Canada’s Bill C-39: What the Sweeping Economic Legislation Could Mean for Projects, Workers and the Environment

By: Ebenezer Adugyamfi & Emmanuel Ayiku for GhanaianNewsCanada

18 OCTOBER 2026

Canada’s federal government is advancing a wide-ranging piece of legislation that could reshape how major infrastructure and resource projects are approved, how certain labour disputes are handled and how the country manages some aspects of its economic development.

Known as Bill C-39, or the Building Canada Strong Act, the proposed legislation was introduced on September 21, 2026. The government says the measures are intended to reduce delays, provide greater certainty for investors, strengthen supply chains and help Canada develop the infrastructure needed to support long-term economic growth.

However, the bill has also prompted debate about the consequences of accelerating project approvals and expanding federal intervention in labour disputes.

The legislation is not limited to a single infrastructure initiative. It proposes changes across several areas of federal law, making it an important development for businesses, workers, Indigenous communities, environmental organisations and Canadians concerned about how major national projects are assessed.

What is Bill C-39?

Bill C-39 is the federal government’s proposed Building Canada Strong Act, introduced as part of its broader economic agenda.

The legislation seeks to make it easier and more predictable to advance major projects, including infrastructure and resource developments that may require federal assessment or authorisation.

Ottawa argues that lengthy approval processes can discourage investment and delay projects that could contribute to economic growth, employment, transportation capacity and energy security.

Under the proposal, federal reviews and decisions would generally be completed within one year after a project proponent submits a comprehensive application, subject to the legislation’s rules and provisions governing the review process.

The government says the approach would preserve environmental standards and respect Indigenous rights while making decisions more efficiently.

Bill C-39 also proposes changes to the Canada Labour Code and other legislation, meaning its potential effects extend beyond construction and infrastructure.

As of October 18, the bill has passed second reading in the House of Commons and has been referred to a special legislative committee for further examination. It has not completed the parliamentary process and is not yet law.

Faster approvals for major projects

One of the central features of Bill C-39 is its proposed effort to shorten the time required for federal project reviews.

Large projects can involve several assessments, consultations and regulatory approvals before construction can begin. Supporters of reform argue that uncertainty and delays can increase costs, discourage investors and prevent projects from moving forward.

The government wants federal decisions to be made more quickly once applicants provide complete submissions.

The proposed one-year timeline is intended to give businesses and project developers greater clarity about when they can expect federal decisions.

However, a shorter review timeline does not automatically mean every project will be approved within a year or receive approval at all. Projects must still meet applicable requirements, and the legislation contains provisions governing how reviews proceed.

The practical effect will depend on how the new framework is implemented, the complexity of individual projects and the capacity of the agencies responsible for reviewing applications.

Cabinet could designate regions of national interest

Another major element of the bill concerns the designation of regions considered to be in the national interest.

The proposal would allow the federal government to establish such regions following the relevant assessment process. Eligible projects within designated areas could benefit from a more coordinated approval framework and certain authorisations.

The intention is to reduce the need for separate, repetitive approvals where the government has already assessed relevant regional conditions.

For businesses, this could provide greater certainty about whether a proposed development can proceed and what requirements must be met.

However, the approach also raises questions about how regions will be selected, how eligibility criteria will be applied and what opportunities communities will have to participate in decisions that affect their land and livelihoods.

Environmental organisations have expressed concern that accelerating approvals at the regional level could reduce the time or opportunities available to examine the specific effects of individual projects.

The government maintains that faster approvals can coexist with environmental protection and Indigenous rights. The implementation of those commitments will be central to assessing the legislation’s eventual impact.

Environmental assessments and Indigenous rights

The proposed changes to project reviews have generated debate over how Canada will balance economic development with environmental responsibilities.

Bill C-39 proposes amendments to the federal Impact Assessment Act and related legislation. These include changes to how certain assessments are conducted and how federal authorisations are coordinated.

The legislation would also give the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission responsibility for assessing designated projects that include specified activities regulated under the Nuclear Safety and Control Act. Under the proposed framework, those assessments would not be referred to a review panel.

Environmental advocates have warned that compressed timelines and changes to assessment procedures could make it harder to examine complex ecological impacts, including potential effects on fish habitat, water systems and surrounding communities.

The bill also proposes changes affecting measures under the Fisheries Act, including a mechanism through which certain compensation obligations for harm to fish or fish habitat could be met through payments to the Environmental Damages Fund.

Critics argue that payments to a fund may not necessarily restore the particular habitat damaged by a project.

Indigenous rights are another significant consideration. Major infrastructure and resource projects can affect Indigenous territories, treaty rights, traditional land use and access to natural resources.

The federal government says the proposed reforms will respect Indigenous rights and preserve its obligations to consult Indigenous peoples.

The key question is how those commitments will be applied when approval timelines are shortened or regional frameworks are introduced. The legislation’s passage alone will not settle the legal and practical questions that may arise in individual projects.

Bill C-39 and workers’ right to strike

Beyond infrastructure, the bill proposes changes to Section 107 of the Canada Labour Code, which concerns federal intervention in labour disputes.

The federal government has previously relied on this provision during disputes involving federally regulated sectors, including transportation. Those interventions have generated legal challenges and disagreement over the limits of ministerial authority.

Under Bill C-39, the legislation would explicitly set out the minister’s ability to direct the Canada Industrial Relations Board to take measures that could include ordering a return to operations or moving parties into binding arbitration.

The proposal also establishes conditions for intervention. These include consideration of a special mediator’s report and a determination that a work stoppage is adversely affecting the national interest.

The government argues that the changes would clarify existing authority and establish clearer safeguards around the use of Section 107.

However, labour law experts have questioned whether the proposed wording would effectively expand the government’s ability to intervene in collective bargaining.

Their concern is that a broad interpretation of the national interest could allow economic disruption to become a stronger justification for ending strikes.

This matters because the right to strike is an important part of collective bargaining in Canada. The Supreme Court of Canada recognised constitutional protection for the right to strike in its 2015 decision in Saskatchewan Federation of Labour v. Saskatchewan.

That protection does not mean every strike is immune from lawful limits, but any restrictions must satisfy applicable constitutional requirements.

The legislation’s final wording, the way the powers are exercised and any resulting court challenges could therefore play an important role in determining its effect on workers and employers.

Why the meaning of “national interest” matters

The phrase “national interest” is central to several elements of the government’s economic agenda.

In the context of project approvals, the concept can be used to identify developments or regions that Ottawa considers important to Canada’s broader economic or strategic objectives.

In labour disputes, the proposed test would help determine when a work stoppage could justify federal intervention.

Critics argue that the term requires careful application because economic consequences can vary significantly from one situation to another.

For example, a disruption to a major transportation network could affect businesses, supply chains and the movement of essential goods. At the same time, strikes are intended to create pressure during negotiations, and the economic impact of a work stoppage does not automatically establish that government intervention is constitutionally justified.

The government has described the national-interest threshold for labour intervention as a high one, while acknowledging that each dispute would need to be considered in its own circumstances.

How the provisions are interpreted in practice could become one of the most closely watched aspects of the legislation.

Political debate and parliamentary scrutiny

Bill C-39 has received support at second reading, allowing it to proceed to committee scrutiny, but that vote does not amount to final passage.

The House of Commons approved the bill at second reading on October 8, 2026, and referred it to a special legislative committee.

The parliamentary debate has reflected different views about the proposed balance between economic development, workers’ rights and environmental protections.

The government has defended the legislation as a way to accelerate projects and provide greater certainty for investment.

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has indicated that his party wants amendments, including changes relating to project decision timelines and workers’ rights.

NDP Leader Avi Lewis has criticised the proposal, arguing that it threatens the right to strike and raises concerns about consultation with Indigenous communities.

The committee stage provides an opportunity for parliamentarians to examine the bill’s provisions, hear evidence and consider amendments before any further votes.

The bill must still complete the remaining stages of the legislative process before it can become law.

What Bill C-39 could mean for Canadians

If enacted, the legislation could have different effects depending on where Canadians live, the industries in which they work and their involvement in major development projects.

For businesses and investors, more predictable approval processes could help with planning and investment decisions.

For workers in federally regulated industries, the proposed changes to Section 107 could affect how labour disputes are resolved and when the government may intervene.

For Indigenous communities, the implications will depend in part on how consultation obligations and rights protections are respected in the new approval framework.

For environmental groups and communities near proposed developments, the central issue will be whether faster reviews retain sufficient opportunities to identify and address environmental risks.

These possible effects remain subject to the bill’s final wording, the parliamentary process and any subsequent regulations or legal interpretations.

What happens next?

The special legislative committee is expected to examine the proposed legislation and consider possible amendments. The bill would then need to proceed through the remaining stages in Parliament, including any required votes in the House of Commons and consideration by the Senate.

Until that process is completed and the legislation receives royal assent, the proposed measures should not be treated as fully implemented law.

For Canadians, the debate over Bill C-39 is about more than reducing paperwork or accelerating construction. It concerns how the country will make decisions about major projects, protect legal rights and determine when economic objectives justify changes to existing regulatory processes.

The legislation’s eventual impact will depend not only on whether it passes, but also on how its provisions are interpreted and applied.

GhanaianNewsCanada will continue to follow the bill’s progress and report on developments affecting Canada’s economy, workers, Indigenous communities and environmental protections.