What each bill does, in plain language. Both sides of the debate where there has been one.
Parliament, filtered through what you care about
Take a short values survey and Demos shows you the bills and petitions that touch what you care about.
A free account lets you record where you stand, see how your MP voted, email them about it, and get a summary of what matches you — daily, weekly, monthly, or not at all.
Updates rules and paperwork requirements across dozens of federal laws — covering farming, food safety, environment, transport, and trade — to reduce administrative burden and allow more use of electronic systems.
What it means for you
Farmers, businesses, and regulators would deal with less paperwork and fewer outdated rules, making it easier and cheaper to comply with federal regulations.
EconomicSocialGovernanceEnvironmental
The debate · 3 points
Supporters say
The bill would cut red tape so Canadians spend less time on paperwork, with clearer and more efficient rules and regulations.
Fewer barriers and faster government services would help Canadian businesses compete and grow in a changing global economy.
The bill would reduce red tape in agriculture by amending the Fertilizers Act, the Seeds Act, and the Feeds Act, addressing long-standing concerns from farming communities.
Requires the CPP Investment Board's investment policies to bar investments in any entity with reasons to believe it has committed human, labour or environmental rights violations, produced prohibited munitions, or directed certain corruption offences.
What it means for you
Canadians with CPP savings could see their pension fund exclude companies accused of human rights, labour, environmental or corruption violations. Whether this affects returns depends on how the board applies the test.
EconomicSocialGovernanceEnvironmental
No debate summary yet — we'll add the for/against once this bill is debated.
Bill C-37 establishes a legal framework giving First Nations authority over water, drinking water, wastewater, and related infrastructure on their lands, allowing them to set their own water safety standards.
What it means for you
First Nations communities would gain the legal power to manage their own safe drinking water systems, helping to end the long-standing drinking water advisories that have affected many reserves.
SocialGovernanceEnvironmentalReconciliation
The debate · 6 points
Supporters say
The bill would give First Nations authority over drinking water and wastewater on their lands, affirming their inherent right to self-government.
It would set enforceable national drinking water standards and regulations, closing gaps in current protections.
It commits the federal government to predictable, long-term funding and to a First Nations-led water commission, building on $4.6 billion over five years and the lifting of 158 long-term water advisories since 2015.
Critics say
The bill defines First Nations lands as reserve lands only, which may leave out traditional territories and raise doubts about whether UNDRIP, including Article 25, fully applies.
Chiefs say they were not properly consulted on this version of the bill, and a treaty table agreed to with the Crown has not yet met.
Critics say the bill is weaker than the previous version, Bill C-61, and that it lacks true co-development with First Nations, which many chiefs have requested.
This is a wide-ranging omnibus bill touching many different policies important to Canadians. Included among these, it speeds up government approvals for major infrastructure and energy projects, strengthens supply chain laws, updates labour rules, and modernizes trade document processes.
What it means for you
Big construction and energy projects could get approved faster, goods could move more efficiently across Canada, and workers in federally regulated industries could see changes to collective bargaining rights. Read the deep analysis for more details.
The bill would speed up approvals for major projects such as energy, mining, ports and transportation corridors. Supporters say a single, coordinated review and clearer timelines would give investors more certainty and get projects built faster.
Supporters say the bill would reduce work stoppages in federally regulated sectors such as transportation and trade. They argue that more time to bargain, earlier access to mediation, and clearer rules would help workers and employers reach agreements before disputes escalate.
The bill would strengthen labour protections, including measures against wage theft and worker misclassification, better protection for workers when contracts change hands, help for workers seeking a first collective agreement, and faster grievance arbitration.
Critics say
Changes to section 107 of the Canada Labour Code would allow the federal government to end legal strikes and lockouts. Critics say the criteria for intervention are too broad, and they call for clear limits, written reasons to Parliament, and an independent mediator. Some unions want section 107 repealed entirely.
Several First Nations and Indigenous organizations say they were not properly consulted, that consultation was rushed, and that they received too little information about major projects. Some have launched court challenges, and they argue the bill could affect treaty rights and fall short of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Critics argue the bill would weaken environmental protections and favour fossil fuel infrastructure. They cite scientists' concerns about irreversible environmental damage and argue that Canada's climate goals are being undermined.
This bill requires the federal government to create a national strategy to end 'energy poverty' — the inability to afford adequate heating, cooling, and electricity — with targets, reporting to Parliament, and an advisory council.
What it means for you
Low-income Canadians, seniors, renters, and people in northern or remote communities who struggle to pay energy bills could eventually benefit from new federal programs focused on affordable energy and home efficiency upgrades.
A national strategy would create federal accountability for addressing energy poverty.
The federal government can collect and analyze data and set thresholds, so it can direct time and resources where they will have the greatest impact.
Improving home energy efficiency, such as furnaces and boilers, reduces energy use even when that energy comes from fossil fuels. The Canada Greener Homes Affordability Program is a positive step in this direction.
