EventDocument
Bill C-39 at second reading in the House.
Second-reading debate on C-39 ran from 2026-09-23 to 2026-09-25, with no vote by 2026-09-27; the government moved to refer the bill to a legislative committee. The Conservatives were critical ('all talk and no action'; the one-year timeline is 'smoke and mirrors'; they want the Impact Assessment Act, former Bill C-69, repealed), did not say how they would vote, and said they would propose amendments. The Bloc said it would vote against; NDP and Green MPs strongly criticized the bill. The Liberals hold a majority and can pass the bill without cross-party support (CBC).
- 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); Pierre Poilievre (spoke); Andrew Scheer (spoke); Christine Normandin (spoke); Andréanne Larouche (spoke); Avi Lewis (spoke); Heather McPherson (spoke); Elizabeth May (spoke)
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
- CBC News, “New major projects bill, rowdy question period kick off Parliament's fall sitting” (external site), . source record
- openparliament.ca, “Bill C-39 (45-1): debates” (external site), . source record
- CBC News, “Carney government to study new major projects bill with tool last used in Harper era” (external site), . 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
“The Bloc Québécois will not endorse such an authoritarian view of public authority.”
From openparliament.ca: Bill C-39 (45-1): debates, Andréanne Larouche (Bloc Québécois, Shefford), House of Commons, September 23, 2026, 4:25 p.m.
Laws and agreements
How it bears on the outcome
| Explanation | Fit | Why |
|---|---|---|
| O0 No meaningful speed-up | Neutral weak | Second-reading debate with opposition criticism is ordinary procedure; the majority can pass the bill, so it says little about pace. |
| O1 Faster, but the extra output goes mostly elsewhere | Neutral weak | A procedural stage says nothing about speed or destination. |
| O2 Faster, and more volume reaches the US (this level or higher) | Neutral weak | A procedural stage says nothing about speed or destination. |
| O3 Locked-in preferential terms for the US | Neutral weak | A procedural stage says nothing about US terms. |
Logged against predictions
- P1: "No deal before the law" (a test of the foresight thought experiment) (logged 27 September 2026, logged only)