The case for Bill C-39: faster projects, stronger trade corridors and fewer labour disruptions

The strongest argument for Bill C-39, the Building Canada Strong Act, is that it attempts to solve one of the most persistent complaints from Canadian industry: major projects can spend years navigating overlapping federal reviews, permits and consultations before receiving a final decision. The bill would move toward a “one project, one decision, in one year” model once a proponent has submitted a complete application, while assigning a lead regulator to coordinate federal approvals and consultations. Ottawa says this would not eliminate environmental assessment or Indigenous consultation, but would run more of those processes concurrently rather than sequentially. The Calgary Chamber of Commerce, Edmonton Chamber and Business Council of Alberta have all welcomed the direction, arguing that predictable timelines are important because capital can move elsewhere when companies cannot determine when — or whether — a Canadian project will receive approval.

For Alberta, the trade and infrastructure provisions could be equally important. Bill C-39 would create designated national trade corridors, establish a Transportation Projects Office to coordinate approvals, modernize port governance and reduce duplication affecting rail, ports, bridges and other transportation infrastructure. It would also extend the Prairie rail interswitching pilot for 48 months once Canada-U.S. trade conditions permit, potentially giving grain and other commodity shippers more options. The government argues that the broader package could help move Canadian energy, minerals, agriculture and manufactured goods to overseas markets more reliably, while business groups say a faster permitting system could improve the economics of pipelines, power projects, mines and export infrastructure. The Edmonton Chamber says Canada needs a system where businesses can invest with confidence and projects can move from proposal to construction on predictable timelines.

The government also argues that the labour provisions are intended to prevent damaging disputes before they reach the point of a prolonged strike or lockout, rather than simply give Ottawa new intervention powers. Bill C-39 would extend conciliation from 60 to 90 days, create a special-mediator process, require post-dispute relationship-building, strengthen support for first collective agreements and provide tools to address grievance backlogs and bad-faith bargaining. Employer organizations have welcomed the emphasis on stability in nationally important sectors such as rail, ports and aviation, where shutdowns can quickly affect supply chains far beyond the bargaining table. The central case made by supporters is therefore broader than simple deregulation: they argue C-39 could make Canada more attractive to investment by combining faster project approvals, more reliable trade infrastructure and a labour system designed to resolve disputes earlier — while maintaining the government’s stated commitments to environmental standards and Indigenous rights.