“Other governments, run by both the NDP and Conservatives, recognize essential services and have ordered striking workers back on the job. I want to know if the federal NDP also recognizes essential services.”

“Mr. Speaker, the member made reference to the issue of labour. I would like to get her to think about essential services. The Manitoba government actually asked the Manitoba Labour Board to order striking Dynacare employees back to work. It used the mechanism of the labour board, and the labour board agreed that Dynacare is an essential service. Whether it is an NDP government in Manitoba or Conservatives in other jurisdictions, they seem to recognize essential services. Does this particular member or the federal NDP recognize essential services?”

“This bill will help our economy by speeding up building projects and giving businesses certainty. Our government has already invested heavily in western Newfoundland, from ferries and energy to local businesses. I want the member to admit that we have delivered for her area.”

“Mr. Speaker, my hon. colleague certainly represents a beautiful part of the country. I had the privilege of being in her riding four times in the last year. The member talks about the work that is needed to help drive the economy of the country forward. I would submit to her that this is exactly what is in this bill, this build Canada strong act, which is all about moving faster on timelines and creating the certainty that businesses need. When I look at what this government has done for Newfoundland and Labrador, whether it is Churchill Falls and helping to support Premier Wakeham and the Government of Quebec; whether it is the fifth Marine Atlantic ferry, which is crucial for her riding; $30 million and I was part of an announcement in Corner Brook in her riding; or whether it is Corner Brook Pulp and Paper expansion project, Bay du Nord, the mining sector opportunities or tourism, there certainly have been some good things that I have been a part of that have been announced in her riding. I am wondering whether she would acknowledge that the government has put forward things that are making a difference in western Newfoundland.”

“I want the House to pass this bill. It speeds up project approvals so businesses can invest, while still protecting the environment and workers' rights. It also helps companies and unions solve labour disputes before strikes happen.”

“Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today after a busy summer in my riding of Milton East—Halton Hills South to speak to Bill C-39, the building Canada strong act, and to the important balance this legislation seeks to strike between economic growth, business investment and the protection of Canadian workers. This legislation recognizes something that I believe is fundamental to Canada’s economic future: We cannot build a stronger economy without stronger business and we cannot build stronger business without an equally strong workforce. These two things should never be competing goals, because they vitally depend on one another. I was raised in a blue-collar, working-class home. My mom was a long-term care nurse for over three decades, and my father learned the carpentry trade after immigrating from Italy, before working as a truck driver. I learned from my parents that work can be hard, but it can be meaningful when properly recognized and supported. Canada faces a rapidly changing global economy and we have an opportunity to meet the moment and attract new investment, expand Canadian businesses, strengthen our domestic supply chains and build major projects that create good jobs. However, as we do that, we also have a responsibility to ensure that workers have safe workplaces, fair wages, meaningful collective bargaining agreements and the protections they need to succeed. That balance is particularly important in critical sectors like aviation, ports, railways and logistics, industries that Canadians rely on every day. Bill C-39 would require earlier bargaining in higher-risk situations with the goal of preventing labour disruptions before they occur, and its measures are designed to strengthen the collective bargaining process. For example, parties in high-risk relationships would need to begin the bargaining process at least six months before the current CBA expires, and the conciliation period would be extended from 60 days to 90 days, giving both sides more time to negotiate before a dispute escalates. Accordingly, a key part of our labour reform is the introduction of a special mediator, who would have a defined 21-day mandate to work with both parties during the conciliation period. Most importantly, this process would not eliminate the right to strike. I believe that collective bargaining should remain the foundation of Canada’s labour relations system. Workers and employers should be able to negotiate their own agreements, and government intervention should not become a substitution for bargaining. That being said, there are exceptional circumstances where a labour dispute can have consequences that extend well beyond the parties at the bargaining table. This brings me to section 107 of the Canada Labour Code. Section 107 gives the Minister of Labour the authority to take measures considered necessary to maintain or secure industrial peace and promote conditions favourable to the settlement of industrial disputes. Members may remember the dispute between flight attendants and a national airline in August last year. I have many flight attendants and airport workers who live in my riding, just a short drive from Toronto Pearson Airport, and many of them contacted my office to explain the conditions of their work. Likewise, I received calls from those impacted by the unexpected cancelling of flights, about families who were stranded, cargo that was delayed and businesses that were affected. Many will say that labour strikes are supposed to be painful and disruptive, and those people are right. That is how we experience just how crucial the role of the striking worker is. We all profoundly feel the absence of their work. It impacts our lives and it impacts their lives. That particular strike was ended using section 107. Our government ordered an inquiry into the very valid grievances of the attendants. I publicly responded at that time, acknowledging the crucial work that flight attendants provide to keep our economy moving, and I expressed my disappointment that more time was not available for meaningful bargaining between the parties. We know that the best, fairest and most comprehensive deals are the ones made at the bargaining table by the parties themselves. Bill C-39 is our government’s response to this. It proposes a clearer framework for when those powers can be used, providing greater protections for collective bargaining. Section 107 should always be a genuine last resort, not something that is used simply because of a strike or lockout being inconvenient. Bill C-39 introduces clear guardrails and greater accountability by requiring a special mediator to investigate and provide a public report to the minister outlining the following: firstly, the issues in dispute; secondly, the parties’ positions on those issues; thirdly, the extent of the parties’ participation in the process; and lastly, the likelihood of reaching a negotiated settlement. Only after considering this new report would the minister be able to consider invoking section 107. We must recognize that federally regulated industries are essential to maintaining our economy and protecting Canadians. That is why there needs to be a clear and transparent process for responding to disputes at major ports, railways and other critical infrastructure. Bill C-39 attempts to establish that process, while maintaining collective bargaining as the primary means of resolving disputes. Our country needs a system that provides balance between protecting our economy and protecting our workers, which is why Bill C-39 proposes several other labour protections regarding worker misclassification, wage theft, workplace safety and stronger support through the wage earner protection program. Over the summer, I spoke with many union leaders, including from the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, who represent airline workers in my riding. They expressed concerns over what they call “contract flipping”, where contracts are retendered and subcontractors are switched, which can negatively affect workers and their wages. This bill would extend successor rights in certain contract retendering situations in airports and air transportation, helping preserve union representation and collective agreements when a contract moves from one contractor to another. I will speak a little about business investment as well. Not only do workers deserve certainty, but businesses do too. For businesses considering whether to expand, invest, hire or build new facilities in Canada, uncertainty is very costly. If approvals take years longer than anticipated, investment can and often does move elsewhere. I have heard many similar stories from businesses in my riding. Canada is competing for investment with countries around the world. Our system must be rigorous but also predictable. This bill proposes a more coordinated federal approval process, with the goal of one project, one review, one year, but we do not need to choose between upholding Canada’s strong environmental protections and streamlining project reviews. We can do both and must do both. Businesses need to know what the rules are, and workers need to know that those rules will protect them. Communities need to know that projects will be properly assessed, and indigenous communities must continue to have meaningful opportunities to participate in decisions that affect their rights and interests. A modern economy should be capable of doing all these things at the same time. Bill C-39 also recognizes that expanding Canadian businesses requires more than just approving individual projects. We need stronger transportation corridors. We need reliable ports and railways. We need efficient supply chains, and we need to reduce unnecessary duplication for businesses. This is particularly important at a time when Canada is working to diversify its trade relationships and strengthen the economy. We cannot control what other nations do, but we can control whether Canada is prepared to compete. We can make it easier for businesses to invest and easier to build. We can strengthen our infrastructure and protect Canadian workers, and we can create a labour relations system that encourages employers and unions to reach agreements together. That is the balance that I see reflected in Bill C-39. It is about recognizing that Canada’s economic success depends on both workers and business. We need a framework that encourages investment while maintaining strong standards, and we need collective bargaining that really works. We need safe workplaces. We need fair treatment for workers. We need an approval system that gives businesses the confidence to put capital to work in Canada. Canada has tremendous economic potential. We have skilled workers, entrepreneurs who want to grow, natural resources, manufacturing capacity, infrastructure, and communities ready to build, but potential alone is just not enough. We need to create the conditions for Canadians to turn that potential into investment, jobs, innovation and long-term economic security, while ensuring that the workers who make growth possible are protected and have meaningful voices. Bill C-39 would bring these objectives together to make our economy more competitive, protect workers, make the regulatory process more predictable and uphold environmental protections and indigenous consultation requirements. It seeks to ensure that when labour disputes become particularly serious, there is a transparent and structured process before exceptional government authority is used as a last resort. What I and I expect many Canadians want to see is more investment, more businesses expanding, more projects getting built, more Canadians working good, well-paying jobs and stronger protections for those workers. That is the balance we should continue working toward.”

“Work stoppages are rare, because 95% of these labour deals are reached without one. Our government cares about transparency. We test all our bills carefully to make sure they follow the Charter of Rights before they come to the House.”

“Mr. Speaker, my colleague asked a question about section 107. I will note that 95% of collective agreements in federally regulated sectors are reached without a work stoppage. It is a very rare incident when this happens. Certainly I am in favour of transparency and accountability, as is our government, which is why this legislation is being presented. All of our legislation goes through rigorous charter testing. The last thing the government wants is to be brought into court on a charter challenge. I would rely on the work that has been done by the drafters of the legislation and by the minister in making sure that all legislation is charter-compliant when it comes to the House.”

“I support this bill. It includes a special mediator whose public report will hold employers accountable if they do not bargain in good faith.”

“Mr. Speaker, my colleague and I sat together at the public accounts committee, and I learned a lot from him. The issue of transparency and accountability is coming up, and it is one of the reasons we have included the special mediator piece. As to what the special mediator would do, the report they would present would hold employers to account. What employer is going to want a report that shows it was not bargaining in good faith? I would refer again to the thoroughness and thoughtfulness that have been put into this legislation with respect to accountability and transparency.”

• 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 my colleague to share her thoughts on how our government is building a stronger Canada. This bill is part of our larger plan, along with new trade deals and massive new investments.”

“Mr. Speaker, I am wondering if my colleague can provide her thoughts on the more holistic approach the government has taken with respect to building Canada healthier and stronger. For example, if we look at the trade file, there are 20-plus security and trade agreements, with more to come. We can talk about the half a trillion dollars being talked about for potential investments in Canada. Then this legislation was brought forward, with the theme or common thread being to build a stronger and healthier Canada. I would ask for the member’s overview on that, please.”

“I support this bill because it will grow our economy and help us trade more with countries other than the United States. It gives businesses clear rules while still protecting the rights of workers and Indigenous people.”

“Mr. Speaker, there are two underlying themes here: funding growth in the economy and doubling our non-U.S. trade over the next 10 years. There are questions we have to ask ourselves: Are we supporting a growing economy? Are we putting enough effort into diversifying our trade? That is the way we are going to be successful in the future. The holistic approach that my colleague references is really about balance. It is about making sure that businesses have certainty because they see legislation clearly and are able to proceed with predictability. It makes us a reliable trading partner for international capital as well, and it balances the very important rights of workers and of the indigenous people in our country. This is about balance and striking the right balance.”

“We do not want to be like Donald Trump. This bill balances protecting workers, giving businesses certainty, and holding employers accountable.”

“Mr. Speaker, certainly no one, I believe, in this chamber wants to be more like Donald Trump. We are trying to strike a balance so that workers feel protected and are protected, that there is certainty in business and that employers know they are going to be held to account as well.”

“We can protect the environment and build Canada's economy at the same time. Indigenous groups supporting the port of Churchill prove this is possible. I want the member to agree that we can do both.”

“Mr. Speaker, I would disagree with the member opposite. There is no surprise there. At the end of the day, conservation and having environmentally sound policies is something that we can in fact do while developing Canada’s economy. There are ample types of examples one could cite. One thing, based on the comments by the member for Winnipeg Centre with respect to indigenous people, is that we could take a look at the port of Churchill and its surroundings. There are indigenous-led businesses and indigenous communities getting behind an Arctic gateway through that point. Does the member not agree that we can in fact do both and advance the economy in major projects?”

“Governments from all parties use labour boards to end strikes and send people back to work. For example, the NDP government in Manitoba just did this in September. I want the member to admit that both NDP and federal governments have done this.”

“Mr. Speaker, I am going to have the member reflect on the issue of essential services, because it is important for us to recognize that governments of all political stripes have used labour boards in order to end strikes. If we take a look at my home province of Manitoba, very recently, back in September, the provincial government asked the Manitoba Labour Board to in essence end the strike of Dynacare employees and ultimately made them go back to work. I am wondering if the member opposite would recognize that at least at the provincial level, where the NDP has governed, and at the federal level, labour boards have been used to end strikes. Does she believe in any—”

“I want the House to pass this bill. It speeds up government approvals for major energy and transportation projects, including in Alberta, while still protecting the environment and consulting Indigenous groups.”

“Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of Bill C-39, the building Canada strong act. Before turning to the legislation, I want to reflect on the responsibility the people of Edmonton Centre entrusted to me. Last year, they put their trust in me and the Prime Minister’s vision for Alberta and for our country. At a critical moment in Canada’s history, they chose strong leadership and a clear direction for our future. The Prime Minister committed to a federal government that would work as a genuine partner with Alberta. As a lifelong Albertan, I am so proud to help deliver on that commitment. Alberta is front and centre to our economic vision and our plan for Canada. Back home, my discussions with my constituents remind me of what that means for the people we serve: young women and men preparing to enter the trades, business owners in our downtown core looking to expand and parents in Woodcroft or Westwood thinking about their children building a better life in the community they call home. Their ambitions give purpose to our work here. I take pride in what Albertans across our province have built and in the ingenuity and determination that continue to shape our future. No story defines Alberta’s innovation and dedication like the oil sands. For generations, that potential presented a formidable challenge. The bitumen was thick and much of it lay deep underground. Turning that resource into a viable industry required breakthroughs in science, engineering and construction. Today, Alberta’s next chapter is taking shape in our classrooms, laboratories, businesses and workplaces. It will draw on energy, agriculture, manufacturing, technology and ideas whose full potential we are only starting to understand. Our responsibility is to help make those possibilities become real, and that work has taken on a new urgency. The unjustified and unprovoked trade war with the U.S. has put Canadian livelihoods under pressure. It has reinforced the importance of building strength at home and expanding our relationships around the world. For Alberta, reaching more customers means greater choice, stronger opportunities for producers and more security for workers. We have the resources the world needs and the expertise the world values. Governments have to work together to connect those strengths to new markets and to new investment. Our partnership with Alberta is producing concrete results. This legislation would help us continue to deliver not just for our province but for all Canadians. I was just in Calgary to announce how our government and the Province of Alberta will work together to advance the vision of high-speed rail connecting Calgary and Edmonton. By referring the high-speed rail strategy to the Major Projects Office, we are bringing federal expertise and coordination to a provincial vision that will connect businesses, people and opportunities along this very important corridor. Last week, I joined the Prime Minister and the Premier of Alberta in Fort McMurray as our government listed Pacific link, the proposed west coast pipeline, as the first project of national interest under the Building Canada Act. Canada and Alberta will share equal ownership, and indigenous communities will be offered a minimum of 10%. The proposed pipeline will connect Alberta’s industrial heartland just outside of Edmonton with the west coast and with growing markets in Asia. For the people I represent, that connection is close to home. It links the skills and industries of our region to customers around the world. Pacific link will advance the Pathways carbon capture project, which will target 16 million tonnes of annual emissions while building Canadian expertise in carbon capture. These projects, Pacific link and Pathways, have the potential to support about 180,000 jobs. These projects demonstrate what governments can do when they work together. We have to bring that coordination now to more investments across the country. Bill C-39 would carry that work forward. For a business preparing to invest, clarity about the federal process matters. It helps companies plan, secure financing and commit to the workers and suppliers who will build new projects. The bill would bring greater coordination to federal assessments and permitting. Departments could work in parallel with clearer responsibilities and a more predictable path to a decision. Also, decisions would take one year from when the required information has been provided with provision for additional time, if necessary, and permits could be issued alongside that decision-making. These connections matter across Alberta’s economy. A growing manufacturer needs reliable electricity. An agricultural producer needs dependable transportation. An exporter needs a route to the customer who wants to buy their product. Opening new markets requires the capacity to reach them, and this bill would help strengthen the infrastructure, the trade corridors and the processes that make that happen. Building successfully also requires public confidence. Assessments have to be rigorous. Conditions have to be enforceable. The Crown’s duty to consult indigenous peoples must be fulfilled with time needed for meaningful consultation. Coordinating that work, as this bill is intended to do, can support earlier participation and clearer decisions. Respecting rights and supporting indigenous ownership are responsibilities that we have to carry forward together. First nations and Métis communities are already taking ownership stakes in major infrastructure supported by provincial and federal loan guarantee programs. These can create lasting revenues and great opportunity. That same spirit guides our work with provinces, respecting their responsibilities while fulfilling our own and delivering on shared commitments. The people who helped build Alberta invested in a future they would never really fully see, and their work gave the generations that followed more opportunity to earn a living, raise a family and contribute to their communities. Now, that responsibility belongs to us. I think of residents in my riding, such as a young person entering the trades to build new projects, the business owner ready to fill new orders from customers overseas and parents celebrating the fact that their children can build a life, a good life, close to home. The decisions we make here should give them confidence in that future. Our workers and researchers, businesses and communities are ready to build, and Bill C-39 would help the government do its part. Together, we can turn Alberta’s ambition into greater Canadian strength and create opportunities that will endure for generations. I urge all members to support Bill C-39.”

“Our Major Projects Office is working quickly with the provinces. We signed several agreements with Alberta for the Pacific link project in a very short time. We also have other major projects already under construction.”

“Mr. Speaker, we have seen with the MOU with Alberta how quickly we can collaborate and work with other provinces to make sure that, through the Major Projects Office, projects can go through to fruition. Just as an example, the Pacific link project is a very complicated megaproject. In a very short period of time, relatively speaking, that project has moved through five or six different agreements with the Province of Alberta, culminating in the announcement on October 1 with the conditions that will be attached to that project to be put in place a year from now, which is actually an incredible timeline. You asked the question with respect to which projects have shovels in the ground already, and certainly Contrecoeur and the Mackenzie Valley pipeline—”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 45 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“I want this bill to pass. It speeds up project approvals without weakening environmental rules or our duty to consult Indigenous peoples. Right now, decisions take 10 to 15 years, which scares away investors.”

“Mr. Speaker, I apologize. Sorry, my French is quite poor. Therefore, I will answer in English. This bill would in no way detract from our obligation to consult with indigenous peoples, nor would it change anything about environmental laws and protections. What it would do is remove duplication and a series of permitting, regulations and processes that do not proceed concurrently but sequentially. Projects in this country cannot take 10 to 15 years for there to be a decision because no one will ever want to invest in this country or in any project at all.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

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

  See full analysis →

“We opened the Major Projects Office in Alberta a year ago, and it is already handling about two dozen projects. I want the minister to explain why this office and these projects are important.”

“Mr. Speaker, about a year ago, the government established and opened the Major Projects Office, which is located in the minister’s home province. I think a couple of dozen projects that have already been forwarded to the Major Projects Office. I would ask the minister to provide her thoughts on the importance of having it in Alberta and on the projects themselves.”

“We have 27 major projects moving forward across the country, not just in Alberta. Our goal is to grow the economy in every region while protecting the environment and respecting Indigenous rights.”

“Mr. Speaker, with respect to projects moving forward through the Major Projects Office, I believe the number at the present time is 27, and that includes projects from not just Alberta but all across the country. As a government, and we have heard the Prime Minister say this from day one when he was elected, we are committed to building Canada strong and making sure that all regions across the country can have economic prosperity, but to do so while respecting indigenous rights and environmental rules.”

• 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 →
• Little substance
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Signal 37 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 the House to pass this bill. It speeds up the approval process for major building projects and trade routes while still protecting workers, the environment, and Indigenous rights.”

“Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be able to add my comments on this very important piece of legislation today. As we reach a point where we would be moving forward on it, I am glad to have a chance to participate. As I indicated, I am pleased to rise today in support of Bill C-39, the one Canadian economy act. At a time when Canadians are facing profound economic uncertainty, this legislation represents a critical step towards building a stronger, more resilient and more prosperous Canada. The world is changing rapidly. Long-standing assumptions about global trade, supply chains and economic partnerships can no longer be taken for granted. Around the world, countries are reassessing their economic security, looking for reliable partners and working to strengthen their ability to weather external shocks that we hear about every day. In this new environment, Canada has a unique opportunity and it is imperative that we do not allow it to slip away. We are one of the very few countries in the world that possess all the ingredients necessary to succeed in this emerging economic reality. We have abundant natural resources. We have a highly skilled workforce. We have world-class innovators, researchers and entrepreneurs. We have strong democratic institutions, the rule of law and a culture of co-operation that is respected around the world everywhere, including in this House. Most important, we have the capacity not only to build a stronger future for ourselves, but to serve as a trusted partner to other nations that are seeking stable and reliable economic relationships, given the current situation with our partner to the south. As countries look to diversify supply chains and reduce vulnerabilities, Canada can help lead that way. We can strengthen our economic independence while deepening partnerships with like-minded nations. We can help build an international economy rooted in stability, integrity, prosperity and mutual respect. To seize that opportunity, we must be prepared to build. We must be able to develop our resources responsibly. We must be able to construct major infrastructure. We must be able to connect our producers to new markets and we also have to be able to do so at a pace that reflects the urgency of the moment. This is where Bill C-39 comes in. A critical component of this legislation would address one of Canada’s long-standing challenges: our ability to move important projects from proposals to construction in a timely and predictable manner. Canadians rightly expect strong oversight of major projects. They expect rigorous environmental assessments, which we intend to see continue. They expect meaningful consultation and partnership with indigenous communities, something that is very important to all of us here in the House. They expect transparency, accountability and responsible governance. These are not obstacles to progress. They are reflections of the values that define us all as Canadians. The challenge is not that Canada reviews projects. The challenge is that our review processes have too often become fragmented, duplicative and unpredictable. Projects that would create jobs, strengthen supply chains and improve Canada’s competitiveness have too frequently encountered delays that discourage investment and cause opportunities to be lost. Bill C-39 would address that challenge. Our government is creating a faster, more predictable and more coordinated system for project reviews, while fully maintaining the high standards that Canadians expect. The legislation would establish clearer, simpler and more predictable processes for project proponents and indigenous groups participating in consultations. It would provide investors with the certainty they need to put capital to work and have confidence to build in Canada. Through a more coordinated approach to federal approvals and a commitment to timely decisions, we would improve the efficiency of our diligence without compromising the values and protections that Canadians have entrusted us to uphold. That balance is essential. Investors need certainty, workers are looking for opportunity, and communities are looking for growth. Indigenous partners deserve meaningful engagement. Canadians need confidence that important projects are can be built responsibly and efficiently. Bill C-39 attempts to strike that balance. At the heart of every major project, every transportation corridor and every new economic opportunity are Canadian workers. Building a stronger Canada is not simply a matter of policy. It depends on the people who design, construct, operate and maintain the infrastructure that powers our economy. That is why our government would also be modernizing Canada’s labour framework and strengthening protections for workers in federally regulated industries. Changes to the Canada Labour Code would strengthen collective bargaining by helping parties address issues earlier, reach negotiated agreements and resolve disputes, while fully protecting the right to strike that we all respect and acknowledge. Additional measures would modernize labour protections to keep pace with the changing economy. The government would also add 100 new health and safety officers to increase inspection capacity, additional staff to help address complaints before the Canada Industrial Relations Board, and enhanced enforcement measures to crack down on worker misclassification. Together, these improvements would help build a modern, resilient and fair labour relations system that supports good jobs, stable workplaces and a stronger economy. Just as workers are essential to Canada’s future, so too are the transportation networks that connect our products, businesses and communities. Canada’s long-term economic strength depends on efficient trade corridors that link our producers to domestic and and international markets. Bill C-39 would help strengthen Canada’s trade corridors and their ports, move Canadian goods more efficiently, unlock new opportunities and build more resilient supply chains. The legislation would support the designation of strategic trade corridors, reduce bottlenecks, improve coordination of federal permitting and advance priority transportation projects, something that is way overdue. It would also modernize port governance, promote the digitization of trade processes, reduce unnecessary administrative burdens and create clearer and more predictable conditions for investment. These measures would help Canadian businesses grow, reach new markets and compete successfully in the global economy while maintaining high standards of safety, security and sustainability. Bill C-39 is about more than reducing red tape. It is about ensuring that Canada is ready for the realities of a changing world. It is about building infrastructure, supply chains, workforce, and regulatory systems that are needed to support the next generation of Canadian prosperity. At a time when nations around the world are searching for stability and reliable partners, Canada has an opportunity to lead. We have the resources. We have the talent. We have the expertise. We have the institutions. What is required now is the determination to act. That is what Bill C-39 is about.”

• Echo ×3

  A repeated line

  “Changes to the Canada Labour Code will strengthen collective bargaining by helping parties address issues earlier, reach negotiated agreements and resolve disputes, while fully protecting the right to strike.”

  Said 3 times by 3 members since September 24.

  Every time it was said →

“I agree with the member. Indigenous communities must always be included in these discussions, and we should make these decisions together as Canadians.”

“Mr. Speaker, I share the member’s concerns. I believe that every member of the House shares the member’s concerns about ensuring that indigenous communities are at the table 100% of the time. Those discussions are heartfelt. The decisions that will be made should ultimately be made with all of them as a group, and as Canadians together.”

• 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 →

“I support this bill. Even though it speeds up reviews, environmental protections stay in place. I trust the environment minister to protect our environment.”

“Mr. Speaker, I believe that all of us have mutual concerns about protecting the environment regarding Bill C-5, Bill C-39 or any other legislation that goes forward that is expedited. However, at the same time, there are different ways of doing things, and I think a lot of the protections we have around the environment remain there and move forward. I am very confident, in hearing the Minister of the Environment, who is very keen on protecting the environment, that the things that would protect the environment as we move forward are in the bill.”

“I want the member to explain why this bill must pass quickly to help our economy and create good, high-paying jobs.”

“Mr. Speaker, the hon. member and I we were seatmates for almost a year and a half, and because of that, I know how experienced she is. In fact, she is one of the most experienced members of the House. We are in unprecedented times. I would like to hear the member’s reflections on something, given the vastness of her experience. If we talk about the speed at which the government is moving, the focus that we have in creating prosperity and creating good, high-paying jobs, what is the importance of that as it relates to this legislation?”

“I support this bill. It takes too long to get projects approved in Canada, which scares away investment. We can protect the environment and still get things built much faster.”

“Mr. Speaker, let me say very clearly that I am so happy that Bill C-39 is moving forward. It will be 26 years next month that I have been here as a member of Parliament, and it takes forever to get anything done. There can be many great intentions, but it takes 10 years to get anything done here, and that is not the way we build a country. If I were to invest somewhere, I would want to invest somewhere where I know things are going to move along quickly. In past practice, over 26 years, everything that I thought would happen quickly, in one year, two years or three years, has taken years. It is overdiscussed and overprocessed. I am very glad that Bill C-39 is moving forward. We have to make sure we do things right, protect our interests and protect the environment, but I believe we can do it all at the same time.”