PHOTO ILLUSTRATIONS BY THE GLOBE AND MAIL (SOURCE: THE CANADIAN PRESS)
Bill C-39, the “Building Canada Strong Act,” introduced by the Carney government in September 2026, is a sprawling 243-page omnibus bill that seeks to fast-track major infrastructure projects and curbs labour disruptions. While the government frames it as a necessary measure to strengthen the economy, the legislation has drawn fierce opposition from organized labour, environmental groups, Indigenous nations, and political adversaries. The anti-C-39 coalition argues that the bill represents a dangerous concentration of executive power that undermines constitutional rights, environmental safeguards, and Indigenous sovereignty.
The most contentious aspect of Bill C-39 is its amendment of Section 107 of the Canada Labour Code. This provision grants the labour minister broad authority to intervene in federally regulated industries to “maintain or secure industrial peace”. Under the bill, the minister can appoint a special mediator for 21 days, after which a report is issued. Critically, the minister need only believe that a strike “adversely affects or may adversely affect the national interest” before ordering workers back to their jobs and imposing binding arbitration.
Of course there is no such thing as the “national interest”, at least not in imperialist countries such as Canada. There is a ruling class interest, and the interests of workers and their oppressed allies. These interests as Marx explained are irreconcilable. The Minister who moves to break legal strikes will consider only the interests of the ruling class in Canada.
Labour organizations view this as a direct assault on the constitutional right to strike, which the Supreme Court of Canada affirmed in 2015. The Canadian Labour Congress argues that Bill C-39 “gives one minister unchecked power to override workers’ constitutional right to strike, with no independent body required to agree and no one with the power to stop them”. The National Union of Public and General Employees (NUPGE) points out that “national interest” is left undefined, with only “relevant considerations” that are “overly broad and vague”. Labour experts describe the revised provision as “Section 107 on steroids,” noting that the government’s claim of imposing “guardrails” is a mischaracterization.
The Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) has announced it will defy any attempt under Bill C-39 to break a CUPE strike. The Seafarers’ International Union of Canada and other unions call for removal of new Section 107 powers. For labour, the right to strike is only meaningful if workers can actually exercise it when it matters. A right that can be suspended by ministerial decree is no right at all.
Bill C-39 contains over 300 clauses that amend more than a dozen pieces of federal legislation, including laws protecting species at risk, water quality, and fisheries. Critics warn that the bill could dismantle environmental safeguards by allowing Ottawa to grant permits for preliminary construction before the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada completes its review, provided the environment minister considers it “enabling activities” and in the “public interest”. The bill would also shift review authority over pipelines, transmission lines, and nuclear projects from the Impact Assessment Agency to specialized regulators, which critics argue are more easily captured by industry interests.
Environmental groups describe the proposed “national interest” zones as potential “sacrifice zones” where a wide range of projects could be pre-approved with minimal scrutiny. Megan Leslie of World Wildlife Fund Canada questions whether the government understands that it is in the national interest “not to poison our lakes and rivers” and “not to have species go extinct”. The Sierra Club Canada Foundation laments that in standing up to U.S. bullying, Canada is willing to put “some of the things that make Canada so special on the table”.
Indigenous nations have been among the most vocal opponents of Bill C-39. The Nishnawbe Aski Nation (NAN) Chiefs reject the legislation outright, stating that it “elevates” the threat posed by the earlier Bill C-5 “to an unprecedented level”. NAN Grand Chief Alvin Fiddler declared that “consent is the path to certainty, and NAN First Nations will not be ignored”. The Chiefs oppose what they describe as “unilaterally imposed legislation that systematically removes them from the decisions about their territories,” calling it “the same failed colonial approach that places Canada’s economic interests above the lives of our people”.
The bill’s fast-tracking of resource development without free, prior, and informed consent violates Treaty rights, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), and Section 35 of the Constitution. NAN has committed to opposing the bill through “legal, political, and land-based” avenues. The Assembly of First Nations has also criticized the bill for proposed changes to consultation practices.
Bill C-39 has created unusual political dynamics. The NDP, with deep ties to the labour movement, calls for “more consultation”. The Conservatives, meanwhile, have been making inroads among union members and see an opportunity to court labour voters. Conservative labour critic Kyle Seeback has criticized the Liberals’ “unprecedented” use of Section 107, arguing that “it’s actually made labour relations worse”.
Even the procedural handling of the bill has drawn criticism. The government moved to refer C-39 to a “legislative committee”—a tool not used since the Harper era—which critics argue is designed to fast-track the bill and limit thorough scrutiny. Legislative committees, unlike standing committees, do not typically compile major reports or provide dissenting opinions, raising concerns about transparency and democratic accountability.
In conclusion, Bill C-39 represents a sweeping restructuring of Canada’s labour, environmental, and Indigenous relations frameworks. Its opponents argue that it concentrates unprecedented power in the hands of a single minister, erodes constitutional rights, and prioritizes rapid resource extraction over environmental protection and Indigenous consent. For unions, environmentalists, and First Nations alike, the bill is not about building Canada strong—it is about building it at the expense of the very people and protections that make the country worth building.