
Carney government's ‘nation-building' bill becomes law despite Senate criticism
OTTAWA — Prime Minister Mark Carney's controversial legislation to fast-track 'nation-building' development projects received royal assent and became law after the rushed passage of Bill C-5 through the Senate on Thursday.
But the legislative accomplishment — the first government bill to pass in both chambers under the minority Liberal administration elected April 28 — was marred by expressions of outrage from some senators, who criticized the legislation's creation of 'so-called Henry VIII' powers that allow the federal cabinet to override laws and regulations to approve development projects. Some also condemned what they saw as the bill's lack of consultation and requirements to respect Indigenous rights, suggesting the new process could get bogged down in the very opposition and delay that it is designed to avoid.
'Bill C-5 is not reconciliation. It's a betrayal of it,' said Sen. Paul Prosper, a Mi'kmaq lawyer from Nova Scotia, who told the red chamber his office received a deluge of 'racist vitriol' after he spoke about his desire to slow down the legislation that
sped through the House of Commons last week
with the support of opposition Conservatives.
Yet some in that party still had concerns about the legislation. Mary Jane McCallum, a Conservative senator from Manitoba, argued Thursday that the bill gives too much power to the federal cabinet to choose projects, and to decide which laws and regulations are relevant to how they are approved.
'Canada is not a dictatorship, yet the so-called Henry VIII clauses in Bill C-5 bring us dangerously close to the precipice,' she said.
After two days of debate, the Senate voted down several amendments that would have sent the legislation back to the House, and passed it as written without a recorded vote Thursday afternoon. It received Royal Assent from Gov. Gen. Mary Simon a short time later.
Since introducing and pushing to pass the bill before Canada Day, the Carney government has defended the legislation as a necessary framework to boost economic growth and reduce reliance on the United States that has imposed steep tariffs that Ottawa deems illegal and unjustified. Last week, Carney also promised to host summits with Indigenous leaders in July to ensure there is participation on which proposed projects — from pipelines to ports and mines — are chosen for the fast-track process under C-5.
The
legislation
gives the cabinet wide latitude to fast-track a development project based on 'any factor' it deems relevant. Although it's not written in the legislation, the government has pledged to finish the approval of fast-tracked projects so construction can begin within two years, while the special powers the bill creates are set to expire after five years.
On Thursday, Sen. Hassan Yusseff, a former labour leader who advocated for the bill in the upper chamber, echoed the government's rationale that the special process to fast-track major projects — and a separate, less contentious part of the bill to lift federal barriers to trade and labour mobility inside Canada — are necessary because of U.S. President Donald Trump's trade war.
His voice breaking with emotion, Yusseff made the case that the legislation is needed quickly to bolster the Canadian economy and help workers in the industries targeted by Trump's tariffs, from steel and aluminum to the auto sector.
'The men and women who build this country of ours are watching very closely,' Yusseff said.
Throughout the day, senators debated the merits of the bill, with some arguing it forces Indigenous groups and environmentalists to trust the government to respect rights and standards, rather than force the government to do so.
Some senators, however, said the bill's references to Indigenous rights in the Constitution, as well as the government's insistence it won't fast-track projects without provincial buy-in and Indigenous consultation, mean these concerns can't be addressed through amending the legislation.
'There's no bill we can pass that will guarantee the honour of the Crown,' said Alberta Sen. Patti LaBoucane-Benson.
'I don't think there's anything more we can do to the text of the bill to protect Indigenous rights.'
Others, like Ontario Sen. Bernadette Clement, argued Parliament should take more time to improve the legislation and address concerns raised by environmental groups, Indigenous communities, and organizations like the Assembly of First Nations.
'Growing our economy, nation-building — yeah, that's urgent. It requires a timely an efficient response. But it doesn't require the trampling of Indigenous rights and our environmental protections,' Clement said.
Marilou McPhedran, a senator from Manitoba, expressed shock that Conservatives and Liberals in the House voted en masse to surrender 'parliamentary sovereignty' to the cabinet under the bill.
'As we watch the results of the C-5 juggernaut roll out and roll over Canada, please remember this key question: are the constitutionally guaranteed rights to equality, to Aboriginal and treaty rights, the first to go with Bill C-5?' she said.
The House of Commons made several amendments to the bill that some senators welcomed, including new reporting requirements on how projects are selected, and the creation of a parliamentary committee to oversee how the legislation is being used.
The House also added a requirement to publish details of a project at least 30 days before it is named in the 'national interest,' and introduced limits so no projects can be added to the new process while Parliament is prorogued or dissolved.
The legislation also requires the minister responsible for the law — currently Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Dominic LeBlanc — to consult with provinces, territories and Indigenous Peoples whose rights 'may be adversely affected' by a project. The Commons inserted a clause that requires the government to get 'written consent' from a province or territory — but not an Indigenous community — if a project falls within an area of its 'exclusive' jurisdiction.
Sen. Marc Gold, the government representative in the chamber, said the bill is 'fundamentally about trust' that all groups — including the government — will act in the best interests of Canadians during a time of crisis after an election he said gave the Liberal minority government a clear mandate to pursue rapid economic growth.
'C-5 is indeed extraordinary, and indeed it entails unprecedented trust,' Gold said. 'This is not about any partisan interest, but in the interest of our country.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

24 minutes ago
Senators prep for a weekend of work to meet Trump's deadline for passing his tax and spending cuts
WASHINGTON -- The Senate is expected to grind through a rare weekend session as Republicans race to pass President Donald Trump's package of tax breaks and spending cuts by his July Fourth deadline. Republicans are using their majorities in Congress to push aside Democratic opposition, but they have run into a series of political and policy setbacks. Not all GOP lawmakers are on board with proposals to reduce spending on Medicaid, food stamps and other programs as a way to help cover the cost of extending some $3.8 trillion in Trump tax breaks. The 940-page bill was released shortly before midnight Friday. Senators were expected to take a procedural vote Saturday to begin debate on the legislation, but the timing was uncertain and there is a long path ahead, with at least 10 hours of debate time and an all-night voting session on countless amendments. Senate passage could be days away, and the bill would need to return to the House for a final round of votes before it could reach the White House. 'It's evolving,' said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., as he prepared to close up the chamber late Friday. The weekend session could be a make-or-break moment for Trump's party, which has invested much of its political capital on his signature domestic policy plan. Trump is pushing Congress to wrap it up, even as he sometimes gives mixed signals, allowing for more time. At recent events at the White House, including Friday, Trump has admonished the 'grandstanders' among GOP holdouts to fall in line. 'We can get it done,' Trump said in a social media post. 'It will be a wonderful Celebration for our Country.' The legislation is an ambitious but complicated series of GOP priorities. At its core, it would make permanent many of the tax breaks from Trump's first term that would otherwise expire by year's end if Congress fails to act, resulting in a potential tax increase on Americans. The bill would add new breaks, including no taxes on tips, and commit $350 billion to national security, including for Trump's mass deportation agenda. But the spending cuts that Republicans are relying on to offset the lost tax revenues are causing dissent within the GOP ranks. Some lawmakers say the cuts go too far, particularly for people receiving health care through Medicaid. Meanwhile, conservatives, worried about the nation's debt, are pushing for steeper cuts. Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., said he is concerned about the fundamentals of the package and will not support the procedural motion to begin debate. 'I'm voting no on the motion to proceed,' he said. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., pushing for deeper cuts, said he needed to see the final legislative text. The release of that draft had been delayed as the Senate parliamentarian reviewed the bill to ensure it complied with the chamber's strict 'Byrd Rule,' named for the late Sen. Robert C. Byrd, It largely bars policy matters from inclusion in budget bills unless a provision can get 60 votes to overcome objections. That would be a tall order in a Senate with a 53-47 GOP edge and Democrats unified against Trump's bill. Republicans suffered a series of setbacks after several proposals were determined to be out of compliance by the chief arbiter of the Senate's rules. One plan would have shifted some food stamp costs from the federal government to the states; a second would have gutted the funding structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. But over the past days, Republicans have quickly revised those proposals and reinstated them. The final text includes a proposal for cuts to a Medicaid provider tax that had run into parliamentary objections and opposition from several senators worried about the fate of rural hospitals. The new version extends the start date for those cuts and establishes a $25 billion fund to aid rural hospitals and providers. Most states impose the provider tax as a way to boost federal Medicaid reimbursements. Some Republicans argue that is a scam and should be abolished. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has said that under the House-passed version of the bill, some 10.9 million more people would go without health care and at least 3 million fewer would qualify for food aid. The CBO has not yet publicly assessed the Senate draft, which proposes steeper reductions. Top income-earners would see about a $12,000 tax cut under the House bill, while the poorest Americans would face a $1,600 tax increase, the CBO said. One unresolved issue remains the so-called SALT provision, a deduction for state and local taxes that has been a top priority of lawmakers from New York and other high-tax states. The cap is now $10,000. The White House and House Republicans had narrowed in on a plan for a $40,000 cap, but for five years instead of 10. Republican senators says that's too generous. At least one House GOP holdout, Rep. Nick LaLota of New York, said he cannot support the compromise. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said Republicans are rushing to finish the bill before the public fully knows what's in it. 'There's no good reason for Republicans to chase a silly deadline,' Schumer said. House Speaker Mike Johnson, who sent his colleagues home for the weekend with plans to be on call to return to Washington, said they are 'very close' to finishing up. 'We would still like to meet that July Fourth, self-imposed deadline,' said Johnson, R-La. With the narrow Republicans majorities in the House and Senate, leaders need almost every lawmaker on board to ensure passage. Johnson and Thune have stayed close to the White House, relying on Trump to pressure holdout lawmakers.


Bloomberg
25 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Wind, Solar Credits Face Shorter Phase-Out in GOP's New Tax Bill
Key tax incentives for US wind and solar projects would face a more aggressive phase-out in the Senate's latest version of President Donald Trump's spending package. The tweak, which follows pushback by Trump on the Inflation Reduction Act credits, would sharply limit the number of solar and wind farms that qualify for incentives, appeasing opponents while risking the ire of moderate members who argued for a slower phase-out.

USA Today
26 minutes ago
- USA Today
Tens of thousands march against Hungary's government, for LGBT rights
Crowds in Budapest waved rainbow flags and carried signs mocking Prime Minister Viktor Orban amid a new ban on Pride marches. BUDAPEST, June 28 (Reuters) - Tens of thousands of protesters marched through Hungary's capital on June 28 as a banned LGBTQ+ rights rally swelled into a mass demonstration against the government. Crowds filled a square near Budapest's city hall before setting off across the city, some waving rainbow flags, others carrying signs mocking Prime Minister Viktor Orban. "This is about much more, not just about homosexuality, .... This is the last moment to stand up for our rights," Eszter Rein Bodi, one of the marchers, said. More: They were out and their companies were proud. Then came the DEI backlash. "None of us are free until everyone is free," one sign read. Small groups of far-right counter-protesters attempted to disrupt the parade, but police kept them away and diverted the route of the march to avoid any clashes. Orban's nationalist government has gradually curtailed the rights of the LGBTQ+ community in the past decade, and its lawmakers passed a law in March that allows for the ban of Pride marches, citing the need to protect children. Opponents see the move as part of a wider crackdown on democratic freedoms ahead of a national election next year when Orban will face a strong opposition challenger. Organizers said participants arrived from 30 different countries, including 70 members of the European Parliament. More than 30 embassies have expressed support for the march and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen called on Hungarian authorities to let the parade go ahead. Seventy Hungarian civil society groups, including the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union, Transparency International Hungary and the Hungarian Helsinki Commission, published an open letter on June 27 in support of the march, saying the law that led to the police ban "serves to intimidate the entire society". 'Legal consequences' "The right to assembly is a basic human right, and I don't think it should be banned. Just because someone does not like the reason why you go to the street, or they do not agree with it, you still have the right to do so," Krisztina Aranyi, another marcher, said. Budapest mayor Gergely Karacsony tried to circumvent the law by organising the march as a municipal event, which he said does not need a permit. Police however banned the event, arguing that it fell under the scope of the child protection law. Orban, whose government promotes a Christian-conservative agenda, provided some clues on June 27 about what participants can expect when he warned of "legal consequences" for organising and attending the march. Earlier this week Justice Minister Bence Tuzson warned in a letter sent to some foreign embassies in Budapest that organizing a prohibited event is punishable by one year in jail, while attending counts as a misdemeanour. The law that allows for the ban of Pride lets police impose fines and use facial recognition cameras to identify people who attend. When asked about the threat of a one-year jail term, Karacsony said at a press briefing on June 27 that such a sentence would only boost his popularity. "But I cannot take it seriously," he said. Making the march a key topic of political discourse has allowed the Orban government to take the initiative back from the opposition and mobilise its voter base, said Zoltan Novak, an analyst at the Centre for Fair Political Analysis think tank. "In the past 15 years, Fidesz decided what topics dominated the political world," he said, noting that this has become more difficult as Orban's party has faced an increasing challenge from centre-right opposition leader Peter Magyar's Tisza party, which has a 15-point lead over Orban's Fidesz in a recent poll. Tisza, which has been avoiding taking a strong position on gay rights issues, did not specify in response to Reuters questions whether it believed the Pride march was lawful, but said those attending deserved the state's protection. "Peter Magyar has called on the Hungarian authorities and police to protect the Hungarian people this Saturday, and on other days as well, even if it means standing up against the arbitrariness of power," its press office said. Magyar himself would not attend.