EventDocument
Bill C-39, the Building Canada Strong Act, introduced by Steven MacKinnon
Long title: 'An Act respecting certain measures to strengthen the economy'. The government's line is 'one project, one review, one year': one federal decision within a year of a complete application. For projects it regulates (pipelines, designated power lines, offshore renewables), the Canada Energy Regulator would coordinate permitting. The bill amends the Impact Assessment Act, the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, the Building Canada Act, the Canada Transportation Act (trade corridors) and the Canada Labour Code. It contains no tax measures. By then 27 projects worth C$200 billion had been referred to the Major Projects Office.
- Date
- Kind
- Legislation
- Where
- Canada
- Evidence
- Document: An official document: a bill, a filing, an agreement text. How evidence is weighed
- Who
- Government of Canada (acted); Major Projects Office (acted); Danielle Smith (spoke); Steven MacKinnon (subject); Business Council of Alberta (spoke); Business Council of Canada (spoke)
When people heard about it
The public does not always learn of an event when it happens: some come out later, and old ones can become news again because of something newer.
- Happened
- First reported
- (same day), in The Hill Times
Sources
- Parliament of Canada (LEGISinfo), “LEGISinfo: C-39 (45-1), An Act respecting certain measures to strengthen the economy (Building Canada Strong Act)” (external site), . source record
- RealAgriculture, “Liberals' Bill C-39 includes measures to curb supply chain strikes, extend Prairie rail interswitching” (external site), . source record
- Government of Canada (One Canadian Economy), “Government of Canada introduces legislation to transform how Canada builds” (external site), . source record
- Parliament of Canada, “Bill C-39, An Act respecting certain measures to strengthen the economy (Building Canada Strong Act), first reading text” (external site), . source record
- Government of Canada (One Canadian Economy), “Bill C-39 Introduction (backgrounder, with the Cabinet Directive on Getting Projects Built in Canada)” (external site), . source record
- Business Council of Alberta, “BCA Statement on the Building Canada Strong Act” (external site), . source record
- JFK Law, “One Year, One Consultation, One Decision: Overview of the new Building Canada Strong Act (Bill C-39)” (external site), . source record
- The Narwhal, “Carney's Bill C-39 overhauls environmental reviews and Indigenous consultation” (external site), . source record
- Cassels, “Bill C-39: Building Canada Strong Act Proposes Major Changes to Project Approvals, Trade Infrastructure, and Federal Labour Relations” (external site), . source record
- McMillan LLP, “Bill C-39: The Building Canada Strong Act Introduces Significant Reforms to Federal Project Review and Permitting Process” (external site), . source record
- Evidence for Democracy, “Media Release: E4D Warns Bill C-39 Centralizes Power Over Major Project Decisions. Transparency Must Follow.” (external site), . source record
- MLT Aikins, “Permit me to explain: Bill C-39's plan to build Canada faster” (external site), . source record
- The Hill Times, “Unions, NDP decry new bill as attack on labour, but feds say Canada needs C-39 to build major projects” (external site), . paywalled source record
- The Globe and Mail, “Poilievre dismisses Bill C-39 as all talk, no action at outset of Commons debate” (external site), . paywalled source record
Quotes
“Bulldoze Nature Bill”
From The Narwhal: Carney's Bill C-39 overhauls environmental reviews and Indigenous consultation, final para.
“Meanwhile, Indigenous groups worried the changes could undermine reconciliation and limit their ability to assert their constitutional rights within their territories, warning of potential lawsuits.”
From The Narwhal: Carney's Bill C-39 overhauls environmental reviews and Indigenous consultation, para. 18
“when there is a reliable trading relationship with the United States”
From RealAgriculture: Liberals' Bill C-39 includes measures to curb supply chain strikes, extend Prairie rail interswitching, section '48-month extension of extended interswitching', para. 4
Laws and agreements
- One Canadian Economy Act (incl. Building Canada Act) (C-5)
- Building Canada Strong Act (C-39): this event is its “Introduced” stage
- Cabinet Directive on Getting Projects Built in Canada: this event is its “Announced” stage
Claims that rest on this event
- US trade pressure since 2025 gave Ottawa the political cover to clear permitting and political blockages, producing permanent laws (fast-track permitting and investment tax cuts) that unlock a second wave of output.
C-39 makes C-5 permanent.
- The build-out only makes sense if the builders expect continued access to the US market: C-39's rail-competition clause for the Prairies takes effect only 'when there is a reliable trading relationship with the United States', and the firm new oil capacity runs south.
The US-conditional interswitching clause.
- Ottawa is opportunistic, following 'never waste a good crisis': it used the mandate and political cover of the tariff era to pass fast-track and tax tools. This judgment says nothing about Washington's intent.
Permanence sought while the pressure lasts.
- In the foresight thought experiment, the deal-timing test ('No deal before the law') works in one direction only. A deal or easing within 120 days after the later of two dates, C-39 becoming law and the Mega Deduction becoming law, would support 'foreseen and wanted'. Continued pressure that still spares raw goods would not count against it; only sustained escalation that damages the flow south would.
One half of the anchor (introduced, not passed).
- Fragmentation (breaking Canada up through its provinces and separatists) and the thought experiment's 'foreseen and wanted' build-out need opposite things from Ottawa: a wanted build-out needs a strong Ottawa that passes C-39 and overrides holdouts, fragmentation a weak one. So the two can be told apart.
The strong-Ottawa step to watch the US reaction to.
How it bears on the outcome
| Explanation | Fit | Why |
|---|---|---|
| O0 No meaningful speed-up | Against weak | A bill for one federal decision within a year, with 27 projects worth $200 billion referred, aims at faster permitting; it is not yet law. |
| O1 Faster, but the extra output goes mostly elsewhere | Fits weak | Faster permitting fits any speed-up reading equally; nothing says where output would go. |
| O2 Faster, and more volume reaches the US (this level or higher) | Fits weak | Faster permitting fits any speed-up reading equally; nothing says where output would go. |
| O3 Locked-in preferential terms for the US | Fits weak | Faster permitting fits any speed-up reading equally; the bill gives no preferential terms to the US. |
Logged against predictions
- P1: "No deal before the law" (a test of the foresight thought experiment) (logged 21 September 2026, logged only)