Canada’s federal government is advancing a sweeping piece of economic legislation that could change how major infrastructure projects are approved, how goods move through the country’s transportation networks and how labour disputes are handled in federally regulated industries.
Bill C-39, officially titled An Act respecting certain measures to strengthen the economy and known as the Building Canada Strong Act, was introduced on September 21, 2026. The legislation is part of Prime Minister Mark Carney’s broader effort to strengthen Canada’s economic resilience, attract investment and reduce delays affecting major projects.
The bill passed second reading in the House of Commons on October 8 and was referred to a special legislative committee for further examination. It remains proposed legislation and has not yet completed the parliamentary process required to become law.
At more than 200 pages, the bill covers several areas of federal policy, including environmental assessments, energy infrastructure, transportation, ports, trade corridors and labour relations.
The government argues that Canada needs a more coordinated regulatory system to compete for investment and build essential infrastructure more quickly. Critics, however, have questioned whether the proposed changes provide sufficient safeguards for workers, Indigenous communities and the environment.
For Canadians, the outcome could affect everything from the construction of major energy projects to transportation delays, supply-chain efficiency and negotiations between employers and workers.
What is Bill C-39?
Bill C-39 is the federal government’s proposed Building Canada Strong Act. Its stated purpose is to strengthen the Canadian economy by modernising project approvals, improving the movement of goods and updating parts of the country’s labour relations framework.
The legislation is designed to reduce overlapping regulatory procedures and provide investors with clearer timelines for federal decisions.
Under the government’s proposal, federal reviews and decisions for major projects would generally be completed within one year after proponents submit comprehensive applications and the required studies and information. The aim is to reduce uncertainty for companies planning major investments.
The government argues that lengthy and duplicative approval processes can discourage investment, delay construction and prevent Canada from fully developing its natural resources and infrastructure.
However, the bill is not limited to speeding up construction. It also proposes changes to transportation policy, port administration, environmental permitting and the circumstances in which the government could intervene in certain labour disputes.
Its wide scope is one reason the legislation has attracted significant attention from political parties, labour organisations and Indigenous representatives.
1. Faster approval for major infrastructure projects
One of the central elements of Bill C-39 is a proposed overhaul of the federal project assessment and permitting process.
Major infrastructure projects can require approvals from multiple departments and regulatory bodies. Under the current system, different agencies may assess overlapping issues or issue separate permits, potentially creating delays.
The government wants to coordinate those processes so that reviews can happen simultaneously where possible, with a lead federal authority responsible for bringing the different requirements together.
The proposed system would allow certain federal approvals to be combined into a single decision document, with conditions and mitigation measures attached.
The legislation also proposes changes to the responsibilities of regulators overseeing projects involving pipelines, nuclear facilities and other infrastructure.
The government says these changes could provide businesses with greater certainty about when projects can proceed, helping attract investment and create employment.
However, the one-year timeline would begin only after a comprehensive application and the necessary supporting information had been submitted. It should not be interpreted as a guarantee that every project will be approved or completed within 12 months.
Projects would still face applicable assessment requirements, and approvals could include conditions intended to address environmental, safety and other impacts.
2. What does the bill mean for the environment?
Environmental assessment is one of the areas likely to attract close scrutiny during the committee stage.
Bill C-39 proposes amendments to the Impact Assessment Act and other legislation governing federal permits. Among the changes, it would give the federal government greater flexibility to coordinate approvals and allow certain preparation work to begin before a final decision statement is issued, where the proposed legal requirements are met.
It also proposes changes affecting the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission’s role in assessing designated projects involving activities regulated under nuclear safety legislation.
The government maintains that the reforms are intended to reduce duplication without abandoning environmental review requirements.
Its stated position is that Canada can accelerate projects while maintaining environmental standards and respecting Indigenous rights.
Critics, however, argue that faster decision-making must not weaken scrutiny of the potential consequences of major developments.
Concerns include whether shorter and more centralised processes could limit opportunities to examine environmental risks, consider community concerns or challenge decisions.
The final effect will depend on the wording of the legislation, how its provisions are implemented and how regulators apply the relevant legal requirements.
For that reason, the distinction between streamlining an approval process and removing environmental protections is important. The government says it is pursuing the former; critics want stronger assurances that the latter will not occur.
3. Indigenous rights and consultation
Indigenous consultation is another major issue in the debate over Bill C-39.
Major infrastructure and resource projects can affect Indigenous lands, traditional territories, treaty rights and the use of natural resources.
The federal government says the proposed legislation would improve coordination by creating a Crown Consultation Hub within the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada for relevant projects.
The aim is to reduce duplicated consultation processes and make it easier for Indigenous communities to engage with federal departments.
The government says the changes are intended to support meaningful consultation rather than eliminate it. Its background materials also state that northern assessment and permitting arrangements established through modern treaties would not be altered by the proposed approach.
However, critics argue that the push to approve projects more quickly could create tension between the government’s economic objectives and its obligations to Indigenous peoples.
During an October 15 protest in North Bay, Ontario, labour leaders and First Nations representatives raised concerns about the legislation’s potential implications for treaty rights and community participation in decisions involving resource development.
Those opposing the bill have argued that Indigenous communities must have meaningful opportunities to participate in decisions affecting their territories.
The issue is particularly significant because legal obligations to consult Indigenous peoples do not disappear simply because a government wants to accelerate a project.
How the bill balances consultation, regulatory timelines and the legal rights of Indigenous communities is likely to remain a central issue as parliamentary scrutiny continues.
4. Changes to labour relations and workers’ rights
Beyond infrastructure, Bill C-39 proposes changes to the Canada Labour Code that could affect federally regulated workplaces.
These include industries such as rail transportation, ports, air transportation, telecommunications, banking and other sectors that operate under federal labour jurisdiction.
The government says its proposals are intended to modernise collective bargaining, strengthen worker protections and provide tools to address disputes that have consequences extending beyond the parties directly involved.
One of the most contentious aspects concerns the circumstances under which the government could intervene when a labour dispute remains unresolved.
The bill has drawn criticism from labour organisations and opposition politicians who argue that expanded intervention powers could weaken workers’ bargaining position and their ability to exercise the right to strike.
Critics have also questioned whether the proposed framework could encourage employers to rely on the prospect of government intervention rather than negotiating agreements with workers.
The government, by contrast, argues that the proposed measures would apply in limited circumstances and are intended to reduce serious disruptions in essential parts of the economy.
The debate is particularly important in transportation, where work stoppages can affect ports, rail networks, shipments and businesses across the country.
Bill C-39 proposes a new framework for handling these issues, but the exact consequences for workers and employers will depend on the final legislative wording and its application.
For workers, the central question is whether the reforms will provide a more predictable bargaining process while preserving meaningful negotiating power.
For businesses and consumers, the issue is how to reduce disruptive labour conflicts without undermining the legal rights of employees.
5. How Bill C-39 could affect transportation and trade
Another major part of the legislation focuses on Canada’s transportation system and the movement of goods.
The government wants to improve coordination among ports, railways and other parts of the national supply chain to reduce bottlenecks and make the movement of products more reliable.
The proposed measures include changes to Canada’s National Transportation Policy and the designation of National Trade Corridors.
These corridors would help federal authorities identify important transportation routes, monitor their performance and coordinate planning across different parts of the supply chain.
The bill also proposes establishing a National Trade Corridors Council to identify bottlenecks and recommend ways to improve efficiency.
For businesses, more predictable transportation could reduce delays in moving products to domestic and international markets. Exporters could benefit from improved access to ports, while importers could benefit from more reliable shipping arrangements.
The legislation also proposes changes to port governance and administration intended to provide port authorities with additional commercial and financial flexibility.
Other measures cover railway construction approvals, international trade documentation, marine transportation and temporary flexibility for certain shipping activities during declared emergencies.
These proposals are intended to make Canada’s transportation networks more responsive to changing trade conditions and reduce unnecessary administrative barriers.
However, the practical effects will depend on implementation, investment and cooperation between federal authorities, provincial governments, transportation operators and affected communities.
Changing regulations alone will not necessarily eliminate congestion or resolve infrastructure shortages. Ports, railways and other facilities may still require significant investment and physical upgrades.
6. Why the bill has become a political issue
Bill C-39 has received support from the governing Liberals and the Conservative Party at second reading, although that support does not mean the parties agree on every part of the legislation.
The Conservatives voted with the Liberals on the second-reading motion on October 8. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre indicated that his party intended to propose amendments during committee consideration, including changes relating to project timelines and worker protections.
The New Democratic Party has criticised the legislation, arguing that it threatens workers’ rights and raises concerns about the government’s approach to Indigenous consultation.
The bill’s committee stage provides an opportunity for MPs to examine its provisions, hear arguments and consider proposed amendments before the legislation proceeds further through Parliament.
The political debate reflects a broader question facing Canada: how to attract investment and build infrastructure faster while maintaining legal safeguards and public accountability.
Supporters emphasise the need to improve Canada’s competitiveness, expand infrastructure and make better use of its natural resources.
Opponents and critics focus on the possibility that accelerating decisions could come at the expense of environmental scrutiny, workers’ bargaining rights or Indigenous participation.
The final legislation may change as Parliament considers amendments and committee recommendations.
7. What happens next?
After passing second reading, Bill C-39 was referred to the Legislative Committee on Bill C-39 for detailed study.
The committee stage allows MPs to review the bill clause by clause and consider proposed amendments. The bill would then need to return to the House of Commons for further consideration before proceeding through the remaining parliamentary stages, including consideration by the Senate and the process required for royal assent.
Until those steps are completed, the bill remains proposed legislation.
Canadians following the debate should distinguish between measures that are already in force under existing laws and the changes that Bill C-39 would introduce if enacted.
The government has presented the bill as part of a broader economic strategy aimed at strengthening Canada’s capacity to build, trade and attract investment.
Whether it achieves those objectives while addressing concerns about workers’ rights, environmental oversight and Indigenous consultation will be an important part of the legislative debate.
For businesses, workers, Indigenous communities and investors, the committee’s examination will provide a clearer indication of how the proposed reforms may evolve before Parliament makes a final decision.
The legislation’s ultimate significance will depend not only on whether it becomes law, but also on how its provisions are implemented and how effectively the government balances economic development with Canada’s legal and democratic obligations.
