Liberals' major projects bill heads to committee after vote splits opposition

Analysis

The Liberal government's sweeping economic legislation, Bill C-39, passed a key vote in the House of Commons on Thursday, clearing the way for study by a special parliamentary committee. The bill, which aims to streamline approvals for major infrastructure projects and amend federal labour laws, passed second reading with the support of the Conservative opposition. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre said his party backed sending the bill to committee in order to propose amendments to what he called a "weak, watered-down, long-delayed" piece of legislation. The New Democrats, Bloc Québécois and Green Party voted against the motion.

Poilievre told reporters his party will seek amendments to speed up project decision timelines to between six months and a year, eliminate the industrial carbon price, and create "shovel-ready zones" with pre-permitting. He also said Conservatives would introduce measures to protect workers' rights, though he offered no specifics. "We will be putting forward amendments, to protect workers, their jobs, their rights and the working-class people who build this country," Poilievre said. The 243-page Building Canada Strong Act proposes a single review for major projects, to be completed within one year, extending an approach previously used only for major infrastructure.

READ MORE: Cuba urges Canada to maintain opposition to U.S. embargo ahead of UN vote

READ MORE: Albertans vote to stay in Canada, endorse changes to immigration and constitution

Critics warn of overreach and exclusion

The formation of the special committee has itself become a point of contention. The 11-member committee includes six Liberal MPs, four Conservatives and one Bloc Québécois member, giving the government a majority. It does not include representation from the NDP, which lacks official party status and thus does not get an automatic seat on standing committees. NDP House leader Don Davies said he asked Government House leader Steven MacKinnon to allow his party to participate but was turned down, a move Davies called "fundamentally undemocratic." Green Party Leader Elizabeth May said she also asked for standing but was denied.

Davies argued the exclusion was deliberate. "We think that the Liberals know that if New Democrats are on the special committee, that we will be nominating witnesses, we will be asking questions, we will be moving amendments, we will be raising issues that you’ve heard mentioned here that they don’t want raised," he said. The committee is not scheduled to meet until the House returns from its Thanksgiving break the week of October 19, unless members adopt a motion to start earlier. Canadian Labour Congress Vice-President Siobhan Vipond expressed concern that a special committee might not allow sufficient time for scrutiny or enough witnesses.

Labour and Indigenous rights at the centre of debate

At a news conference with labour and First Nations leaders on Thursday, Davies and NDP Leader Avi Lewis called for the bill to be scrapped. Lewis said the legislation "must be scrapped" because of the massive changes it would unleash and because the government failed to consult adequately with Indigenous communities and other groups. The bill also proposes changes to the Canada Labour Code, introducing a special mediator and a national interest test to guide when the labour minister can intervene to end a strike or lockout under Section 107. Unions argue this threatens workers' fundamental right to strike. "If the government instead chose to give employers the intervention powers that they’ve been asking for, we are going to have to draw a very different conclusion about what the legislation has been designed to accomplish," said CLC President Bea Bruske. She said the possibility of a strike creates the incentive needed for compromise at the bargaining table. Candace Rennick, national secretary-treasurer of the Canadian Union of Public Employees, said her union's executive board decided it would stand with any locals who defy intervention orders. "Because it’s CUPE members and CUPE members only that should decide when their picket lines end," she said.

In contrast, federally regulated employers say the legislation does not go far enough. Derrick Hynes, president and CEO of FETCO, said his organization supports the special mediator but wants the labour minister to have the power to intervene before a work stoppage begins. "The one area where we feel strongly the bill falls short is that it does not give the minister the option to act in a preemptive way before a work stoppage occurs," Hynes said. He rejected union claims that the changes strip workers of their right to strike, arguing the bill instead imposes clearer limits on the government's existing powers.

Indigenous leaders also voiced strong objections at the news conference. Chief Shelly Moore-Frappier of the Teme Augama Anishinabek nation said her community is not anti-development but the bill must not pass as written. She called for amendments to compel Indigenous consent for developments, eliminate deadlines on consultation, and require companies to clean up former industrial sites. "We were told the fast-track was temporary. C-39 takes it and makes it permanent," Moore-Frappier said, referring to the Carney government's initial major projects law. Also on Thursday, Cold Lake First Nations filed in Federal Court for a judicial review of Ottawa's decision to designate the Pacific Link pipeline a project in the national interest, accusing the government of failing to adequately consult. Poilievre, when asked how he would enforce tight timelines while giving Indigenous communities enough time to consider proposals, said Indigenous people have already given their consent to an aggressive infrastructure agenda. "Indigenous people want to build, and I believe that Indigenous Canadians can be the richest people anywhere on earth if we unblock our resources, get the government out of the way and get building," Poilievre said. The government insists it will uphold its duty to consult with Indigenous groups and argues the legislation does not threaten the right to strike.

Liberal MP voices concerns from within

Some concern about the bill's scope has emerged from within the Liberal caucus. British Columbia MP Patrick Weiler voiced reservations during debate on Tuesday, saying that while he supports the bill's overall direction, he is not comfortable with it giving cabinet the power to fast-track project timelines. He also warned the one-year timelines could undermine the duty to consult. "Given that the powers in this bill would be permanent, it is important that where new flexibility or discretion is created, Parliament instils clear and transparent processes," Weiler said. He ultimately voted for the bill on Thursday.

Green Party Leader Elizabeth May echoed Weiler's concerns, calling the bill the "omnibus of omnibuses" and warning it threatens to trample the environment to build things quickly. "Once Cabinet decides a project or undefined region of national interest has been decreed by Cabinet (then) every future decision will be taken for the furtherance of the project," said May. "It’s quite extraordinary." She argued that moving fast often leads to poor outcomes and cost overruns. Lewis said Weiler took a "courageous stand" and encouraged more progressive Liberals to speak up. "There are people in the progressive Liberal universe who are dismayed by this legislation and I encourage more of them to speak up before it's too late," Lewis said.

With files from The Canadian Press, CBC News and National Post