Bill C-39 · 45th Parliament · Mark Carney
Building Canada Strong Act
An Act respecting certain measures to strengthen the economy
Government bill, sponsored by Steven MacKinnon (Minister of Transport and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons). Still before Parliament.
- IntroducedSept. 21, 2026
- Debated in principleOct. 8, 2026
- Studied by a committeeNot reached
- Passed its first chamberNot reached
- Passed the second chamberNot reached
- Became lawNot reached
Leading supporters
Ranked by the part each played: who is responsible for the bill, who carried it, and who spoke for it most.
- Mark CarneyPrime Minister
- Steven MacKinnonMinister of Transport and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons
- Abdelhaq SariLiberalArgues that federal processes are too slow and complex and that Bill C-39 is needed to modernize approvals and attract investment.
- Karim BardeesyLiberalArgues the bill provides coordinated approvals with strong protections unlike past efforts.
- Hon. Steven MacKinnonLiberalintroduces the bill as the most important economic legislation in decades
- Kody BloisLiberalPresents the bill as delivering faster timelines and business certainty to strengthen the economy.
- Juanita NathanLiberalDescribes the bill as critical for improving transportation, trade and reducing red tape.
- Jacques GourdeConservativeArgues action is needed to build infrastructure and attract investment, and it is hard to oppose.
Who carries this bill
Arrows run from the person responsible to those who answer to them on this bill. The critic leads the Senate’s scrutiny and answers to no one on it.
What it set out to do
On 21 September 2026, the Minister of Transport and Leader of the Government in the House of Commons introduced Bill C-39, An Act respecting certain measures to strengthen the economy (Building Canada Strong Act) in the House of Commons and it was given first reading. Part 1 implements certain measures in relation to project evaluations. Division 1 of Part 1 amends the Impact Assessment Act to, among other things, (a) provide that the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission is to conduct the impact assessment of a designated project that includes activities that are regulated under the Nuclear Safety and Control Act; (b) authorize the Minister of the Environment to grant certain federal authorizations that are required in respect of a designated project at the same time that the Minister issues a decision statement in respect of the project; (c) ensure that a decision statement in respect of a designated project for which the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada conducts the impact assessment is issued within one year after the proponent provides the required information or studies; (d) provide for the coordination of the impact assessment of designated projects and the review processes f…
Summary by the Library of Parliament.
Where members stand
2nd reading of Bill C-39 · 2026-10-08 · Passed
- Voted for: 296
- Voted against: 26
- Paired: 10
- Did not vote: 5
For it 242
Voted for it, or spoke in support
and 202 more
Challenging it 62
Support only with changes, or serious objections raised in debate
and 22 more
Against it 20
Voted against it and argued against it
How it changed on the way
Only laws are compared, introduced against passed.
How precisely it is written
vagueChallenging the law: EasyDisputing a charge: Easy
The text repeatedly conditions powers and duties on what the responsible authority or Minister considers appropriate, necessary, or in the public interest. It also uses open-ended tests such as effects that are likely to be to some extent significant.
Open to argument
“subject to any conditions that the Minister considers appropriate to mitigate any adverse effects within federal jurisdiction”
The phrase delegates unlimited choice over conditions to the Minister's subjective view.“in a manner that the responsible authority considers appropriate”
Public participation rights are defined only by the authority's own opinion of appropriateness.“the effects that, in the responsible authority's opinion, are likely to be caused by the carrying out of the designated project”
Core factual findings rest on the authority's personal opinion rather than an objective standard.“that are likely to be, to some extent, significant and the extent to which they are significant”
The key threshold for adverse effects uses a vague sliding-scale test without measurable criteria.
Clear-cut
“the responsible authority with respect to a designated project is (a) the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, in the case of a designated project that includes activities that are regulated under the Nuclear Safety and Control Act”
This assigns responsibility by reference to an existing statute and defined project type.“analyst means a person or a member of a class of persons designated as an analyst under subsection 120(1) or (2)”
The term is tied directly to a specific designation power.
Discretion. Ministers, the Agency and the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission decide what information or studies are required, what conditions to impose, whether effects are significant, and whether activities are in the public interest, all subject only to their own opinions.
Challenging the law itself. Repeated reliance on subjective phrases such as 'considers appropriate' and 'in the opinion of' creates vagueness that can be challenged under section 7 of the Charter for lack of fair notice and arbitrary enforcement.
Disputing a charge under it. Because obligations turn on what the responsible authority 'considers' necessary or appropriate, a proponent can readily dispute whether any particular demand or prohibition was validly triggered.
Read by a language model from the as introduced text; every quoted phrase appears in the bill. A reading of the drafting, not legal advice.
Did it work?
Only laws in force for two years or more are checked.
Who lobbied on it
No lobbying registration naming this bill is loaded.
Stages and dates from LEGISinfo.