Translate Politics Parliament in plain language.

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

186 statements

Jacob Mantle

Conservative
“Canadians should be able to buy Canadian wine anywhere in the country. The government broke its promise to make this happen by 2025. This bill needs better protections for business secrets. The government also needs to use its powers to make provinces drop their trade barriers.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I enjoy a glass of Okanagan wine, and it should be flowing freely across this country. We were promised that it would flow freely across this country. In fact, we were promised it by Canada Day 2025. It is another broken promise. To answer the member’s question, there are two things I would like to see. I would like to see greater protections for companies’ proprietary information, and second, I would like to see a real, ambitious proposal from the other side to deal with the half of the equation that is missing, which is the provinces. The Liberals say that this is about the provinces and it is not our problem. No. They are the federal government, and they should exercise leadership, use their constitutional powers and get the job done.

View on ourcommons.ca Grade D+ View analysis

Elizabeth May

Green
“The digital trade law should not be hidden inside this huge bill. It should be its own bill so we have time to study it properly.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from York—Durham very much for drawing attention to division 8. I am going to put this to him bluntly. As I see it, in a couple of pages in an omnibus budget bill, not just a section of Bill C-39, they have created a separate piece of new legislation, the enabling digital trade act. Can the member see any reason we would not have had a separate piece of government legislation called the enabling digital trade act, with time to study it as a stand-alone piece of work, not part of an omnibus bill?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A View analysis

Jacob Mantle

Conservative
“The digital trade rules should not be in this bill. This bill is about building big projects and pipelines, not moving goods across borders. Digital trade is a good idea, but it should be its own bill. We should study it in committee to make it better before we pass it.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, that is a very perceptive question. There is no reason I can see that this should have been in Bill C-39. This has been talked about since 2021. In fact, the Liberals agreed to do this back in 2021. My math is not too good, but we are five years later, and they are ramming it through in an omnibus bill. Why? There is no reason. It does not have anything to do with building major projects or pipelines. It has to do with moving goods across borders. Maybe the government can explain why it chose to ram that through in here. It is actually not a bad idea. It could be made better. It should be a stand-alone piece that is presented to the House. It should go through the normal process, including to the trade committee and perhaps other committees, to be studied, made better and then passed. Why did the Liberals not do that? Only the government can answer.

View on ourcommons.ca Grade A View analysis

Maxime Blanchette-Joncas

Bloc Québécois
“The government says this bill gives businesses predictability, but their tariff decisions have been confusing and inconsistent. Businesses need predictability, and the only real way to give it to them is to sign a good trade deal with the United States as soon as possible.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, my colleague referred to a response he received from our colleagues on the government side. They say we need the bill so we can ensure predictability. Let me just go over what happened. During the last election, the Prime Minister said that he would resolve the tariff crisis. He imposed tariffs, then removed them, arguing that he was doing it to strengthen our negotiating position, and then he imposed retaliatory tariffs. These are the kinds of problems that do nothing to provide predictability. Does my colleague agree that, for our businesses to truly have predictability, we need to reach the best possible agreement with the U.S. as soon as possible?

View on ourcommons.ca Grade D View analysis

Jacob Mantle

Conservative

Linked statement

“I agree that businesses need certainty with our biggest trading partner. The government has delayed for 18 months, and that uncertainty is making companies invest in other countries instead of Canada.”

  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 6 of 100

    None of this statement addressed the specific topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I actually completely agree with my colleague from Quebec. We need certainty with our largest trading partner. In fact, the government’s rag-the-puck strategy has created 18 months of uncertainty, and that is why we are seeing companies choose to invest outside Canada rather than inside Canada. They need certainty that this issue will be put to bed, and the government is failing to do that.

View on ourcommons.ca Grade F View analysis

Gord Johns

NDP
“I am asking everyone to agree to set the official time to 12:43 a.m.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I would like to seek unanimous consent to see the clock at 12:43 a.m.

View on ourcommons.ca View analysis

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 147

All 45 items ·
  1. Oral Questions The Economy 2 statements
  2. Oral Questions The Economy 2 statements
  3. Oral Questions Oil and Gas Industry 6 statements
  4. Oral Questions Housing 3 statements
  5. Oral Questions Justice 2 statements
  6. Oral Questions Taxation 6 statements
  7. Oral Questions Housing 4 statements
  8. Oral Questions Taxation 10 statements
  9. Oral Questions Agriculture and Agri-Food 2 statements
  10. Oral Questions Justice 9 statements
  11. Oral Questions Public Safety 2 statements
  12. Oral Questions Correctional Service of Canada 3 statements
  13. Oral Questions Mental Health and Addictions 2 statements
  14. Oral Questions Public Services and Procurement 8 statements
  15. Oral Questions Seniors 2 statements
  16. Oral Questions Justice 2 statements
  17. Oral Questions Housing 7 statements
  18. Oral Questions Labour 2 statements
  19. Oral Questions Housing 2 statements
  20. Oral Questions Correctional Service of Canada 4 statements
  21. Oral Questions The Economy 2 statements
  22. Government Orders Building Canada Strong Act 32 statements
  23. Oral Questions Justice 2 statements
  24. Government Orders Building Canada Strong Act 186 statements
  25. Private Members' Business Ukrainian Heritage Month Act 8 statements
  26. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  27. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  28. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements