Introduction
The Business Council of Alberta (BCA) is pleased to provide the Legislative Committee on Bill C-39 with additional information regarding our position, following the testimony given by our president, Adam Legge on Monday, October 19.
BCA is a non-partisan business organization whose 130-plus CEO members represent the majority of Alberta’s private sector investment, job creation, exports and business research and development. BCA is committed to building a more prosperous Alberta within a strong and united Canada.
BCA supports Bill C-39.
Canada faces an urgent competitiveness challenge. Over the past decade, the country has struggled to attract the level of private investment needed to improve productivity, strengthen energy security, and diversify exports. Recent trade tensions have only added to the urgency with which these investments are needed.
While many factors influence investment decisions, businesses consistently identify Canada’s major project review and approvals system as one of the country’s most significant competitive disadvantages. Project reviews have become increasingly lengthy, unpredictable and duplicative, discouraging investment without necessarily improving environmental outcomes.
Bill C-39 represents an important shift toward restoring confidence in Canada’s project review system, as well as in making improvements on labour disputes and trade infrastructure, including port governance. The legislation responds to many of the recommendations BCA has made through our From Barriers to Breakthroughs reports. It recognizes that Canada can become a model jurisdiction for efficient, robust and predictable major project reviews, as well as a more competitive and reliable trading partner; all while maintaining strong environmental protections; respecting the rights of Indigenous Peoples, and preserving workers’ rights. We recommend that the Committee review those reports for an industry-supported view of what a good regulatory system looks like.
While we believe Parliament can strengthen several aspects of Bill C-39, its overall direction is the right one. As the bill moves through the legislative process, we encourage Parliament to preserve the legislation’s central objective: making Canada a predictable and efficient place to invest that can support Canada’s long-term prosperity.
Improved Project Reviews
Bill C-39 proposes a wide range of improvements to Canadian regulation and legislation. Perhaps the most important of these is the many changes that improve Canada’s process of major project reviews and permitting.
The bill introduces a one-year timeline for major projects, beginning once a proponent has submitted the required information. By establishing a defined review period, the legislation provides greater certainty about when federal decisions will be made, allowing proponents and investors to plan around a predictable process. Predictability is just as important to investors as speed. Companies struggle to invest when approval processes can extend for many years with uncertain end dates and multiple sequential reviews. By establishing a defined timeline, Bill C-39 begins restoring confidence that major projects can receive timely decisions.
Equally important, the bill allows impact assessments and federal permitting processes to proceed concurrently rather than sequentially. Rather than treating these as separate stages, the bill enables responsible federal agencies to review technical permitting requirements alongside the broader impact assessment. It also allows technical permit applications to be assessed alongside each other as one coordinated federal decision, which reduces duplication, shortens overall review times and lowers unnecessary costs without eliminating environmental oversight.
The legislation also appropriately consolidates responsibility for federally regulated pipelines, power lines and certain offshore renewable energy projects within the Canada Energy Regulator (CER). These projects will be assessed by the CER as the single federal assessor, rather than doing so jointly with the Impact Assessment Agency, concentrating technical expertise and reducing duplication as a result. By doing so, it also creates a clearer and more efficient process while maintaining rigorous technical oversight throughout a project’s lifecycle, from construction to closure.
Similarly, replacing overall pipeline length with the amount of new right-of-way required better aligns review requirements with a project’s potential impacts. Projects largely using existing corridors — therefore creating fewer environmental and land-use disturbances — can proceed through less extensive reviews, rather than subjecting lower-impact projects to unnecessarily burdensome processes. By focusing more intensive reviews on projects that introduce substantial new disturbance, this also ensures that regulatory resources are directed to where they have the greatest value.
Collectively, these reforms move Canada toward a more efficient regulatory system while maintaining accountability and public confidence.
More Practical Environmental Regulation
Bill C-39 recognizes that effective environmental protection is an important priority even as it seeks to get projects approved alongside economic and social considerations.
Under the proposed legislation, alongside environmental impacts, decision-makers will be required to consider whether project approval conditions are technically, economically and practically feasible. This is an important improvement. Minimizing environmental impacts is necessary, but environmental conditions should also reflect considerations like economic cost and technical feasibility.
Similarly, BCA supports the bill’s greater flexibility around habitat offsetting and habitat banking under the Fisheries Act. A broader toolbox allows governments and proponents to achieve environmental objectives using approaches that are better suited to the circumstances of individual projects while maintaining strong safeguards. By expanding the available offsetting mechanisms, the legislation supports more outcomes-focused habitat restoration, helping to ensure that offsetting measures provide the greatest ecological value.
These reforms do not weaken environmental protection. Rather, they recognize that practical, science-based regulation often produces better environmental outcomes than inflexible requirements.
Supporting Trade and Economic Growth
While major projects are the central focus of the bill, they are not the only meaningful reforms. The legislation also includes significant changes to Canada’s trade and transportation infrastructure system, as well as to labour negotiations in federally regulated industries, all of which will help with the efficient and reliable movement of goods across the country and to international markets.
We support the legislation’s modernization of Canada’s port governance framework. The bill gives Canada’s port authorities greater commercial and financial flexibility, including new opportunities to create new entities, engage in activities beyond the traditional limits of the port, and create partnerships that promote inter-port collaboration and investment in port infrastructure. These changes, which closely align with recommendations BCA has previously made, will strengthen Canada’s trade infrastructure and improve the efficiency of critical supply chains, and help attract investment and build the infrastructure needed to move Canadian goods domestically and internationally.
The bill also takes meaningful steps to encourage earlier resolution of labour disputes. Stable labour relations benefit workers, employers, and Canadians alike. Bill C-39 requires earlier engagement in higher-risk bargaining, creates a longer conciliation period to reach negotiated settlements, and introduces the role of a special mediator to make resolution more likely and strikes less likely, all while preserving the right to strike.
Under the bill, workers avoid prolonged disputes and lost wages, employers gain greater certainty, and Canada’s reputation as a reliable trading partner is strengthened. Even a one-day strike takes supply chains three to five days to recover from — and even that may understate the impact, considering it doesn’t reflect the possibility that shippers may prepare for potential strikes by stopping shipments months in advance. Given the importance of ports and railways to Canada’s export economy, encouraging earlier settlements is in the national interest.
Taken together, these measures signal an important shift toward improving Canada’s investment climate and economic competitiveness.
Where Parliament Should Hold the Line
Bill C-39 has attracted criticism from some stakeholders. While debate is healthy, Parliament should not lose sight of what the legislation actually does. It is a solid piece of legislation that will improve business investment and economic activity in Canada.
Environmental Protection Remains Strong
Some have argued that Bill C-39 weakens Canada’s environmental protections in favour of faster approvals.
We disagree.
A longer review is not necessarily a better review. Rigour depends on the quality of scientific analysis, the expertise of regulators, and the effectiveness of project conditions — not the length of time required to complete the process.
The one-year review timeline does not eliminate scientific work. Baseline studies and information gathering occur before the formal review period begins, and regulators such as the CER continue overseeing projects throughout construction, operation, and eventual closure.
In other words, projects will continue to undergo environmental review. Regulators will continue to impose conditions. Proponents will continue to be required to avoid, mitigate and offset environmental impacts where appropriate.
Bill C-39 rebalances the system. It does not dismantle it.
The Duty to Consult Remains Unchanged
The Crown’s duty to consult Indigenous Peoples is an obligation under Section 35 of Canada’s constitution. Bill C-39 does not change that obligation, nor could it.
The legislation seeks to reduce duplication within the federal system while allowing timelines to be extended where additional consultation is necessary.
Done well, more coordinated consultation benefits everyone. Indigenous communities face fewer overlapping federal processes, governments gain greater clarity, and proponents receive greater certainty that approved projects can proceed without avoidable legal challenges.
Strong consultation and efficient project reviews are complementary objectives — not competing ones.
Workers’ Rights Continue to Be Protected
Bill C-39 also should not be characterized as weakening workers’ rights.
Canadian workers retain the right to strike. The legislation does not remove that right. In fact, it places guardrails around the Minister of Labour’s use of Section 107 of the Canada Labour Code, which imposes binding arbitration and sends striking workers back to work.
Instead, the bill extends opportunities for conciliation and introduces a special mediator with the goal of helping parties reach negotiated settlements before disputes escalate into strikes or lockouts. If negotiations nevertheless fail, workers continue to retain their legal ability to strike.
Some have argued that the bill reduces employers’ incentive to negotiate, relying instead on the Minister stepping in once a strike commences. This overlooks important parts of the bill. First, the bill doesn’t give the Minister new powers — the Minister can’t prevent a strike, and C-39 doesn’t change that. Second, the special mediator creates transparency and strengthens accountability through its reporting of whether parties are negotiating in good faith throughout the process. Third, strikes of any length — or even the anticipation of a strike — significantly damage businesses’ operations and reputation. That alone is sufficient incentive for employers to seek resolution. Additionally, the existing ban on replacement workers already strengthens unions’ bargaining position during a work stoppage.
Repeated disruptions at ports and railways impose significant costs on workers, employers and Canada’s broader economy while sending a poor signal to investors about the stability and reliability of the country’s trade and transportation system. Measures that encourage earlier settlements while preserving collective bargaining rights represent a balanced approach that serves the public interest.
Where Parliament Can Strengthen Bill C-39
While BCA supports the legislation, Parliament should take this opportunity to further strengthen the bill in five key areas.
1. Make the One-Year Timeline Meaningful
The one-year review timeline should be both achievable and binding.
As drafted, proponents have one year to complete required information and studies before the government’s review timeline begins. While this hypothetical two-year process would shorten current project review timelines considerably, there is no assurance that regulators will only request information and impact studies capable of being completed within that timeframe. If extensions become routine, the practical benefit of the reform will be significantly minimized.
Similarly, once the formal review begins, the clock may be suspended for prescribed activities or extended under several circumstances, with no limit to the number of times this can happen. Without greater transparency and accountability, reviews could continue well beyond one year while technically remaining within legislative requirements.
Parliament should therefore ensure information requests and study requirements are capable of being completed within a year. It should also establish stronger limits on the circumstances under which timelines may be paused or extended. Finally, it should publicly report on each time the clock is stopped and for what reason, as well as the total time each review takes.
Predictability alongside shorter targets is what ultimately restores investor confidence.
2. Define “Public Interest” and Strengthen Procedural Fairness
Bill C-39 allows project approval conditions to be added or amended on the basis of the public interest but does not define what that term means.
Leaving such an important concept undefined creates uncertainty for proponents and increases the risk that decisions may not hold between governments.
In BCA’s view, safe and responsible projects that create jobs, improve productivity, strengthen Canada’s economy and enhance affordability are clearly in the public interest. We believe Bill C-39 should explicitly state the same.
The legislation should also require that proponents receive notice before conditions are materially changed, have an opportunity to respond, receive written reasons explaining decisions, and be assured that any revised conditions remain technically, economically and practically feasible.
Greater transparency would improve both investor certainty and public accountability.
3. Move Political Decisions to the Beginning of the Process
Major projects appropriately involve elected decision-makers because they require governments to balance environmental, economic and social considerations.
However, those political decisions should occur early in the review process. Leaving fundamental political decisions until the end of the review process is itself a major source of investment uncertainty.
Investors should know as early as possible whether a project is acceptable in principle. Once that decision has been made, independent lifecycle regulators should determine how the project proceeds by applying technical expertise, scientific evidence, and appropriate regulatory conditions. Otherwise, businesses could be asked to spend hundreds of millions of dollars (or more) on project reviews with no assurance the project will be approved at the end of the day.
Resolving this uncertainty earlier would give proponents and investors greater confidence to invest time and capital in projects.
4. Ensure Participation Reflects Legitimate Interests
Finally, Parliament should consider introducing a standing requirement for participation in project reviews.
Individuals, Indigenous communities, organizations and businesses with rights that may be affected — or who are directly impacted by a project — should continue to have meaningful opportunities to participate.
However, introducing a clear standing requirement would help ensure regulatory processes remain focused on evidence from parties who are legitimate rights holders or are directly impacted by the project under review, improving both efficiency and public confidence. For instance, the bill could adopt language from the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act 2012 which outlines the concept of an “interested party” that is either directly affected by the project or has relevant information or expertise.
5. Reconsider the Replacement Worker Ban
Bill C-39 makes meaningful improvements to Canada’s federal labour relations framework by encouraging earlier settlements while preserving workers’ right to strike.
However, it leaves in place the replacement worker prohibition introduced through Bill C-58, which fundamentally alters the balance of collective bargaining. The ban artificially strengthens unions’ bargaining position and reduces employers’ ability to maintain operations during disputes.
Parliament should reconsider this provision to better align Canada’s labour relations framework with Bill C-39’s broader goal of making Canada a more reliable and competitive place to invest.
Conclusion
Bill C-39 represents one of the most significant efforts in years to improve Canada’s project review system and restore confidence in the country’s investment climate.
The legislation addresses many longstanding concerns raised by the business community, including the need for faster, more predictable review timelines, reduced duplication, greater reliance on expert regulators and more practical environmental regulation. These reforms will help Canada attract investment, improve productivity, diversify exports and strengthen long-term economic growth.
There are important opportunities for Parliament to strengthen the bill by making timelines more meaningful, providing greater certainty around public-interest decisions, clarifying the respective roles of elected officials and expert regulators, and ensuring participation in project reviews remains focused and effective.
At the same time, Parliament should resist efforts to reverse the bill’s core reforms. Bill C-39 does not abandon environmental protection, Indigenous consultation or workers’ rights. Rather, it seeks to achieve these objectives through a more efficient, coordinated and predictable regulatory system.
BCA supports the timely passage of Bill C-39 and encourages Parliament to adopt targeted improvements that enhance certainty, accountability and public confidence without undermining the significant progress the legislation makes toward getting Canada building again.