly enough, that is the very topic that the Government of Canada is focusing on in this bill, because it is absolutely essential if we are to be able to carry out projects quickly. Since our colleagues in the House are constantly raising the issue of the speed of our decision-making, it is absolutely essential that we give ourselves the means to make decisions efficiently and quickly, so that developers can build our country and public institutions can swiftly carry out the projects that are essential to the establishment and development of our economic autonomy. I just want to remind my colleagues of Quebec’s objectives, which are public. The Declaration of services to citizens and businesses states that a permit should be issued within 75 days for any project with moderate environmental impact. In Quebec, the target for the revised Impact Assessment Act is nine months. We are hoping that decisions will be reached within a one-year timeline. That is essentially the process being considered here, not the rigour with which regulations are enforced, and certainly not an encroachment on provincial decisions. We want to be able to move quickly and provide all developers with accurate information so they can help build Quebec. Since the beginning of their history, Canadians have built Canada. Previous generations have undertaken projects that have transformed the country. The national railway, which connected communities, helped establish Canada as a continental country. The Trans-Canada Highway is a great example of a project that connected our regions and strengthened economic ties from coast to coast to coast. Then there is the St. Lawrence Seaway. We have some great examples of projects that have been completed and have helped build our country. That is what we need to do today. We need to do this if we want to become an energy powerhouse. We are going to do this with projects that use fossil fuels, but we are going to transform them with projects that reduce their carbon footprint. We are going to reduce methane emissions. On top of that, we will be able to implement clean electricity projects. The Churchill Falls project is not isolated only to Quebec. This project will enable us to produce energy that can be delivered to Canadians in the Maritimes and Ontario and that we could even sell to our economic partners. This is important if we want to be able to meet our net-zero targets. To be able to carry out projects effectively and efficiently, we need to have the means to respond quickly so that we can meet these commitments. That is why we are making these decisions. We are streamlining processes and consolidating permit applications that stem from various initiatives. In addition, we are finding a way to incorporate them in the same decision. This will have no impact on provincial regulatory frameworks. The regulatory frameworks of the provinces involved in a project must and will apply. I have some examples. In 2024, Bombardier wanted to relocate its warehouse and found a very interesting piece of land in Saint-Philippe. That project needed to be built quickly given Bombardier’s various challenges and deadlines. Rosefellow, which was Bombardier’s developer, succeeded and we managed to incorporate the entire analysis under the Species at Risk Act within 75 days. We got involved early in the project and found solutions. Without the ability to incorporate feedback from colleagues and make decisions quickly, Bombardier would not have set up operations in the Montérégie region, and the project, which was announced this summer and is now up and running, not long after it was conceived, would not have come to fruition. When we read the impact assessment for the port of Contrecoeur, we see everything that was done to ensure alignment and connection with Quebec’s laws and regulations. The agreement to protect the copper redhorse was made in agreement with Quebec. We are not substituting or erasing Quebec’s constitutional rights. We are proactively working with Quebec so that authorizations are efficient and so that proponents can move forward. Another example involves the Quebec Central Railway, which connects Lévis and Thetford Mines. It was a project to rehabilitate a rail line, but it ran into some problems. Some of the land on which the rail line was built contained asbestos tailings, which fall under Quebec’s legislation. Although this was a federal project, Quebec’s laws were applied, and Quebec authorizations were used. There is therefore a way to work in a fast, predictable and clear context. This will allow us to proceed much more efficiently. People have been calling for this. We are introducing this today because there is a tariff crisis, but there are also other crises. We need to take back control of our economy and boost our productivity. The whole issue of environmental approvals means that we need to be able to do this properly. I would be remiss if I did not emphasize how central our partnership with indigenous peoples remains to these efforts. Indigenous communities must play a key role in shaping projects that affect their lands, their rights and their future. We can coordinate projects based on clear processes, and we will be able to secure a strong commitment that provides a great deal of certainty to all parties involved. Let me conclude with this final point. These proposals have been shaped by a deep commitment. Over the past few months, our government has listened to indigenous peoples, provincial and territorial governments, workers, businesses, industry representatives and Canadians across the country. Canadians emphasized the importance of improving the efficiency of federal processes while maintaining environmental safeguards and respecting indigenous rights. Stakeholders highlighted the need for greater certainty, clear timelines, strong supply chains and modern frameworks that can support future growth. That made sense to us, which is why the bill before Parliament reflects what we learned from those conversations and seeks to seize the opportunities before us and address the challenges facing our country. Urgent action is required, and that is why we are introducing this bill. We are confident that Canada can make decisions in a timely manner and provide reliable infrastructure. This is not just about improving processes. It is about preparing our country for the future. Let us build a competitive economy, create more opportunities for workers and communities, strengthen our ties at home and abroad and ensure that Canada remains a country where we can achieve great things together.”

“Our government is not moving slowly. In our few months in office, we have already introduced many new rules and laws. Our job in Parliament is not to build projects ourselves. Our job is to set up the right rules so developers can build things across Canada, and that is what this bill does.”

“Mr. Speaker, I am surprised to hear my colleague say that our government is dragging its feet. I have not been a member of Parliament for very long, but in the few months since we took office, there has already been some acknowledgement of our government’s ability to introduce laws and regulations for Canadians. It is important to create the right conditions. That is Parliament’s role. My role is not to pick up a shovel and start digging to build a railway track or a power transmission corridor. My role is to create the proper conditions so that developers who want help build Canada can do so. That is what we are doing here today.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“These bills do not weaken our environmental rules. They let projects move forward legally while we set their environmental conditions. Other places do this too, and it protects good projects from lawsuits.”

“Mr. Speaker, if we read the content of Bills C-5 and C-39 carefully, we can see that they work on the assumption that projects can be developed in keeping with legal requirements while allowing sufficient time for determining the conditions surrounding their implementation. This approach, which resembles what in Quebec is known as the pre-tabling of authorizations, is quite common in countries that take a strict and streamlined approach to environmental approvals. We are familiar with the projects, and we do not want to expose them to legal challenges; we simply want to create the conditions necessary to meet environmental requirements.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“I want to ask the member how this bill fits into our plan to make Canada stronger. The Prime Minister's recent summit brought in almost 500 billion dollars in potential investments. How does this bill help support that?”

“Mr. Speaker, I wonder if my colleague could provide her thoughts in regard to how the legislation is part of a bigger agenda the government has for building Canada stronger and healthier. A good example of that, as I have cited on numerous occasions, is the investment summit that the Prime Minister hosted, which generated close to half a trillion dollars of potential commitments coming to Canada. What impact is that going to have on our nation, and how is this legislation there to help support it?”

“I support this bill. Most of the projects investors want to build are for renewable energy. This bill sets clear timelines to help build these green projects faster, just like Quebec already does.”

“Mr. Speaker, we have not said much about it, but almost half if not more of the projects discussed at the 2026 Canada Investment Summit that elicited considerable interest are projects focused on renewable energy. However, to get these renewable energy projects built quickly and efficiently, and for Canadians to reap the full benefits, it is essential that proponents be given the tools they need to take effective action. As a reminder, these timelines and this integrated work approach are already part of the philosophy espoused by Quebec’s environment ministry.”

“I want the House to pass this bill. It speeds up government approvals for major building projects. Slow reviews drive away investors and cost Canada jobs.”

“Mr. Speaker, Canada is entering a decisive period in its history, as we can all appreciate. Around the world, economies are adapting to new realities, supply chains are being rapidly reshaped and countries are competing to attract investment, talent and innovation. In this environment, Canada has a clear choice to make. We can move with confidence and seize new opportunities or we can allow lengthy approval processes to slow our progress. Our government has chosen to move forward with urgency. Today I rise to speak about legislation that would help Canada build major projects and many other projects more efficiently, modernize key elements of our transportation and trade systems, and strengthen the foundations of productive and fair workplaces. Together, these measures would help create jobs, attract investment, improve economic resilience and position Canada for long-term success. Canada begins from a position of strength. We are a country rich in natural resources, home to a highly skilled workforce and supported by strong public institutions. We have the rule of law, we have a great social safety net and we have a strong and stable democracy. We are recognized around the world as a reliable trading partner and a stable place to invest, but strengths alone are not enough. Canada is unfortunately known for quite lengthy regulatory reviews. To achieve the growth and prosperity we all aspire to, we must be able to turn our potential into results. Throughout our history, Canadians have demonstrated what is possible when ambition is matched by action. Generations before us built projects that transformed our country, things that captured the imagination of the nation. The national railway connected communities and established Canada as a truly continental nation, the Trans-Canada Highway linked regions and strengthened economic ties from coast to coast, and the St. Lawrence Seaway expanded trade opportunities and connected Canadian businesses to global markets. These are great accomplishments, but they did not happen by accident. They required vision, co-operation, investment and a lot of determination. Above all, they required people who understood that building for the future often means overcoming challenges in the present. That same spirit is needed today, and that is the spirit of this legislation. The projects that will define the next generation may look different from those of the past. They may include critical mineral development or supporting emerging technologies. They will include energy projects that enhance economic and energy security. They will involve ports and transportation corridors, electricity transmission, advanced manufacturing facilities, telecommunications infrastructure or other strategic investments that strengthen Canada’s economic future. Whatever form they take, these projects will help create opportunity, increase productivity, help us diversify trade and support good-paying jobs across Canada. The question before us is whether our systems are equipped to deliver those outcomes in a world that is quick-moving. For too many years, in fact, project approvals in Canada often involved lengthy and complex federal processes. Delays can create uncertainty for workers, communities, indigenous partners, businesses and especially investors. In some cases, projects have waited years before receiving the decisions needed to proceed. In a competitive global economy, time matters. At the investment summit the Prime Minister hosted recently, which I participated in, I heard from investors who talked about how they wanted to deploy money in Canada and wanted to invest in Canada, as they saw Canada as a great place, but they all expressed the fact that we had this reputation for slower approval processes, which we needed to address. This bill really would address those issues. When decisions take too long, investment opportunities can be lost. Jobs that could have been created here may be created—”

“I want the House to vote on this bill right now. It speeds up federal reviews so projects get a decision within one year, without lowering environmental standards or cutting Indigenous consultation. It also improves our trade and transport systems, and it protects workers from unfair treatment and wage theft.”

“Mr. Speaker, I apologize for that. I was timing myself to make sure I stay on time. I have removed the device from the desk. I apologize to the interpreters. As I was saying, when decisions take too long, investment opportunities can be lost. Jobs that could have been created here may be created elsewhere. Communities that are counting on major economic development projects may be forced to wait, and I believe strongly that right now Canada simply cannot afford to fall behind or wait. That is why our government is proposing significant reforms designed to improve the efficiency and predictability of federal decision-making. Our objective is straightforward: to provide federal decisions on all projects within one year while maintaining high standards of environmental protection and respecting the rights of indigenous people. This approach is not making Canada a jurisdiction of low standards. It in fact says that we can do both: have high standards and speed up the process. It is not about reducing scrutiny. It is about improving coordination and eliminating unnecessary duplication. Moving from consecutive to concurrent review processes is the key. Canadians should not have to choose between economic growth and responsible development. We can achieve both together. Strong environmental stewardship and efficient government are not mutually exclusive. A process can be both rigorous and timely. We need to get to a yes or a no faster, and that is exactly what we intend to do with this legislation. Over decades of experience, Canada has developed significant expertise in environmental assessment and project review. We have learned valuable lessons about how reviews can be conducted more effectively, how technology can support better outcomes and how governments can work together more efficiently, like between provinces and the federal government, for example. Our goal is to ensure that projects are reviewed carefully, decisions are based on evidence, consultations are meaningful and outcomes are achieved within a predictable time frame. Predictability is key if we want to see the global capital we are competing for get deployed in Canada and really get to work in our communities. It needs certainty in order to flow, and that is exactly what we are trying to provide. Indigenous partnership remains central to this effort. We recognize that indigenous communities must play an important role in shaping projects that affect their lands, rights and futures. Better coordination and clearer processes can support more meaningful engagement while providing greater certainty to all participants. In fact, a modern project review system should advance economic opportunity, support reconciliation and protect the environment at the same time. We believe Canada can accomplish all three. Building a stronger economy also depends on our ability to move people and goods efficiently. Transportation networks are the arteries of our economy. Railways, highways, ports, airports and marine corridors connect producers to customers, and communities to markets. They help businesses grow, support jobs and enable trade throughout Canada and around the world. When goods move efficiently, costs are reduced, competitiveness improves and consumers benefit. That is why this legislation includes measures to strengthen transportation systems and improve Canada’s trade infrastructure. Our objective is to support modern, reliable and efficient supply chains that can meet the demands of a changing economy. By reducing administrative barriers, simplifying processes and encouraging investment in key infrastructure, we can help Canadian businesses reach new markets and expand existing opportunities. These efforts are also important to Canada’s broader economic security. As the global environment becomes more complex, transportation systems face new risks and challenges. Supply chains must be resilient and capable of adapting to evolving threats. Secure transportation networks are essential for protecting trade, attracting investment and maintaining public confidence. The measures before Parliament in this bill, Bill C-39, would help ensure that federal authorities have modern tools to address emerging risks while maintaining transparency, accountability and predictability for workers, communities, indigenous partners and industries. A stronger transportation system means a stronger Canadian economy. Economic growth also depends on people. Behind every construction project, every shipment and every investment are workers whose efforts make Canada’s success possible. Ensuring that workers have safe, fair and productive workplaces is therefore a fundamental part of building a prosperous country. Canada’s federal labour relations system covers more than one million workers and thousands of employers across key sectors of the economy. In most cases, collective bargaining functions effectively and agreements are reached through constructive negotiations. That success should be recognized and celebrated. However, there are instances where disputes can become prolonged and where disruptions in federally regulated sectors can have consequences that extend far beyond the immediate parties involved. Our government’s objective is to strengthen the conditions for successful bargaining while maintaining a balanced and effective labour relations framework. The legislation before Parliament includes measures to modernize federal labour protections, improve workplace health and safety, support fair treatment of workers, and address issues such as worker misclassification, wage theft and much more. Before I wrap up, I move: That this question be now put.”

“This bill speeds up project approvals from about five years to one year. Canada needs to build faster to attract global investment. The bill also helps resolve hard union negotiations.”

“Mr. Speaker, what I can say about this bill is that it is going to speed up approval processes in this country, from an average of about five years to one year. I think we can all agree that ambition is something that we share, that this country needs to build much faster, that regulatory review processes have lagged, and that the international best practices and standards in this country have weighed down on the possibility of Canada really putting capital to work and competing for global capital. That is really what we are focused on. I know that the bill also contains measures in terms of improving labour relations and ensuring that the 5% of cases that do not make it through a collective bargaining process have additional responsibilities and layers built in to ensure that the process can be successful for all parties involved.”

• 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 →

“This bill does not weaken environmental rules. It keeps strong standards while speeding up reviews. We need faster reviews so we can build major clean energy projects across the country, like power lines, dams, and nuclear plants.”

“Mr. Speaker, the hon. colleague and I served together on the finance committee for some time previously and I always enjoyed the debates we had. In this bill, we are not seeking to water down environmental protections. In fact, we are just trying to ensure that we uphold a high standard while moving a lot faster. A timely process really matters when it comes to building big projects in this country, projects like the member opposite would know well, with the agreement between Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador. For example, the largest clean energy investment in North American history is sizable, and I am sure the member opposite will agree with me that those clean energy projects are sizable, whether they are transmission lines that cross interprovincial boundaries or new electricity generation through hydroelectric or other renewable sources. In my province, it is nuclear, but these are sizable projects. They need regulatory reviews that are timely so that we can get those big things built in this country.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“We will always protect workers' right to strike. We listened to people through tens of thousands of submissions before writing this bill. It only focuses on the rare times when negotiations fail, to help both sides reach an agreement so the government does not have to step in.”

“Mr. Speaker, we will always protect the constitutional right of workers to strike. We are putting in place measures that have been consulted on. There have been over 26,000 submissions and 78 different engagements that have taken place over many months to ensure that we get this right, which is to really look at those 5% of cases where collective bargaining does not reach an agreement at the table and where there is then risk of the federal government having to step in when there is a strike and use section 107. The key here is to get parties working together and to find ways to get agreements at the table—”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“The member got his facts wrong. Many major projects are already being built across the country, including power lines and nuclear projects. Canada is also seeing record business investment.”

“Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member’s comments, and I share the ambition that I think permeated through his remarks today, but some things he got factually wrong. As to the Major Projects Office and the projects that have been referred, quite a number of them have shovels in the ground, like the north coast transmission line and Contrecoeur, Quebec. For Darlington’s SMR project, I can verify that for a fact. I have seen first-hand with my own eyes the construction there. I have actually seen people working on the site. It is incredible. If someone looks, they will see that these projects are moving forward and shovels are in the ground. We have also seen record business investment and more foreign direct investment than in 20 years. Does the member understand that the—”