Energy and Our World

This article originally ran on Forbes.com on October 14, 2026. All rights reserved.

Daniel B. Markind is a Forbes.com energy column contributor. The views expressed in this article are not to be associated with the views of Flaster Greenberg PC.

On September 21, 2026, Canada’s ruling Liberal Party introduced Bill C-39, the Building Canada Strong Act. While the Liberal Party historically has been the party associated with environmentalism and workers’ rights, Bill C-39 proposes many things that appear to be the opposite of what those constituencies normally demand.  It may be that five weeks into the Canada/USA trade dispute, Prime Minister Mark Carney is realizing how serious Canada needs to get regarding modernizing its infrastructure. 

Bill C-39 substantially amends the Canada Labour Code in ways that, among other things, change many aspects of the Canadian labor relations framework such as setting timetables for collective bargaining, special mediation, multi-employer bargaining and the ability of the Ministry of Labour to end a strike or lockout should it be found to be in the “national interest.”

According to Canada’s National Post: 

“The bill aims to designate yet-unspecified areas as “regions of national interest” in which major infrastructure projects would receive the same fast-track approval process as those deemed to be “projects of national interest” under legislation (Bill C-5) passed last year.

 It also removes the responsibility of conducting impact assessments for major energy and nuclear projects away from the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada and puts it into the hands of specialized bodies: either the Canada Energy Regulator or the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.” (Source).

 One of the most important parts of the bill is to provide strict time frames.  For regulated industries such as transportation and banking, Bill C-39 requires parties engaging in collective bargaining to begin renegotiating a union contract six months before it expires if the previous negotiations were acrimonious or if the expiring deal lasted five years or more.

 One area where Bill C-39 would have a significant impact is in fossil fuel pipeline construction. In Canada, new pipelines are regulated under the Canadian Energy Regulator Act which requires a certificated of public convenience and necessity from the Canadian Energy Regulator before construction can commence. 

The provisions of Bill C-39 already have met intense opposition from some traditional Liberal constituencies.  Mark Hancock, national president of the Canadian Union of Public Employees, announced that “if the government thinks that they’re going to take away our fundamental rights, they’re in for a very big wake-up call.” 

Margot Venton, program director of nature at Ecojustice, added that “the package of changes to environmental law over the last year-and-a-half … since this government first tabled the Building Canada Act has truly been like beyond anything we’ve ever seen.” (Source).

Ms. Venton added that essentially, what “they have done is created the power to avoid federal environmental standards for any project…There are no limitations on what can be designated under the law as a national project or area.” 

The goal of the Bill is to streamline project approval and construction by completing project reviews within a year.  As stated by Transport Minister Steven MacKinnon, who introduced the bill, he foresees “one project, one review, and one year to decision.” 

Currently in Canada there are four projects that are in the process of receiving national interest designation.  They are: (1) an oil pipeline running from Alberta to British Columbia’s coast; (2) an Ontario nuclear waste depot; (3) the Roberts Bank Terminal 2 in the Port of Vancouver; and (4) the Mackenzie Valley Highway. 

Obviously, it is too soon to say if Bill C-39 will become Canadian law, but it is admirable that the Carney Administration recognizes that the barriers to infrastructure development have become too onerous, putting the entire nation at risk. The United States faces the same problem, with litigation and other review risks and delays becoming intolerable.

 At this moment Canada and the United States continue to be locked in a trade standoff.  That does not mean, however, that we cannot learn from each other.  If this concept is successful in Canada, then infrastructure advocates in the United States should be watching closely.