Building Canada Strong Act

Bill C-39, Building Canada Strong Act · Second reading · now at committee in the House Where it stands

What Bill C-39 would do

The bill would set one-year deadlines for impact assessments of major energy projects, including pipelines, power lines, and offshore renewables, once required information is submitted. It would also allow the federal government to designate trade corridors, adjust port governance and rail switching rules, and let electronic documents replace paper records for trade. In addition, the bill would introduce new collective bargaining rules and timelines under the Canada Labour Code, along with changes to environmental reviews and fisheries offsetting fees.

Official text (opens in a new tab)

111 statements

Mario Simard, Jonquière—Hébertville—Pays-des-Bleuets

Bloc Québécois
“I oppose this bill. It lets companies start building oil and gas projects before environmental reviews are finished. If a project is cancelled after construction starts, companies will sue the government.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I do not know whether my colleague read the bill carefully. I did. It gives the government the option of launching oil or gas infrastructure projects without completing environmental assessments first. Here is a very telling example. Back home, the GNL Québec project was turned down. Its proponents had said that they would respect the environmental assessments. However, when their proposal was flatly refused, they turned around and sued the government. I am loathe to think what would happen if an oil and gas project got off the ground, with infrastructure construction under way, only to find out that the project was a no-go and had to be shut down. That would lead to devastating lawsuits for the government. Is my colleague aware of that?

Linda Lapointe, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles

Liberal
“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.”
  • 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
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

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

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

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.

Elizabeth May, Saanich—Gulf Islands

Green
“This bill does not protect the environment. Environmental lawyers agree on this. I want to know if the government will make big changes to it, because it is unacceptable as it is.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed with Bill C-39. Unlike the Liberal MPs, I would say that there are no environmental lawyers who believe this bill protects the environment. I would like to ask whether the government and its MPs are open to significant and serious amendments, because this bill is unacceptable.

Linda Lapointe, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles

Liberal
“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.”
Official Hansard

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.

Jenny Kwan, Vancouver East

NDP
“This bill fast-tracks projects, and an environmental group warns that communities could be forced to live with the pollution. Will the government promise that no community's health or environment will be sacrificed?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, an environmental organization has warned that Bill C-39 would create sacrifice zones, where communities are expected to bear the pollution and environmental risks of projects deemed to be in the national interest. Will the government actually guarantee that no communities will be subject to making those sacrifices of health and environment as a result of fast-tracking projects under Bill C-39?

Linda Lapointe, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles

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

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.

John-Paul Danko, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas

Liberal
“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.”
  • A repeated line

    “Canada is in a position of strength.”

    Said 7 times by 6 members since May 26.

    Every time it was said
Official Hansard

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.

Marc Dalton, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge

Conservative

Linked statement

“The Liberals have been in power for 11 years, and hundreds of projects are stuck. They claim this bill sets a one-year deadline to approve projects, but that is misleading. The one-year clock only starts after companies hand in every study the government asks for, which still leaves years of delays.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I am listening to the Liberal member, and the words are great. I can say amen to a lot of what he is saying, but the problem is that the Liberals have been in power for 11 years. He said that Canada has no shortage of opportunities and huge potential. Well, why are things not happening? We have had 500 projects, actually way more than that, bogged down. The Liberals claim that part 1 of the bill sets a one-year decision timeline, but the fine print reveals that the clock only starts after proponents submit every single study requested. Is this not just a shell game that leaves years of regulatory delays untouched?

John-Paul Danko, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas

Liberal
“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.”
  • 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
Official Hansard

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.

Caroline Desrochers, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Housing and Infrastructure

Liberal
“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.”
Official Hansard

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.

John-Paul Danko, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas

Liberal
“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.”
  • 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
Official Hansard

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.

Elizabeth May, Saanich—Gulf Islands

Green
“The government talks a lot about getting products to market, but they do not seem to understand what is actually in the west coast pipeline. It mostly carries diluted bitumen to China to pave roads, yet the government described it wrongly. Does the government really know what it is shipping?”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, “getting products to market” is a repeated phrase, and one thing that shakes my confidence in the government was in the Canada Gazette. On August 1, when it posted about the west coast oil pipeline, it did not accurately describe, in a very short description, the product that will go in the pipeline. Similarly, as the Liberals talk about the product going to China in the pipeline, I will note that the diluted bitumen, which is actually the product used mostly in China, is the tar in the bitumen to pave roads. I wonder if the member would comment on the level of familiarity of the government benches with the products that are being shipped.

John-Paul Danko, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas

Liberal
“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.”
Official Hansard

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.

Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Madawaska—Restigouche

Liberal
“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.”
Official Hansard

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.

Gérard Deltell, Louis-Saint-Laurent—Akiawenhrahk

Conservative
“Two years ago, Liberals voted against my bill to have only one environmental review per project. Today, the government supports that same idea. I want the member to explain why his party voted against it back then.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from New Brunswick. I commend him for his passion for his region, as we all have for our own. There is a reason we were elected by the people. I know that my colleague was elected 18 months ago, and I congratulate him, but two years ago, before his time, his peers on that side of the House voted against Bill C‑375, which called for “one project, one environmental assessment”. It was my bill, in fact. We, the Conservatives, had introduced it. Today, however, the government is boasting about wanting to move forward. Even the King said as much in the throne speech. What does my colleague have to say to his Liberal colleagues who voted against the “one project, one environmental assessment” bill but support that concept today?

Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Madawaska—Restigouche

Liberal
“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.”
  • 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
Official Hansard

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.

Luc Thériault, Montcalm

Bloc Québécois
“I oppose this bill because it gives too much power to the government and weakens Parliament. The Liberals are using the tariff crisis to take away democratic rules permanently. They will regret giving the government this much power when they are no longer in charge.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, Bill C-5 contained a discretionary provision that gave the minister absolute power to determine which projects are of national interest. Bill C-39 gives even more power to the executive branch by diminishing Parliament’s role. That is a subversion of parliamentary democracy. The Liberals are exploiting the tariff crisis to impose permanent rollbacks that will have no effect during what is left of Donald Trump’s term in office. The member is very enthusiastic about this dangerous precedent, but will he be just as enthusiastic and happy about this bill when he winds up on this side of the House facing a new government and that government starts trampling on democracy and our legislative power?

Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Madawaska—Restigouche

Liberal
“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.”
  • 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
Official Hansard

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.

Eric St-Pierre, Honoré-Mercier

Liberal
“I want my colleague to explain how this bill will help the people in his riding.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Madawaska—Restigouche, who is very involved in his community. How will the people of Madawaska—Restigouche benefit in concrete ways from Bill C-39, the building Canada strong act?

Guillaume Deschênes-Thériault, Madawaska—Restigouche

Liberal
“I want this bill to pass. It sets a one-year limit for federal permit decisions, which helps investors plan projects in northern New Brunswick. It also makes our local ports faster and more efficient, helping businesses in my area ship their goods to markets around the world.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, my riding is home to a number of projects and a great deal of momentum. The bill will provide a clear regulatory framework for people who want to invest in projects in northern New Brunswick. For example, responses about federal permits will be delivered within a year, providing predictability. When it comes to transport, we want to make our ports more efficient. New Brunswick has the port of Belledune and the port of Saint John. Goods from my riding, Madawaska—Restigouche, sail from those ports to reach various markets around the world. Modernizing port processes and procedures to make them more efficient will benefit our local businesses, which are already very active in international trade.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 143

  1. Government Orders Building Canada Strong Act 111 statements
  2. Oral Questions Condolences 2 statements
  3. Oral Questions Taxation 7 statements
  4. Oral Questions The Environment 4 statements
  5. Oral Questions Public Safety 10 statements
  6. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 2 statements
  7. Oral Questions The Economy 18 statements
  8. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 2 statements
  9. Oral Questions Artificial Intelligence 2 statements
  10. Oral Questions Transportation 2 statements
  11. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 2 statements
  12. Oral Questions Business of the House 2 statements
  13. Oral Questions Taxation 6 statements
  14. Oral Questions The Economy 9 statements
  15. Oral Questions Intergovernmental Affairs 6 statements
  16. Government Orders Building Canada Strong Act 65 statements
  17. Oral Questions Fisheries and Oceans 2 statements
  18. Oral Questions Taxation 12 statements
  19. Private Members' Business Protecting Young Persons from Exposure to Pornography Act 14 statements
  20. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  21. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  22. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements