Mike Kelloway

Madam Speaker, Bill C-39, the building Canada strong act, is a crosscutting piece of legislation that would unlock Canada's maritime potential, reduce supply chain restraints at our major international trade gateways and position the Canadian maritime sector to enable our ambitious trade diversification agenda to double Canada's non-U.S. exports within a decade. Our government's trade diversification strategy is working. In 2025 alone, Canada's exports to non-U.S. markets increased by 11.1%, reaching 32.8% of total Canadian exports, the highest share in over four decades. Canada's ports are the gateways that make things happen, bringing Canadian products to markets around the world and building Canada's economic sovereignty. In order to meet our objectives and double our non-U.S. trade, it is essential that we have reliable, efficient and secure marine transportation systems to connect Canada to the foreign markets that want Canadian grain, Canadian energy or the thousands of other products that we proudly produce in this country. Let me start by discussing Canada's port authorities. Canada's port authorities are at the heart of global trade for Canada and transport networks serving as critical nodes that connect Canadian businesses, Canadian farmers and Canadian producers to key international markets. Collectively, the 17 Canada port authorities facilitate the movement of containerized bulk and energy products that underpin our economic growth. To ensure that Canada port authorities are positioned to enable trade diversification and have the flexibility to react to changing international trade patterns, the building Canada strong act would give port authorities the tools and financial flexibility to operate within an increasingly complex marine environment, while ensuring greater transparency and accountability for marine terminals, shippers and other port users. The proposed amendments in this bill would enable Canada port authorities to become commercially oriented and empower them to attract the investment capital necessary to build the next generation of Canadian marine terminals such as Roberts Bank Terminal 2 at the port of Vancouver and Contrecœur at the port of Montreal. To support these types of generational infrastructure projects, the proposed bill would facilitate corridor-level planning to better situate commodities and ensure that Canada port authorities are working together rather than competing with each other for similar business lines. The proposed legislation would also enhance the ability of Canada port authorities to act on commercial opportunities and generate revenue by allowing joint ventures with private and public entities as well as enabling increased collaboration between port authorities. Other amendments would support improvements to the borrowing processes for Canada port authorities and reduce regulatory burden to allow for one project, one review, while others would close data and information gaps. With these proposed tools and financial opportunities, it is more important now than ever to ensure that those in leadership positions at Canada port authorities have the right technical and business-oriented skill sets to set strategic direction and strengthen existing operations. This is why the bill would modernize the governance of our ports through new skill matrices for appointments. Taken together, these proposals would enhance the fiscal and governance tools available to Canada port authorities while ensuring that port authority boards are properly equipped to invest in critical port infrastructure to meet and exceed Canada's export trade goals. Ensuring that Canada port authorities have the right governance and operational tools is only part of the equation. To remain competitive and meet the growing trade demands, ports must also be able to attract and leverage investments to modernize infrastructure, expand capacity and strengthen supply chain resilience. Given the critical nature of our port facilities, these investments need to bring tangible benefits to the country and serve the best interests of Canada and Canadians. Currently, under the Canada Transportation Act, the Minister of Transport can review investments, acquisitions and mergers involving transportation undertakings that are at or above $93 million. Although the threshold captures major investment, it would not capture situations such as when a series of smaller investments cumulatively results in a large foreign investment in specific terminals or marine assets. As such, the government is proposing to broaden the scope of transactions eligible for review by reducing the notification threshold to $10 million to ensure these investments involve transportation undertakings and are in the interest and at the heart of Canadians. We must also ensure that the government is well positioned to respond to emerging threats and risk to marine transportation systems. This very important. Security events can have a significant impact on port and marine operations, which impact the efficiency and reliability of Canada's supply chains. Concerns over security issues, including a dated regime, can lead to the perception that Canada is a weak link. Such perception could adversely affect Canada's relations with other trading partners and have a significant impact on future opportunities for economic growth and development. Canada's marine system needs a modern security framework to adapt and respond to increasingly complex challenges. The proposals in this bill would provide the government with a modern suite of authorities and tools to effectively administer Canada's marine security framework and respond to emergency security threats. Information sharing would be enhanced across marine security partners and allow the Minister of Transport to enter into agreements with third parties and other departments to increase enforcement capacity and ensure critical provisions, such as cybersecurity protections, are being effectively met by the operators. Together, this would promote a more effective response to marine security threats and risks. Through this bill, we would also be seeking to equip the Government of Canada with new tools to support stable and continued operations at the St. Lawrence Seaway. These new tools would give the government needed authorities to safeguard seaway operations in exceptional circumstances to protect operational continuity for this important sector. This includes authorities aimed at reducing disruptions to navigation, such as the authority to appoint an administrator in place of the St. Lawrence Seaway Management Corporation board in certain circumstances, and requirements to terminate the operator agreements, supported by the structure and dispute resolution when needed. As we modernize and backstop the St. Lawrence Seaway, it is equally important that the Government of Canada have the tools necessary to respond quickly and effectively to emerging challenges across the marine transportation system. The building Canada strong act, therefore, complements the measures for the seaway and Canada port authorities by giving the Minister of Transport the power to respond to situations where there is an immediate, imminent and serious threat to ports, the seaway or supply chains. The ministerial order power would allow the minister to safeguard supply chains during a crisis. This could include, for example, pandemics, trade disputes, global conflicts or natural disasters. An order made under these provisions might require a port or the seaway operator to take any measure, including corrective measures, that the minister considers necessary to prevent or mitigate a threat, but would not be used in the event of a labour action or strike. These measures directly respond to the needs of Canada port authorities. Ports across the country support this plan. The Association of Canadian Port Authorities has applauded the government for focusing on the transportation system and creating the conditions for investment in the infrastructure Canada needs. This bill is a practical and forward-looking piece of legislation that recognizes the critical role Canada's marine transportation system plays in supporting economic growth, trade diversification and national supply chain resilience. By modernizing the governance and financial frameworks of Canada port authorities, strengthening oversight of transportation investments and equipping the Minister of Transport with targeted tools to respond to emerging threats, this legislation would help ensure Canada's marine gateway to remain competent, competitive, secure and efficient.

Madam Speaker, it is great to see the member, whom we spend a lot of time with in committee, here today to ask that question. I will leave it to the justice minister to talk about that, but when it comes to this particular piece of legislation, the very fact that we are looking at regional trade corridors is really important for developing growth and a systemic and integrated plan for supply chains with Canadian jobs and workers for Canadian businesses and all Canadians.

Madam Speaker, one thing that seems to be missing over the last four days is the “why”. Why are we doing this? The Prime Minister spoke to it at Davos when he talked about a rupture in the economy and how the only thing we can control is what we can control as a country. That means working with the provinces, with Canadian businesses and indeed with Canadian workers to ensure that we are evolving our economy and putting the steps in place to make sure that happens. That does not happen without Canadian workers, unionized workers. I come from Cape Breton Island. Cape Breton Island was built on unionized workers; so was Canada and so will Canada.

Madam Speaker, I will go back to Cape Breton for a second to tie this together. My father was in charge of mine rescue for about 35 years. He trained the individuals who went underground to save or recover folks, and he often talked about the idea that crisis reveals character. I see with leadership here in the House and leadership outside of the House, and I will give former prime minister Harper his due, that crisis reveals character. We are at an inflection point in this country that requires all of us to come together and work together. That does not mean we cannot be questioned, but cynicism never created a business, cynicism never built a house, cynicism never fed a hungry child and cynicism is not what is going to build this country.

Mr. Speaker, September 21 to 27 marks Rail Safety Week across Canada. Our railways connect communities, move Canadian goods to market and support jobs and growth, but as we strengthen these connections, safety must always come first. Through the railway improvement program, our government works with communities and railway companies to make crossings and rail corridors safer through investments in infrastructure, technology and education, but rail safety is a shared responsibility, so I encourage all Canadians to stay clear of tracks, use designated crossings and remain alert to the signals, the signs and the trains. I thank Operation Lifesaver Canada, the railway workers, the first responders and everyone helping to keep our communities safe. When we look out for one another, we help ensure every Canadian gets home safely.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2) and consistent with the policy on the tabling of treaties in Parliament, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the treaty entitled “Amendments to Annex I of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973”, as modified by the Protocol of 1978, relating thereto and adopted by the Marine Environment Protection Committee of the International Maritime Organization on June 17, 2021.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate the Cape Breton artists who took home honours at the 38th East Coast Music Awards last week in Sydney, Cape Breton. Goldie Boutilier, of Reserve Mines, had a historic week, winning album of the year, breakthrough artist of the year and rock/alternative release of the year. Morgan Toney, from We’koqma’q, won both the indigenous artist of the year and the fusion release of the year, and Elyse Aeryn of Glace Bay, my hometown, claimed release of the year. The Barra MacNeils received the Dr. Helen Creighton Lifetime Achievement Award. Emily Dingwall received the musician's achievement award. Nik MacDonald received artist management of the year. Joseph Parris received the Bucky Adams Memorial Award. Donnie MacNeil received the technical excellence award. The Celtic Colours International Festival won event of the year. The late Laura Mercer received the Stompin’ Tom Award. Cape Breton was not just the host for the ECMAs. We are its heart.

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Milton East—Halton Hills South. I am pleased to rise today to speak against this motion and in support of broadcasting systems that continue to invest in Canadian workers, Canadian creativity and Canadian economic growth. Despite the rhetoric we have heard today, this debate is not truly about the so-called streaming tax. In fact, it is about whether the global streaming giants, which earn substantial revenues from Canadian audiences, should contribute in a fair and reasonable way to the Canadian broadcasting and production ecosystem from which they benefit. That principle is neither radical nor new. For decades, companies participating in Canada's broadcasting system have contributed financially to the creation and presentation of the Canadian programming on which they rely. Those contributions helped build one of the most respected production sectors in the world. Today, Canada is internationally recognized as a major centre for film, television, animation and documentary production, in addition to digital and interactive media. Talented Canadians from coast to coast to coast work on productions viewed around the globe. Our studios are full, our crews are world-class, and our creators are winning international awards. This success did not happen by accident. It happened because successive governments and regulators understood that Canadian stories and Canadian production capacity matter economically, as well as culturally. The motion before the House, in my opinion, ignores that reality. It frames contributions to Canadian programming as though they are simply a burden or a penalty, but these contributions are investments. They are investments in jobs, infrastructure, intellectual property, skills development and economic activity across this country. Not only that, but expenditures on Canadian programming are not a punishment. They are not being asked to shovel money into a bottomless pit. We are asking them to invest in some of the best programming in the world. We are asking them to continue to make some of the great shows that we talked about here today: Shoresy, Heated Rivalry and North of North. We want more of that. They cannot argue that the programming being made in Canada is unworthy of their services. The screen-based production sector supports hundreds of thousands of direct and indirect jobs in Canada. These are not abstract jobs. They are good-paying, highly skilled jobs held by Canadians in every region of this country. They include camera operators, lighting technicians, sound engineers, visual effects artists, editors, costume designers, set builders, location managers, caterers, truck drivers, musicians, actors, writers, producers, translators and post-production specialists. The economic impact extends well beyond the production set itself. When productions film in a community, they rent hotel rooms, use local restaurants, contract transportation companies and use facilities throughout the community they are filming in. I can attest to this. Little Lorraine, a movie that was filmed on Cape Breton Island, was a huge success at the box office, but in terms of economic development, it provided a boost to the Cape Breton Regional Municipality. In cities like Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal, the production industry has become a major economic engine, but places like Cape Breton Island have been home to many movies. Again, what it contributes, not just to the economy of the country, not just to the regional economy, but to the local economy, is quite substantial. This is why the framework established under the Online Streaming Act matters. The world has changed dramatically since the original Broadcasting Act was drafted. Traditional broadcasters continue to contribute to Canadian content obligations while facing increasing competition from large foreign streaming services that dominate audience share and subscription revenues. The problem the legislation sought to address was straightforward: The regulatory system has not kept pace with technological change. Canadians are increasingly consuming programming online rather than through conventional broadcasting platforms, yet the contribution framework that historically applied primarily to Canadian broadcasters is still an item. This imbalance is not sustainable. If Canadian broadcasters are required to contribute to Canadian programming while foreign streaming platforms generating significant Canadian revenues are exempt, eventually the financial foundation supporting Canadian production begins to erode. Contributions to broadcasting systems are not new, and they are not unique to Canada. Many countries around the world require streaming services to contribute to domestic production ecosystems. Jurisdictions across Europe, for example, have adopted similar frameworks to ensure that local production sectors remain viable in the digital era. Despite these obligations, global streaming companies continue to invest heavily in these markets. Why? Companies invest where there is talent, stability, infrastructure and opportunity. Canada, our country, offers all of those things. We have world-class crews. We have globally respected creative talent. We have competitive production environments. We have advanced visual effects and post-production sectors. We have strong educational institutions producing those skilled workers. Importantly, we have a long-established production ecosystem built through decades of public and private investment. I think today we have heard some really interesting dialogue in terms of the focus here. The focus is obviously on affordability when dealing with the Americans. We are focused on that. I could go through the measures we have produced and the ones we are working on, but we also have to look at the creative arts as a major force of economic development. It is essential. I see it first-hand on Cape Breton Island. I have seen the impact it has had on the economy. I have seen the impact it has had on families and jobs. We need to look at this not as an ideological argument, but one of economic development, one where we are not just protecting the creative arts but focused on enhancing them. With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. Speaker, I am not sure I would put all that power into this one Cape Bretoner, because all the production would happen on Cape Breton Island. I will say that the main focus of this government is not just on protecting this sector and those jobs and movies that take place in Quebec, Manitoba or Cape Breton, but enhancing them. Where we are focused is how we build equity and fairness into the system to ensure that these companies, the actors and all of those skilled people I talked about recently are given a leg up. That is what we are going to be focused on.

Mr. Speaker, I think the fundamental, foundational piece here is what I just mentioned about equity and fairness. Where we need to focus is how we reinvest in our own people, our own talent and our own ability. I want to see more movies and shows in Sudbury, where I have not been, but I hope to go. I want to see more of that. What we need to do is continuously focus on this: where the equity is not there, to make sure it is there. That is what a sound government does, and that is what a responsible government will do.

Mr. Speaker, I will go back to what I said earlier. The fact of the matter is that if we just make this an argument about ideology, conspiracy theories and trickle-down economics, we are missing the point. The fact is that government does have a role to support: not to be the sage on the stage, but to be a guide on the side. That is what good governments do. They allow those production companies and those movies to know what we know here in Canada: that we have the best actors, production crews and companies in the world.

Mr. Speaker, first and foremost, I would be remiss not to say, “Go, Habs, go.” I know we are down 3-1, but I think we are going to come back, and I hope we do. The reality is that sometimes we have to pivot, not just in politics but in the economic realm. What we are not going to pivot on is supporting an industry that is so important to Canada: the fine arts, the creative arts and the film industry. We are going to be there in lockstep.

Mr. Speaker, I think the Conservatives can explain why they are anti-Nova Scotia, against green hydrogen in Nova Scotia, against Mersey River Wind in Nova Scotia and against development in Nova Scotia. They are against Nova Scotia workers and Nova Scotia ingenuity. Every single time in the last two weeks the common theme has been anti-Nova Scotia. We, on this side of the House, support Nova Scotia, Nova Scotia workers, Nova Scotia business and this project.

Mr. Speaker, another running theme in the House: conspiracy. The Conservative Party of Canada should now be the CPC, the Conspiracy Party of Canada. It loves a great conspiracy. It could not be that Nova Scotia is excelling in a new industry. It could not be that. It could not be the great workers. It could not be the Premier of Nova Scotia, a Conservative, who supports it. Everywhere we look, there is a conspiracy when it comes to the Conservative Party of Canada.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honour Fred Courtney of Glace Bay, who passed away last Friday at the age of 90. Fred was a hockey legend in Cape Breton. As captain of the 1955-56 Junior Miners, he led his team to a Cape Breton and Maritime championship, earning league MVP. His talents drew interest from the New York Rangers and Detroit Red Wings, yet Fred chose to stay home and serve his community. Beyond hockey, Fred spent 22 years teaching, 22 more years coaching bantam hockey and over 60 years serving the Salvation Army as Corps Sergeant Major. The Glace Bay Minor Hockey Association proudly presents the Fred Courtney trophy each year in his honour. I ask the House to join me in celebrating Fred's life, and what a great life it was, and extending our deepest condolences to his family.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize an incredible group of young Cape Bretoners. In February, the Get Up & Get Organized Youth Summit brought together nearly 50 youth and community members in Sydney to tackle real issues: food security, housing, climate change and active transportation. Co-developed and led by youth aged 15 to 24, the summit gave young people a space to be heard, to lead and to build hope for our communities. I had the privilege of meeting with the youth planning committee on April 1. Its message was clear: Young people care deeply about Cape Breton's future and want decision-makers to listen. I want to recognize the youth leaders, Isaac, Lily, Jordyn and Claire, along with Nova Scotia Health, the Ecology Action Centre and every partner organization that made this possible. The voices of Cape Breton's youth matter, and we are listening.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today with pride and with purpose to speak in support of Bill C-28, the Canadian space launch act. As a proud Nova Scotian, the member of Parliament for Sydney—Glace Bay and someone who has previously had the honour of representing Cape Breton—Canso, I know this project. I know the people behind it. I know the communities that have believed in it and I know exactly what is at stake, because this is not just a bill, but a decision. It is a decision about whether Canada will be a country that launches or a country that watches from the sidelines. Bill C-28 is about whether Canada becomes a sovereign, space-faring nation, one that launches from its own soil, builds its own capabilities and competes in one of the fastest-growing sectors on earth or whether we continue to rely on others. Right now, despite all of our talent, all of our innovation and all of our history, Canada is the only G7 country without domestic launch capability. This is not a position we should accept, and it is not a position Nova Scotia is willing to accept. I was proud to stand alongside the Minister of Justice and the CEO of the Maritime Launch Services when we announced the Canada-U.S. Technological Safeguards Agreement. That agreement cleared the path, and it made commercial space launch in Canada possible, but possibility is not enough. Bill C-28 would turn the possibility into reality. It would provide a legal and regulatory framework, and the certainty that allows companies to invest, to build and to launch from Canadian soil. Without it, the opportunity does not disappear, but it simply goes somewhere else. I hope colleagues across the aisle will support the bill, but if they do not, they should be prepared to explain some things to Nova Scotians. Why is it that the federal Conservatives keep opposing the very projects that the Progressive Conservative governments in Nova Scotia are proudly championing? Let us be very clear about the facts. A Progressive Conservative premier supports the project. A Progressive Conservative finance minister supports the project. A Progressive Conservative minister of economics supports this project. They have said so publicly. They have invested in it, and they are building it. However, federal Conservatives stand in this House and question it. This just does not add up. Premier Tim Houston has been clear. Nova Scotia is proud to be home to Canada's first commercial spaceport, and its government did not just say that; it backed that up with real investment, real policy and real leadership. It understands exactly what this project represents. It is jobs, growth, opportunity and a future. This is not an isolated case. Nova Scotians have seen this pattern before. Here are three examples. Offshore wind, developed in partnership with the same Progressive Conservative government, was opposed by the federal Conservatives. It was mentioned today. The Mersey River Wind project, a $206-million investment powering 50,000 homes, was opposed by the federal Conservatives. Now, a spaceport supported by a Progressive Conservative premier is questioned once again by the federal Conservatives. Nova Scotians to whom I talk are asking a very simple question: Why does the federal Conservative Party keep saying “no” to Nova Scotia? Here is the reality. This is not theoretical. It is not hypothetical. This is happening right now in Nova Scotia. On November 20, 2025, a rocket launched from Nova Scotia, from Canadian soil, for the first time in 27 years. A rocket has already launched, so let us be honest about what this debate is. This is not about whether the industry could exist; it already does. The question is whether Canada will lead it or lose it. This is about investment in Canadian industry, workers and communities that have been told too many times to wait their turn. It is about creating good-paying jobs during construction and in the long term, but it is much more than that. It is about people. It is about whether young Canadians can build careers in aerospace, advanced manufacturing, robotics and innovation without having to leave Nova Scotia to do it. For far too long, the story in Atlantic Canada has been about out-migration, young people leaving for opportunities somewhere else. Bill C-28 is about changing that story. It is about building something new, something that has never existed in this country before. That requires vision, leadership and investment before the finish line, because that is how industries are built. We do not wait until an industry is complete to support it; we support it so it can exist. It is not a flaw in the policy, but that is the policy. Canada has a proud history in space. We built the Canadarm. We sent astronauts into orbit. We are part of lunar missions. Jeremy Hansen is part of the Artemis program to return to the moon. We have the talent. We have the innovation. We have the credibility. When it comes to launching from our own country, we rely on others right now, on foreign infrastructure and on foreign timelines. Strong partners matter, but so does standing on our own two feet. A country like Canada should not have to ask for permission to launch its satellites. That gap, quite frankly, needs to be closed, and Nova Scotia is where we close it. Nova Scotia is uniquely positioned for this with its geography, its coastal location and its Atlantic launch trajectory. These are not theoretical advantages. These are real competitive advantages in the global space economy. This is why Maritime Launch Services chose Canso. This is why international partners from Europe to Asia are already lining up for Nova Scotia. This is why this is not just a regional project, but a national asset rooted in my province of Nova Scotia, serving all of Canada. The project also represents partnership with the municipalities involved, in particular Guysborough County, indigenous communities engaged in this economic opportunity, workers, tradespeople, engineers and innovators across this country. This is what building a nation looks like. It is ambitious, forward-looking and grounded in real communities in Nova Scotia. Again, I ask what the alternative is. Is it to step back, to hesitate or to let other countries take the lead? This is what is at stake without Bill C-28: Investments, jobs and opportunities go elsewhere, and Canada falls behind. Nova Scotia is not asking for permission to build the future. We are already building it. A rocket has already launched. The infrastructure is being built. The partnerships are in place and the momentum is real. The only question is whether the House will match that ambition. The federal Conservatives can continue to say no to Nova Scotia, but our government and in fact the Progressive Conservative provincial government in Nova Scotia are saying yes to jobs, innovation, economic growth, Canadian sovereignty and a country that builds. Bill C-28 would make Canada a space-faring nation. It would strengthen our sovereignty. It would create real opportunity for Canadians and send a clear message to Canadians and to the world: Canada is not standing on the sidelines anymore. We are stepping forward, we are building and we are launching.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the member and I do enjoy our time together on the transport committee. Let me look at this from a certain perspective. We are here today to talk about a legislative framework for processes that follow international standards and that keep security first and foremost in mind. Right now, we are putting that legislative framework to session, but we have a very talented transportation committee. I hope at some point we get a chance to study this project and offer solutions and opportunities, ones that I know that we will look to take seriously.

Mr. Speaker, the member makes some solid points. I used Nova Scotia as an example, but I could have easily used Quebec as an example, in terms of the innovation and the collective intelligence when it comes to space, aviation and things of that nature. I think this regulatory framework touches all provinces, all opportunities, the skills and abilities, and the political and collective will of the Quebec people. I think that good things will be happening in Quebec as well as a result of this regulatory framework.

Mr. Speaker, Canso meets all the standards by which it is more productive and easier to bring product to space via a variety of means, in particular, satellites and whatnot. I appreciate the member bringing it up. Many folks in the municipal district of Guysborough and adjacent communities, municipalities, first nations and the private sector support this for all the advantages that Canso brings. Time and time again, we hear from the Conservatives that it is not possible, as well as more negatives.