Transport and Communications

Thursday, February 12, 2026

The Standing Senate Committee on Transport and Communications has the honour to table its

SECOND REPORT

Your committee, which was authorized to examine the subject matter of those elements contained in Divisions 1, 2, 24, 28 and 29 of Part 5 of Bill C-15, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on November 4, 2025, has, in obedience to the order of reference of Wednesday, November 26, 2025, examined the said subject-matter and now reports as follows:

Division 1 of Part 5 enacts the High-Speed Rail Network Act, which addresses the construction of a high-speed rail (HSR) network between Ontario and Quebec.

Division 2 amends the Canada Post Corporation Act to allow the Canada Post Corporation to set its own rates of postage without seeking approval from the Governor in Council.

Division 24 amends the Broadcasting Act to provide that it is to be construed and applied in a manner that is consistent with the right to privacy of individuals.

Division 28 amends the Aeronautics Act, the Access to Information Act and the Budget Implementation Act, 2019, No. 1 to include such matters as adding provisions concerning the sharing of information about aeronautics, modernizing the administrative monetary penalties framework, authorizing the Minister of Transport to make interim orders in order to give effect to international standards or to ensure that Canada’s international obligations are met, and regulating the use of anti-drone technologies.

Division 29 amends the Canada Transportation Act to provide the Minister of Transport with the authority to make interim orders to give effect to international standards or ensure compliance with Canada’s international obligations.

Regarding Division 1, Transport Canada said that the measures in the new High-Speed Rail Network Act are “necessary” for the “efficient and timely” delivery of the future HSR.

The committee was informed that the new Act includes a declaration (Constitution Act, 1867, section 92(10)(c)) asserting that the HSR project falls under federal jurisdiction, even though some segments will be built within one province only and will be subject to individual impact assessments. Transport Canada indicated that the declaration makes it absolutely clear that the project is a federal one and for the general advantage of Canada.

Some witnesses highlighted that, according to a McGill University study, ridership for the high-speed rail line is projected to reach 10 million passenger trips per year by 2050. It raised questions about whether these volumes are sufficient to justify the cost, which is estimated to be between $60 billion and $90 billion. Since no comprehensive business case has been released that provides a public accounting of the HSR project’s benefits and costs, the committee believes that there is insufficient information to determine whether the project will be financially viable.

When they appeared before the committee, the representatives from Transport Canada and the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada stated that Quebec and Ontario had not yet been consulted but that they will be under the federally led impact assessment process.

That said, the committee would have preferred for meaningful consultations to have already taken place and for the provinces to have already expressed their definitive agreement with the HSR project and its designation as a project falling under federal jurisdiction.

Some witnesses highlighted the significant expropriation powers granted to the federal government as part of the HSR project, in particular emphasizing the removal of the public hearing process set out in the Expropriation Act. Some witnesses also said that, to ensure the success of such a large-scale project, the stakeholder engagement process should be carried out with no shortcuts.

The committee heard that the compensation framework planned for expropriated owners for the construction of the HSR project includes compensation that takes into account not only the value of the land, but also lost profits. Transport Canada also stated that efforts would be made to avoid splitting farmland in two, which would affect the viability of the farms concerned.

When it appeared before the committee, Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC) said that “there is no approved corridor at this point.” Alto said that public consultations would begin in January 2026, although consultations with Indigenous communities along the potential HSR corridor were already underway. The feedback received will help “determine a more precise route.”

Alto also stated that Bill C-15 protects the Indigenous knowledge that will be shared during the process. Some witnesses emphasized the importance of ensuring the confidentiality of Indigenous knowledge. Some witnesses also argued that the principle of free, prior and informed consent should guide Alto and the federal government in the land acquisition process.

The committee heard that Alto will ensure accountability in the development and implementation of the HSR project between Quebec and Toronto, in particular regarding the project’s impact on the communities concerned, including official language minority communities.

The committee raised concerns about how having HSR along the Quebec City–Toronto corridor would affect the viability of VIA Rail’s current services. Transport Canada stated that communities currently served by VIA will continue to be served and that service may be “optimized.” The committee questions that assumption.

Regarding Division 2, Canada Post explained that the proposed changes to the Canada Post Corporation Act would give greater flexibility when establishing letter mail rates, which could help Canada Post return to being financially self-sustaining.

In addition, Canada Post informed the committee that reforming the rate-setting process was part of the transformation plan that it had submitted to the federal government in November 2025. Since the government was still reviewing the plan, Canada Post did not want to divulge the contents, and therefore it offered little detail about other measures that would allow it to return to financial self-sustainability.

The committee heard that, because Canada Post has a monopoly on the delivery of most letter mail in Canada, regular postage rate increases could harm consumers and small businesses. Canada Post said that its rate-setting exercises would be transparent and that postal service in Canada would remain accessible and affordable to everyone.

Canada Post and PSPC indicated that, despite the fact that the proposed changes in Division 2 would remove the requirement to offer free mailings for people who are partially sighted or blind, as well as reduced postage rates for inter-library loans, these two commitments would continue to be honoured. The committee heard that organizations representing those who would be affected were not consulted before these changes were included in Bill C-15.

The Committee heard from library stakeholders who expressed concerns that the repeal of section 21.2 removes an important mechanism for transparency and ministerial accountability, further concentrating authority over library postage entirely with Canada Post’s board.

The committee acknowledges the commitment made by Canada Post and PSPC to maintain these services, but it agrees with those witnesses who said that these commitments are not a replacement for having clear provisions in the Canada Post Corporation Act (sections 19(1)(g)(i) and 19(1)(g.1)). The committee also expresses concern that the definition of “library material” in section 2 and the reporting obligations under 21.2, which provide for appropriate consultations with library stakeholders and for parliamentary oversight, have been excluded. The committee urges the federal government to amend Bill C-15 to maintain these provisions in the Canada Post Corporation Act.

The committee also acknowledges that the PSPC representatives did not provide any meaningful information as to whether sections 19(1)(g)(i) and 19(1)(g.1) of the Canada Post Corporation Act currently provide legal protections or guarantees regarding free mailings for people who are partially sighted or blind, as well as reduced postage rates for inter-library loans.

Concerning Division 28, Transport Canada described its amendments to the Aeronautics Act as a modernization plan to ensure that Canada is in compliance with international standards and that the Minister of Transport has the tools needed to maintain and improve safety and oversight in the aviation sector.

According to NAV CANADA, the amendments proposed in Division 28 would strengthen Canada’s aviation safety framework and enhance transparency, in particular by creating a mechanism for voluntarily communicating safety-related information.

The Transportation Safety Board (TSB) stated that it supports the mechanism, but it expressed some concerns about certain provisions regarding the confidentiality of information shared voluntarily, which could restrict Transport Canada’s ability to communicate information about accidents and incidents to the TSB.

According to NAV CANADA, expanding the existing vicarious liability framework set out in Division 28 would clarify corporate liability in cases where an offence is committed by an employee, instead of focusing on individual penalties.

The committee also heard that the current limits for administrative monetary penalties and summary convictions set out in the Canadian Aviation Regulations are $5,000 for individuals and $25,000 for corporations. The amounts have not increased in over 20 years, according to Transport Canada. Bill C-15 would increase them to $150,000 and $1.5 million respectively, which would be a greater deterrent.

The committee learned that the new security framework for drones and anti-drone technologies proposed in Bill C-15 would prohibit the use of anti-drone technologies, unless it is authorized by the Minister of Transport, when it is in the public interest to do so or if aviation safety or security is at risk.

Regarding Division 29, Transport Canada said that the changes made to the Canada Transportation Act would help accelerate Canada’s implementation of international standards, which would enable timely alignment with its trading partners. The Department explained that the maximum period of three years for interim orders would provide enough time to bring forward a permanent regulation.

While Division 29 stipulates that the Minister of Transport must carry out consultations and act in accordance with the public interest when making interim orders, the committee is concerned about the fact that these orders would not be subject to the Statutory Instruments Act.

After hearing from witnesses about the subject matter of the above-mentioned divisions, the committee supports the proposed elements contained in Divisions 1, 24, 28 and 29 of Part 5 of Bill C 15. The committee does not support some of the proposed elements contained in Division 2 of part 5 of Bill C-15 as per the amendments suggested above.

Respectfully submitted,